[Emmalein]

I'm going out on a limb here...as a woman, I think that there is a BIG difference between a sexually based "touch" and one that's not. I understand that we all have physical boundaries that we don't like crossed and for most people what he did would not have been acceptable. However, it IS different when the touch is sexual in meaning and when it's not. It's like when Trinny & Susannah (not sure of the spelling) of the British version of What Not To Wear grab at the woman's breasts to show them that they aren't wearing the right bra. Mizrahi, as gay as he is, is like a female friend, so the gesture is interpreted in a friendlier, less threatening way, IMHO.

[HitmanLV]

Most women I know don't fondle each other or peer down each others dresses. I guess we keep different company. :-)

[bvw]

You've been immersed in the River of Deconstructionism, obviously. That was a sexual touch, it was an exploitative touch. Your acceptance of the sacremental baptism of Social Deconstructionism means you beleive in "gay" as a sexual identity.

Mizrachi, betcha, was turned on -- if only by the provocativeness of the situation, the crossing of the social line.

[LongElegantLegs]

So what if it was a lesbian looking down your shirt, or squeezing your charmins? Would it be okay, because she's a woman, or not okay, because it's sexual?

There has to be a line drawn somewhere...