Been a while since posting but wanted some input from others. I had the pleasure recently of enjoying this girls feet that I was casually dating. She had size 9 slender tan feet with nice polished pink toes. We were at a park and she let me take off her black boots and socks and I licked and sucked her toes.
The problem was she had flat feet, not much of any arch and it was the 1st time I encountered that. As nice as her feet were, they were missing that curvy arch. I wasn't turned on as much and realized how important a nice arch is to me. After thinking about it, could this be the same reaction a breast guy has from nice curvy breasts as opposed to flat chests?
Posted by wvcple2003 (Member # 5268) on :
Ya; A friend of my wife has very sexy toes, but flat feet; so I can see your meaning in it being a turnoff not having that sexy arch!
Posted by wazdaname (Member # 29767) on :
Umm I wld say the breast as a whole wld be like ugly feet to pretty feet (unattractive breasts to attractive breasts) while the smaller characteristics like toes, arch, wrinkles etc wld only compare to nipple type, texture, shape etc. I don't think u cld say liking an arch of a foot is like liking big breats vs flat chests.
I might be taking your post the wrong way but that's just what I thought.
Posted by wvcple2003 (Member # 5268) on :
OK. I have no idea what you just said wazdaname; but I do respect the alcohol fueled response you just gave. Kinda reminds me of the retarded drival I sometimes speak on here. Great to have a follower! Posted by wazdaname (Member # 29767) on :
No alcohol in me, how did that not make sense at all? How about this, "could this be the same reaction a breast guy has from nice curvy breasts as opposed to flat chests?" my answer=no i don't think they are similar
Posted by GQguy (Member # 16534) on :
quote:Originally posted by wvcple2003: OK. I have no idea what you just said wazdaname; but I do respect the alcohol fueled response you just gave. Kinda reminds me of the retarded drival I sometimes speak on here. Great to have a follower!
LMFAO!!
I agree completely. A foot isn't sexy or feminine without a high arch. For me the higher, the better. It's certainly a let down when her feet aren't as highly arched as you would like.
Posted by hyperion2424 (Member # 39397) on :
A set of arch-supporting inserts should help. In about two months she'll go from flat to high, if she gets the right one. Not an over-the-counter one, either. Have her get the scan (they give her a printout color scan of her soles too) from either a chiropractor or podiatrist.
Posted by Patrick (Member # 1169) on :
If you couldn't understand what Wazdaname said, I'll break it down into SIMPLENESS...
Flat arch is a particular trait (of many) of a foot.
Flat chest isn't equal to just a small trait - it's the whole boob, pretty much.
Sooooo, if you're so overly in love with toes and they're smoking hot, you will probably not care as much about the arch. As you can see through threads here, there are so many particulars that people like best about a foot.
Patrick
Posted by wazdaname (Member # 29767) on :
Thanks for the clarification patrick, I thought i made it understandable but I guess not.
Posted by MarkM1 (Member # 39757) on :
Yeah I find flat feet unattractive also. Right up there with short pudgy toes. I like women to have sexy curved arches and shapely toes.
Posted by mjl1717 (Member # 2939) on :
quote:Originally posted by Patrick: If you couldn't understand what Wazdaname said, I'll break it down into SIMPLENESS...
Flat arch is a particular trait (of many) of a foot.
Flat chest isn't equal to just a small trait - it's the whole boob, pretty much.
Sooooo, if you're so overly in love with toes and they're smoking hot, you will probably not care as much about the arch. As you can see through threads here, there are so many particulars that people like best about a foot.
Patrick
So true.. There are sub fetishes in the foot fetish world!
Posted by wvcple2003 (Member # 5268) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by wazdaname: [QB] Umm I wld say the breast as a whole wld be like ugly feet to pretty feet (unattractive breasts to attractive breasts) while the smaller characteristics like toes, arch, wrinkles etc wld only compare to nipple type, texture, shape etc. I don't think u cld say liking an arch of a foot is like liking big breats vs flat chests.
Some guys on this forum may say different, but I will itterate and say you have made us all dumber by typing such words. May God have mercy on your soul!
Posted by combine_hunter (Member # 39526) on :
Like that line isn't overused.
I think abbreviating "would" and "could" is a little much. That's what threw me off, personally.
![[Thumbs Up]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
Like that line isn't overused.