RE: Is fetish not for single guys?

RE: Is fetish not for single guys? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Kana -> RE: Is fetish not for single guys? (2/17/2012 7:19:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep I don't really think unattached males are at that much of a disadvantage, as long as they're nifty. Ding, ding. We have a winner. quote: I wonder if that might be more the OPs problem -- who knows. Or it could be that, just like high school, some guys are good at getting pussy, (Women find them attractive, they got game, the emit good pheromones, wear the right shoes, know how to style and groove, etc....) and some guys aren't. Someone once posted on here that if you're not the type of guy who can snag the hot chick in RL, you're probably not gonna be able to do the same on-line. The same thought pattern works here, just at a lesser degree. The guys who lack the confidence, social skills, compassion, empathy, etc... to be good at attracting women in person find that the same skills are needed online...and don't do so hot as a result. Just a thought and all...

xssve -> RE: Is fetish not for single guys? (2/17/2012 7:25:40 AM)
Well it's much more competitive in general these days, back in the heyday of the sexual revolution, the Sixties and Seventies, the women were as aggressive as the men, if not more so - a combination of things, the old school Fifties attitude that a woman needed a man meant that a lot of women would go for anything wearing pants and possessing a modicum of social skills, while on the other hand, newly liberated women were shacking up, sexually frustrated divorcees were on the prowl, etc., etc. Fuck "style", shoes, cars, phones, clothes, hair, etc., "game" was a bottle of wine and joint.

Kana -> RE: Is fetish not for single guys? (2/17/2012 8:23:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve Well it's much more competitive in general these days, back in the heyday of the sexual revolution, the Sixties and Seventies, the women were as aggressive as the men, if not more so - a combination of things, the old school Fifties attitude that a woman needed a man meant that a lot of women would go for anything wearing pants and possessing a modicum of social skills, while on the other hand, newly liberated women were shacking up, sexually frustrated divorcees were on the prowl, etc., etc. Fuck "style", shoes, cars, phones, clothes, hair, etc., "game" was a bottle of wine and joint. Grins-Now it's roofies! (and notes that even then, back in the day, gals still went for the hot guy, not the whiny loser in the corner with bad skin and halitosis. Had to have some game to get her to huff down with ya, ya know?)

xssve -> RE: Is fetish not for single guys? (2/18/2012 7:50:27 AM)
Well actually, I think it made it harder to conceal a lack of social skills behind a camouflage of conspicuous consumption.

MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: Is fetish not for single guys? (2/19/2012 11:47:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep Here in NE, we're kinda overstocked on /s-chicks. There is no such thing as too many submissive women! Heresy! Torture the heretic! Thinks for a moment about LillyBoPeep being tortured I'll be in my bunk.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125