[Which is being given appropriately careful thought.]
I think humiliating to functional would be better. He'll let his guard down and think I've become a babbling idiot, and then I'll be able to go straight for the throat.
[. . . And that's probably where he should draw the line in terms of too much information, but he honestly can't because it's fucking hilarious, and it shows. He doesn't laugh, but he's thinking about it.]
Easily done. I'll do some thinking and come up with a list.
. . . What did he use on you? I honestly can't imagine it at all.
It was awful. 'Is there an airport nearby, or is that my heart taking off?' 'Is it hot in here or is it just you?' Worse because I didn't know what he was doing and asked a friend to translate. Which I will regret for the rest of my life because it was the most embarrassing thing I have ever suffered through.
...In fact he's lucky I didn't beat the living hell out of him after that.
So did you. So let's just agree we were both a little blunt and move on.
Polnareff's my friend, as...everything as he tends to be. I don't make a habit of associating with complete imbeciles, so you can trust that obviously he isn't one.
no subject
All right. And in which direction are we going? Functional to humiliating, or the other way?
no subject
[Which is being given appropriately careful thought.]
I think humiliating to functional would be better. He'll let his guard down and think I've become a babbling idiot, and then I'll be able to go straight for the throat.
[Prooooobably literally.]
no subject
Easily done. I'll do some thinking and come up with a list.
. . . What did he use on you? I honestly can't imagine it at all.
no subject
...In fact he's lucky I didn't beat the living hell out of him after that.
no subject
[— thank you, pot.]
no subject
[if anyone is whipped in this relationship it is both of them.]
Just because he got away with something once doesn't mean he always does.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
[and he loves his friend so much, that idiot.]
no subject
[There's a questioning undercurrent here. Explain.]
no subject
'Annoying' is likely one of the first terms one would use to describe Joseph Joestar if they just met him.
['but you freely associate with him for roughly similar reasons.']
no subject
[Okay but you were, though.]
no subject
no subject
[YOU'RE BOTH RUDE.]
no subject
Polnareff's my friend, as...everything as he tends to be. I don't make a habit of associating with complete imbeciles, so you can trust that obviously he isn't one.
no subject
no subject
It's just that he's also dense, obtuse, and a little slow on the uptake.