First, thanks for your reply and actually answering. I think I tend to agree that for the most part, her pants off first tends to be a better route. For a bunch of reasons, keeps the upper hand, getting compliance from her first and so on.
But I think people are missing the point of my question and I must respond to your last paragraph: I do respect replies. And I did listen, enough to see that the question wasn't answered. Also, you can't say my focus is wrong because you literally have no idea what my actual gaming focus is. Other than me asking this one question and persisting until someone actually gives a straight answer. I assume when you refer to my focus, you are implying that I believe things HAVE to happen in some exact specific order, which is not my mindset, for the record. Yes, in the broad sense, I think some things really do have to happen before others, but when you get down to specific items, I realize things can be skipped and moved around. Even then, there is probably an optimal sequence which leads to the least number of problems coming about. That is the reason for the existence of this model in the first place.
That being said, the dicarlo ladder is an attempt to map out a smooth sequence of escalation to sex, and vin dicarlo himself has suggested it could be used as a standalone method. Saying "it doesnt matter when you do this or that" misses the point of it having been created in the first place. What's the point of having a system based on a particular kino sequence, and then responding to questions by saying sequence doesn't matter.
What if the DEL had happened to leave out the part about when to take off
her pants? And then I ask 'where is
that missing step', and people reply that I'm overly focused on sequence... Okay, why are all these
other steps included then?
The whole ladder is an attempt to map a workable sequence
explicitly, and thus when becoming familiar with the model, it is not poor focus to ask where the missing step goes. The same goes for
my pants coming off which actually
is missing... Me taking off my pants is
just as important of a step on the ramp as any other, and there is no reason to exclude it other than the author simply overlooking it by accident. I am pointing out how the model is incomplete in this way. It isn't a question of my game or my focus, it's a question of the completeness of the model. All these other replys are basically saying "you're game will be fine with this model, incomplete as it may be". And maybe thats true, but dammit there's no reason not to just fill in the hole. (thats what we all want anyway right?
)
And
then I'm getting people trying to invalidate my question all these different ways rather than just simply answering it. Saying my life experiences must have been misinterpreted, and therefore somehow inquiry into this particular hole in the model is not legitimate or worthy of an answer. I need not have actually run into this problem in order ask about it and expect that some answer should exist.
So, sorry for the rant, but can you see how frustrating it is, on a website about this, and an entire forum specifically dedicated to this one sequence of kino escalation, asking such a direct question and getting a bunch of irrelevant side junk like "get her turned on enough". Basically what it amounts to is thread-jacking. Or how frustrating it is to get replies along the lines of "dont worry about the sequence" in the
KINO ESCALATION SEQUENCE FORUM. It's self contradicting to have a system based on a sequence of kino (hence the frame there
is an optimal sequence), and then respond to questions with the frame that sequence isn't so important.
So once again, I don't mean to be rude, and I respect everyone here, but I simply want to make my point clear.
Whether or not perfect sequence is important when gaming, perfect sequence is
very important when
writing a method about sequence.