posted
why would you get upset about that? how do you think gay people feel? and they have a tougher time being accepted. but honestly dude, who cares what some book says. dont worry about what society says. i happen to live in the united states, where people are accepted. if someone doesn't accept you for ANY reason, fuck em.
-------------------- "Nina, this is my house, you work for me, and I want to suck your toes." -Big Trouble (2002) Posts: 1855 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:you will find that paraphilias (what we refer to here at Wu's as fetishism) are defined by three criteria
that is exactly the problem tho Jillian. paraphilia and fetishism are not interchangable. fetishism is a subset of paraphilia and as is partialism. the difference between the two is fetishism requires the fetish object to be part of sexual arousal whereas partialism is an attraction towards a non-sexual body part but not to exclusivity of sexual arousal from other acts/body parts.
i am not sure that this is anyone on Wu's that is a true fetishist. not that i know of at least.
posted
After shooting with Jeska I have an areola fetish they are the smoothest I have ever seen - has anyone been attracted to the sexual body parts after child birth which is their function -since when does function = fun? Who wrote that book? Saggy boobies and an epiz?...maybe the feet get bigger yum!
Im off to fire my therapist...he asks too many questions.
speak for yourself.. but it has nothing to do with my attraction to feet.
anyway.. as has been discussed many times, a true fetishist has aberrant sexual behavior. i dont think many of us here are real fetishists as per the true definition:
quote:an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression
how many of us have to have some foot play in our sexual encounters to be aroused? i hope not many. to borrow a phrase from a gentleman whom i knew as Moonshadow, i am foot partialist:
quote:partialism: any inanimate object or any body part not of a sexual nature that arouses erotic feelings or fixation.
i dont NEED feet to be aroused, but they do arouse me and i do enjoy them, but they aren't necessary to be sexually satisfied.
Thanks for posting that clarification of terms, nusuth. I'm often amazed when people tell me they have never heard the difference.
posted
Mr Mule: I would totally agree with what you said regarding societies attitudes about guys like us who enjoy female feet.
To each their own, but i would much rather lick women's toes and soles who put a lot of pride in taking care of their feet, as compared to putting my mouth on female private areas. If you have a woman who is a progressive thinker, she probably would agree.
Posts: 253 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:To each their own, but i would much rather lick women's toes and soles who put a lot of pride in taking care of their feet, as compared to putting my mouth on female private areas. If you have a woman who is a progressive thinker, she probably would agree.
of course you would. licking her feet adressing YOUR desires whereas giving her oral adresses HER desires. no matter how progressive a lady is, she is gonna want you to give her head more than for you to suck her toes.. that is unless you suck at oral.
quote:partialism: any inanimate object or any body part not of a sexual nature that arouses erotic feelings or fixation.
would "sexual nature" include breasts or asses? it seems that way, but they aren't part of the sexual/reproductive system
who defines what's "sexual nature" or not? just keep doing what you like with whom you like, and if they like it too. we are legion, soon enough sexual feet activities will be as mainstream as anal or oral sex.
it seems to me that psychiatry is nowadays church and do not forget how were the above mentioned activities regarded ( still are ) by the church.
[ October 06, 2009, 11:04 PM: Message edited by: hur ]
quote:how many of us have to have some foot play in our sexual encounters to be aroused? i hope not many. to borrow a phrase from a gentleman whom i knew as Moonshadow, i am foot partialist:
quote:partialism: any inanimate object or any body part not of a sexual nature that arouses erotic feelings or fixation.
i dont NEED feet to be aroused, but they do arouse me and i do enjoy them, but they aren't necessary to be sexually satisfied.
I know that I would be not-entirely-fulfilled if my sex life did not involve feet. I can get aroused from plain ol' sexual stuff--pussy is a good thing!--but I crave feet for sure and without them sex would not be 1/10 as enjoyable. But I do not consider myself hampered in my ability to become sexually aroused and so don't really fit the "fetish" definition in the strictest sense, either.
-------------------- You give pleasure to the feet, you give pleasure to the person. Posts: 1297 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyler D.: lol, well based on women's reactions when i start sniffing their toes and deriving pleasure from it, i'd say it is not surprising that they think we are sexual deviants. i can just see this in the women's eyes.
in fact, one really hot chic made a mental illness hand gesture at the camera while i was sniffing her toes the other day. ya know, that hand sign where they point a finger at their head and make circular motions... yeah that crazy sign LOL
she thought i was a freak fer sure boiz
She's the one taking money to satisfy your craving, right? Who is she to judge you, then?
Remember that quote by Obi Wan Kenobi?: "Who is more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows him?"
-------------------- You give pleasure to the feet, you give pleasure to the person. Posts: 1297 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elvzz: I involve the anus and feet whenever I can...it is what Buddah would want...the impermanence of life conditions us to take what we can get
Dude...that ain't Buddhist
Neither was spelling "Buddha" "B-u-d-d-a-h"...
-------------------- You give pleasure to the feet, you give pleasure to the person. Posts: 1297 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have always wondered why there was a relationship with foot feticism and dominant women? I feel more feminine because I have beautiful feet and I feel beautiful when my feet and toes are all "dolled up. My feet are part of the whole sexual experience and it's not about making my man smell them, lick them, suck them, trampling, force feeding etc....that to me is a separate fetish altogether......I want him to love them, enjoy them and think they are beautiful.
Posts: 35 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:To each their own, but i would much rather lick women's toes and soles who put a lot of pride in taking care of their feet, as compared to putting my mouth on female private areas. If you have a woman who is a progressive thinker, she probably would agree.
of course you would. licking her feet adressing YOUR desires whereas giving her oral adresses HER desires. no matter how progressive a lady is, she is gonna want you to give her head more than for you to suck her toes.. that is unless you suck at oral.
I lick at oral, mostly--but I don't rule out sucking. I usually don't suck until she's warmed up a bit.
As for giving oral: When I do it, it's to please her, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy the fuck out of it, too--just like when I suck her toes! Hopefully, she's getting enjoyment out of both when I do them.
-------------------- You give pleasure to the feet, you give pleasure to the person. Posts: 1297 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Tongue]](tongue.gif)
