I like raunchy weddings (maybe I won't invite my parents to mind) and although there are no formalised ways to sex up the groom, that can be rectified in an ad hoc fashion.

I've been to a wedding reception that included the bride pulling the groom toward her by his tie, often. Is that sexed-up enough?

Which reminds me to nitpick: ita, I hope you do NOT mean raunchy weddings, but rather raunchy receptions. Just checking.

But what if I marry a fat hairy guy with enormous manboobs?

In that case, I believe tradition dictates that all underwear-tossing ceremonies be replaced by the two of you stepping back and the spotlight falling upon a troupe of trained monkeys who do an interpretive manboob dance choreographed to Nijinski's "Rites of Spring." I think. Gimme a second to check my Emily Post.

Actually, I meant raunchy weddings in that I was thinking of the bride and groom kiss.

The rest of it can be very asexual. Then pick up the sex baton at the reception.

The whole garter removal, toss, flower toss, garter application was what I meant by pantomime screw.

I do the electric slide with relatives, that would be disgusting.

Actually, I meant raunchy weddings in that I was thinking of the bride and groom kiss.

Huh. t /quietly judgemental

</quietly judgemental>

That's not quiet at all! Everyone can totally hear you!

I like it when that kiss gets a cheer.

Oh, I bet we can come up with a few suggestions.

It's tempting, but I shall refrain from firebombing any bridges.

raunch should not be in public.

Where there is no trust, there can be no line dancing...

A pair of friends had a great gag for their garter toss... to the theme from Peter Gunn, he wandered in from the side, did some cartoon-wolf-ish "sexy mama" looks, climbed halfway up her dress, and then pulled out a string of a brazilian napkins tied together with the garter at the end. Got a lot of laughs.