Is it really that confusing? If it had said there was a pot of gold the implication is clear that the person who reaches it will be rich. You ask “why a nude woman?” and the answer is simply because, just like being rich, desiring a sexual partner is a common desire.
Is it really that confusing? If it had said there was a pot of gold the implication is clear that the person who reaches it will be rich. You ask “why a nude woman?” and the answer is simply because, just like being rich, desiring a sexual partner is a common desire.
A pot of gold explaining the rules to you about it ringing a bell would definitely be even more suspicious than a random naked woman.
It’s a pot of gold. Obviously there’s a leprechaun involved who will be presenting the riddle.
Makes sense. But that would not make me less suspicious.
i would definitely be more suspicious of it. This is probably another paradox frankly.
i think it would make equally as much sense, if not more, if the word naked was just removed.
It’s just fucking shoehorned into it.