I travel frequently for my job and I have been exposed to many feet while out on the road ranging from beautiful to not so beautiful on young girls to older women.
There is a Panera Bread that is not too far from my office that I like to frequent from time to time to take care of some office work, emails, etc.
Today I went to my usual spot and sat down at my usual table. Directly across from me sat an attractive woman, blond hair, roughly 5'5 in height, late thirties early forties, who was also doing some paperwork of her own.
I could not help but notice that she was doing her work but had slipped off her shoes.
Her feet were absolutely divine as she had them propped up on the empty chair directly in front of her.
Needless to say, my attention was going back and fourth between her feet and the work I was attempting to complete on my laptop.
At one point she got up to go get a coffee and I caught a glimpse of her heels since the shoes she was wearing did not have a strap on the back.
Beautiful...smooth, clean, well taken care of. Her toes were symmetrical and the nails although clear, were neat and maintained but not to the point where it looked like she just got a pedicure. The feet overall fit well with the rest of her aging physique.
Both feet looked like they were of an older woman...not young. They had a different look.
It's like comparing a 1963 Corvette Sting Ray and a 2012 Corvette Z06.
Although the 2012 Z06 some could argue is a modern American masterpiece with a devoted following, there is something about it that it does not have that the 1963 Sting Ray has.
When you look at a Sting Ray from the 60's, it calls back on memories. It's a nostalgia that is identifiable by someone who might of at one point in their lives owned that car in the past.
You look at the car and you say "wow...they don't make those any more". Everything ranging from the lines of the car, to the interior, to the feel of the vinyl on the dashboard, the radio, the seats...
The car just looks cool...it's different...it's older.
And yes the Z06 although modern, has characteristically identifiable lines of it's own. It has it's own features and persona.
But it's not the Sting Ray. It does not carry that aura...that story.
This woman was a Sting Ray. And the same way I would stare, admire, and want to sit behind the wheel and drive that car, only the way a 1963 Sting Ray can make you feel, is the same way I felt about her feet.
So I must ask...
If you had to choose would you favor a 2012 Corvette ZO6(girl under 30 with attractive feet) or 1963 Corvette Sing Ray(a woman over 40 with attractive feet)? Why would you choose one over the other?
Posts: 161 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
As long as she's over 18 and the product is fine and test drivable, I don't care if it is the new model or a classic. All ages (races too) have girls with amazing as well as awful feet. It depends on the person.
quote:Originally posted by Patrick: As long as she's over 18 and the product is fine and test drivable, I don't care if it is the new model or a classic. All ages (races too) have girls with amazing as well as awful feet. It depends on the person.
Patrick
My thoughts exactly!
-------------------- Always hopeful for a pretty pair of feet in my face Posts: 1955 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm in my early 40s, but if we're going to make male chauvenist pig comparisons of women to cars I'll add my little comment.
If I was going to trade in my old clunker for another one I'd have to go for a new car. Or if that is not the case I'll at least get a slightly used car with only one previous owner with low mileage. Either way I would need to take it for a test drive, kick the tires, etc. before signing a contract to make a commitment.
posted
That's a tough call but like ladaemon I'd definitely do some test driving before choosing. Not only are looks important but, to me anyway, I'd have to weigh experience (usually, but not always, attributed to the older women) versus open-mindedness (usually, but not always attributed to younger women). What most of us would love to have is a beautiful, young, open-minded, experienced girl. :-) Extremely will written post by the way skaramunga.
Posts: 9728 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, looks are very important, but I've found that "older" girls (those over 35) are more open with their sexuality and more willing to try new things. They tend to focus on YOUR needs more than their own, and tend to be better lovers than the younger ones.
Posts: 638 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My GF is 57. Her feet are are always manicured and often look miles ahead of the 20-30year-olds I see wearing flip-flops and such.
Age really isn't an issue for me. (up to a point) Older women are much more comfortable in their skin...
Posts: 771 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
Thank you for the participation, insight, and kind words.
It's funny because we often associate younger girls (those under 35) as having the best looking feet in general when it pertains to our fetish.
Although this might be a subjective point to convey, does that necessarily mean that those younger feet are the ones that will give us the best experiences in the long run?
As some of you have previously mentioned, having feet that fits our needs is a battle half way won.
How many times have we heard on this forum "she's young, beautiful, with great feet but she doesn't want me to touch them".
In certain instances this can be a huge barrier to overcome...and lately it appears to be a reoccurring theme around here.
I like what some of you posted which touched upon older women who have matured to a point where they have reached a certain level of sexual self-development.
Personally, I think this one particular aspect of older women is incomparable when trying to pin them up against their younger counterparts...
It appears as a foot fetishist, one would have a better experience with an older woman that has aesthetically pleasing feet, who is in touch with her sexual inclinations, as opposed to the younger counterpart who also has good feet but has yet to lift the vale that covers her sexual mediocrity...
Posts: 161 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Thank you for the participation, insight, and kind words.
It's funny because we often associate younger girls (those under 35) as having the best looking feet in general when it pertains to our fetish.
Although this might be a subjective point to convey, does that necessarily mean that those younger feet are the ones that will give us the best experiences in the long run?
As some of you have previously mentioned, having feet that fits our needs is a battle half way won.
How many times have we heard on this forum "she's young, beautiful, with great feet but she doesn't want me to touch them".
In certain instances this can be a huge barrier to overcome...and lately it appears to be a reoccurring theme around here.
I like what some of you posted which touched upon older women who have matured to a point where they have reached a certain level of sexual self-development.
Personally, I think this one particular aspect of older women is incomparable when trying to pin them up against their younger counterparts...
It appears as a foot fetishist, one would have a better experience with an older woman that has aesthetically pleasing feet, who is in touch with her sexual inclinations, as opposed to the younger counterpart who also has good feet but has yet to lift the vale that covers her sexual mediocrity...
Agree:
1)What you say comes only with life experience..
2)And as they say "youth is wasted on the young"
Posts: 830 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LeDaemon: [QB] I'm in my early 40s, but if we're going to make male chauvenist pig comparisons of women to cars I'll add my little comment.
A little touchy, are we?
Anyway, in some ways I prefer older women. The 1967. The remind me of my mother's friends when I was a teen. Some of them had some gorgeous feet that I fantasized about... and some still do (and I still think about them).
Posts: 81 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the way that I look at it; if we are talking about the SAME woman at 20 or at 40, and we are talking about ONLY the feet, I'd take the 40 year old feet any time. If you're mixing in other body parts, then yes, I'd have to go younger.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
