|
Sundowner -> RE: Hairy chest or hairless/shaved ? (11/6/2011 6:10:05 AM)
|
Hmmm. Tricky one this.
But on careful reflection I think I can say firmly that non-hairy chests do it for me.
When I think of the various ladies I've met r/l from CM they've all had hairless chests (Greedy apart, of course) and most of them have been extraordinarily attractive. My problem is that I haven't yet had any sort of intimate relationship with a hairy-chested girl, so in fairness I can't be unequivocal about this; but I don't think I'd get too excited. I'm sure I could maintain normal basic courtesies, like avoiding projectile vomiting, but I fear some indication of distaste might emerge.
Now if the question had centered on the non-chesty area it'd be different. Apart from the irritation of discovering a pubic hair between ones teeth (so annoying when one finds it, so embarrassing when someone else spots it) bushiness around a lady's front bottom can be rather attractive. Less so of course if small creepy things are discovered wandering around in there, particularly if, like me, one normally enjoys the pleasures of oral so much. But I think I have a preference for shaved - it allows for delightful and somehow more intimate wandering of the tongue as well as simple visual enjoyment. And wax-play is so very much more dignified in the post-application stage and dignity during mindless vicious pain infliction is so important don't you think?
When it comes to the back front bottom area, however, (what one could more simply call the bottom I suppose) then I think I'm more firmly of the view that hair is a turn-off. Rimming can be such good fun whilst, strangely, scat play is for me a firm limit. And a hairy bum carrying the unseemly odour of faeces takes me to my earlier discourtesy - projectile vomiting. Just saying.
|
|
|
|
