<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Studying the Booty Call</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:46:45 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Burgess</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/comment-page-1/#comment-1089362</link>
		<dc:creator>John Burgess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:48:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=39023#comment-1089362</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Clearly, I chose the wrong field&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Observers are not supposed to be taking part in the observed activities, in order to remain objective.

Simply &lt;em&gt;watching&lt;/em&gt; BCR&#039;s has another, more usual name, you know...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Clearly, I chose the wrong field</p></blockquote>
<p>Observers are not supposed to be taking part in the observed activities, in order to remain objective.</p>
<p>Simply <em>watching</em> BCR's has another, more usual name, you know...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Florack</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/comment-page-1/#comment-1089253</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Florack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=39023#comment-1089253</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Clearly, I chose the wrong field&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I&#039;m not so sure, James. 
Think of the research involved alone, and their implications, you newly married and all. :-D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Clearly, I chose the wrong field</p></blockquote>
<p>I'm not so sure, James.<br />
Think of the research involved alone, and their implications, you newly married and all. :-D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UlyssesUnbound</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/comment-page-1/#comment-1089107</link>
		<dc:creator>UlyssesUnbound</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:11:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=39023#comment-1089107</guid>
		<description>Fester--you are on the right track, but I would disagree with your &#039;no strings attached&#039; assertion.

In my experience booty calls may well be low-level commitment--even lower than FWBs.  However there have been many experiences of both my friends and myself where a booty-call relationship (BCR--you saw it here first folks) was just as the author stipulated.  A way for men to gain greater sexual access, and women to test-run a boyfriend.  I&#039;m sure the reverse has often occurred.  I think the difference here between a FWB case, is that the booty call partners may never have been close friends.  They may have been classmates, or friends of friends.  A series of booty calls are initiated, sometimes leading to a relationship of sorts, and sometimes to a few months of happy-fun-yes times.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fester--you are on the right track, but I would disagree with your 'no strings attached' assertion.</p>
<p>In my experience booty calls may well be low-level commitment--even lower than FWBs.  However there have been many experiences of both my friends and myself where a booty-call relationship (BCR--you saw it here first folks) was just as the author stipulated.  A way for men to gain greater sexual access, and women to test-run a boyfriend.  I'm sure the reverse has often occurred.  I think the difference here between a FWB case, is that the booty call partners may never have been close friends.  They may have been classmates, or friends of friends.  A series of booty calls are initiated, sometimes leading to a relationship of sorts, and sometimes to a few months of happy-fun-yes times.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fester</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/comment-page-1/#comment-1089104</link>
		<dc:creator>fester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=39023#comment-1089104</guid>
		<description>Paul --- I&#039;m not too sure I would agree with your description of a booty call as a means of getting laid as a last resort.  When I was in college, it was a social norm for them to be minimally strings attached sex that could happen at pretty much any time --- one of the girls down the hall from me had a recurring mid-afternoon booty call for most of the second semester of sophomore year for instance.  I think it is less formalized than friends with benefits as FWBs had the potential to be friends or at least friendly outside of the sack.  They were people who did things together including but not limited to sex while Booty Call participants were mostly limited to sex.  At least that is what I saw in college.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul --- I'm not too sure I would agree with your description of a booty call as a means of getting laid as a last resort.  When I was in college, it was a social norm for them to be minimally strings attached sex that could happen at pretty much any time --- one of the girls down the hall from me had a recurring mid-afternoon booty call for most of the second semester of sophomore year for instance.  I think it is less formalized than friends with benefits as FWBs had the potential to be friends or at least friendly outside of the sack.  They were people who did things together including but not limited to sex while Booty Call participants were mostly limited to sex.  At least that is what I saw in college.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Barnes</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/comment-page-1/#comment-1089103</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Barnes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=39023#comment-1089103</guid>
		<description>Booty calls tend to be partners of last resort as well.  For example, you are at last call in a bar and the prospects for having someone come home with you are nil, you then make a booty call.  I don&#039;t think any male considers a booty call to be someone they would like to develop a relationship with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Booty calls tend to be partners of last resort as well.  For example, you are at last call in a bar and the prospects for having someone come home with you are nil, you then make a booty call.  I don't think any male considers a booty call to be someone they would like to develop a relationship with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Drew</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/studying_the_booty_call/comment-page-1/#comment-1089102</link>
		<dc:creator>Drew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:28:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=39023#comment-1089102</guid>
		<description>Uhh, er.......

I&#039;m such a dinosaur.  I lost track at &quot;friends with benefits.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uhh, er.......</p>
<p>I'm such a dinosaur.  I lost track at "friends with benefits."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
