quote:Originally posted by Michael P: this is the one thing i hate most about our little community
how a guy can get off being treated like a weak spineless turd i'll never know
because you are not into it. Take for example a "normal" guy who likes tits and ass only. He may look at you and say the same thing because you like feet and possibly say something similar to what you said:
how a guy can get off on feet i'll never know
i think there's a huge difference between getting off on a body part and getting off on some chick calling you a worthless piece of shit
it's not even close to being the same thing
-------------------- quote: ---------------------------------- posted by Andy - Laa: my posts in this thread are not as good as Michael P's Posts: 3024 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never understood how some guys can be into smelly feet, or wide flat feet, or stalking women in public to get candid photos or videos of their feet. Or those who like to "borrow" a woman's shoes in order to masturbate in them, or... You get the point.
One would think that posters to a foot fetish board, of all things, would be much more tolerant of the fetishes of others. To ask someone with an interest in submission to explain the attraction is a little like asking some rabid fan of smelly feet to explain theirs. What are they going to say: Because they smell good to me? Because the smell gets me off?
It's an unfair question that ultimately cannot be answered, and one that shouldn't even be asked, certainly not here.
Posts: 89 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by manolojchoo: I've never understood how some guys can be into smelly feet, or wide flat feet, or stalking women in public to get candid photos or videos of their feet. Or those who like to "borrow" a woman's shoes in order to masturbate in them, or... You get the point.
One would think that posters to a foot fetish board, of all things, would be much more tolerant of the fetishes of others. To ask someone with an interest in submission to explain the attraction is a little like asking some rabid fan of smelly feet to explain theirs. What are they going to say: Because they smell good to me? Because the smell gets me off?
It's an unfair question that ultimately cannot be answered, and one that shouldn't even be asked, certainly not here.
Here's an illustration of the Pot calling the Kettle Black ... First lamenting the lack of Tolerance among the foot fetish community, as applies to these forums ... then closing with the statement that the question itself is unfair and shouldn't even be ASKED. How tolerant is that?
The points are well-taken, as to personal preferences, and the fact they are wide and varied in nature; that there are many foot-centric habits and fantasies some (or many) other foot lovers may find abhorent. They lose some validity though, when stating this topic's question shouldn't even be asked, and particularly in light of a hoped-for "tolerance".
[ February 09, 2009, 01:08 PM: Message edited by: Ben Del Amitri ]
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by High_Arch_Analyst: Because I just don't get it. I occasionally come across these clips of girls talking verbal shits on viewers and/or male participants. I have to immediately navigate away from the clips. I find "mouthy" overzealous women extremely annoying (I think most men do).
If your into it, I could care less. I just want to hear from the horses mouth how a person verbally taking a shit on you is appealing. Don't you ever just want to tell that bitch to shut the fuck up?
Ironically, the very people who possess the predilection for humiliation by another, may be the least likely to speak up in answer to this, or in defense of their willing participation.
Toesucker85 offered a nice reply, ostensibly from the standpoint of a person who does enjoy this.
quote:Originally posted by Toesucker85: o yea as far as appeal i like all the attention plus im submissive, i like when a woman takes control.
Although not offering specifics, he did make a straight-forward, simple and genuine reply. And while I'm not able to understand the reasoning behind it, I think I do understand him and appreciate his input.
[ February 09, 2009, 01:12 PM: Message edited by: Ben Del Amitri ]
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Here's an illustration of the Pot calling the Kettle Black..."
No, Ben, the illustration was to point out the moral hazard of criticizing the sexual predilections of others. I used the royal "I(ve)" form in my opening paragraph to make that point. Perhaps I should have put that paragraph in quotation marks to be more obvious.
"They lose some validity though, when stating this topic's question shouldn't even be asked, and particularly in light of a hoped-for "tolerance"."
The validity of my argument is not at all diminished, and I stand by my statement. Indeed, to question someone else's kink, on this forum of all places, suggests an almost laughable hypocrisy.
One final comment, not at all related to our minor disagreement here: I enjoy your photo contributions to this site. Some of your models are breathtakingly beautiful. So, it's good to have you back in the thick of it, so to speak.
quote:Originally posted by manolojchoo: "Here's an illustration of the Pot calling the Kettle Black..."
No, Ben, the illustration was to point out the moral hazard of criticizing the sexual predilections of others. I used the royal "I(ve)" form in my opening paragraph to make that point. Perhaps I should have put that paragraph in quotation marks to be more obvious.
"They lose some validity though, when stating this topic's question shouldn't even be asked, and particularly in light of a hoped-for "tolerance"."
The validity of my argument is not at all diminished, and I stand by my statement. Indeed, to question someone else's kink, on this forum of all places, suggests an almost laughable hypocrisy.
One final comment, not at all related to our minor disagreement here: I enjoy your photo contributions to this site. Some of your models are breathtakingly beautiful. So, it's good to have you back in the thick of it, so to speak.
quote:Originally posted by Michael P: this is the one thing i hate most about our little community
how a guy can get off being treated like a weak spineless turd i'll never know
because you are not into it. Take for example a "normal" guy who likes tits and ass only. He may look at you and say the same thing because you like feet and possibly say something similar to what you said:
how a guy can get off on feet i'll never know
i think there's a huge difference between getting off on a body part and getting off on some chick calling you a worthless piece of shit
it's not even close to being the same thing
On the contrary, refer to manolojchoo's 1st post for a better understanding of what is being said.
quote:Originally posted by manolojchoo: "Here's an illustration of the Pot calling the Kettle Black..."
No, Ben, the illustration was to point out the moral hazard of criticizing the sexual predilections of others. I used the royal "I(ve)" form in my opening paragraph to make that point. Perhaps I should have put that paragraph in quotation marks to be more obvious.
"They lose some validity though, when stating this topic's question shouldn't even be asked, and particularly in light of a hoped-for "tolerance"."
The validity of my argument is not at all diminished, and I stand by my statement. Indeed, to question someone else's kink, on this forum of all places, suggests an almost laughable hypocrisy.
One final comment, not at all related to our minor disagreement here: I enjoy your photo contributions to this site. Some of your models are breathtakingly beautiful. So, it's good to have you back in the thick of it, so to speak.
Regards, mjc
TOUCHE' - your points are well-stated and well-taken!
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
my wife tells me it is cultural. I am black and feel like you; there is no way in hell I am putting up with some woman even attempting to dog me out and treat me like shit. (yes, the photos where the girl is giving the camera the finger are not even worth my time pulling up.) My wife is white and says that is something that more white guys are into. She says that white guys tend to be more intimidated by women and afraid to approach them out of fear of rejection. That and they like for the woman to take the lead out of ease for them (the white guy.) I didnt know that and never approached the subject. But if that is true, it makes sense and agrees with Toetapper and Tyler D's comments.
My wife says this submissive role is a turn off for most women and which is why a lot of white women go for black guys; they are strong and confident and dont take the woman's shit.
(If this theory is true, then would it make sense that white guys hook up with black women and black guys hook up with white women?)
Either way, all I know is that I am not a submissive person and dont like to be in any role that positions me that way. Least of all in a relationship.
-------------------- "if at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking 'til you do succeed." Posts: 28 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ben Del Amitri: Ironically, the very people who possess the predilection for humiliation by another, may be the least likely to speak up in answer to this, or in defense of their willing participation.
Ben, this is the most insightful comment of the thread thus far, second to manolojchoo's comment about the hypocrisy in some of us trying to interrogate a superset of our own brethren about their preferences.
Basically, it is the silent majority out there who cause this humiliation perception and it is that very same demographic (who are mostly ashamed & feeble) that it is difficult to pry the explanations out of them, especially when questioned in such an "un-nurturing" way.
And folks should not go assuming that the cause for their preference is that mommy didn't "nurture" them enough either, because I have seen more than my share of subbies suddenly go on the meek offensive after such an insult to their intelligence.
They are foot fetishists just like all of us and should not be looked at as having psychological problems that stemmed from childhood, cuz probably most of us have had our own feet preferences stem from triggers that occured at a younger age as well.
quote:Originally posted by mrwright: My wife says this submissive role is a turn off for most women
Generally speaking, this is often true and also a reason why this silent majority of foot subbies cause the disgust, comtempt & disrespect from most women out there and subsequently, the low-life prejudices against the rest of the non-subbie foot demographic.
This is perhaps a reason that a vocal minority of insecure foot guys like to lash out at the foot subby majority, because these complainers are tired of having to earn women's respect based on their own merit (as opposed to preconcieved notions).
[ February 10, 2009, 08:31 AM: Message edited by: Tyler D. ]
posted
For me, I think the submission aspect evolved almost simultaneously with the foot fetish. I think that in most of Western society the foot has for a very long time been a "dirty" part of the body. This might be why in my early fantasies I imagined having to engage in the lowliest of activities with a woman--for me this was showing reverence for her feet. (I also had fantasies of ass worship, another unpleasant part of the body in my culture.)
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
