RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander?

RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (Full Version)

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

Message

littlewonder -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:20:36 PM)
It's amazing how I was able to find a man and have even before Master and even now that I am with him, I have one photo up...me and my hair flinging around and I still got and get offers...no genitalia, no sexy boudoir photos, no bits or pieces showing, no long legs in heels, etc....just an eye and hair. so what was that saying about women putting themselves out there in their sexy poses or whatever?

Level -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:23:21 PM)
When the OP used "lower", it made me think he meant the vajayjay.

Focus50 -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:23:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsLadySue Probably because men are visual creatures. Right here - "first cab off the rank"...! Men like to look whereas women mostly prefer the lights to at least be low if they can't be out altogether when "bumpin' uglies".... But before it gets to that, they first hafta attract a man. It's not about hypocrisy (the women doing it but not appreciating it when the men do), but merely a matter of women being different to men. And I appreciate those gender differences, which has much to do with why I don't much care for women of this age adopting predominantly (bad) male habits like tattoos and being rough, loud n rowdy etc. But I digress. Seems like a more interesting question to put to gay men. Not that I wanna know.... lol Focus.

EsotericLady -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:24:13 PM)
First of all, if she has little other marketable qualities about herself to choose from, it probably would be smart. and Secondly, if that is the kind of man she would be most interested in attracting, than I would think so. (And the crowd roars!!!) quote: ORIGINAL: lizi In the case of women putting out nude pics for men, well that would be smart marketing now wouldn't it? Men generally like to see nudity. So a women advertising herself to a man by using nude bait is using bait which would probably get her a response from a large percent of men out there.

Level -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder It's amazing how I was able to find a man and have even before Master and even now that I am with him, I have one photo up...me and my hair flinging around and I still got and get offers...no genitalia, no sexy boudoir photos, no bits or pieces showing, no long legs in heels, etc....just an eye and hair. so what was that saying about women putting themselves out there in their sexy poses or whatever? Yeah, but you do that hair flinging thing really well [:D]

littlewonder -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:26:39 PM)
my accidental picture of me looking at my camera when it wasn't working and going off in my face lol. Yup, I'm pretty good at accidents. [:D]

DOM68005 -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:28:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DOM68005 Why is it then that females by a large margin put their front lower bits in many profiles and pictures? I fail to see how breasts entered the responses. I am a "breast man". I enjoy a nice form capped by a set of nice nipples. By defination, breasts are not "front lower bits". Perhaps, I should have said genitalia. It's just not a term that I normally use except when talking to medical folk in a medical context.

Level -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:30:36 PM)
A quasi-related aside: in the last hour, on a facebook page, the admin posted a "boobs" pic. A nice one, imo. But almost every single female comment was harsh: "fat", "lopsided", "saggy", etc. Hmm.

Akrotiri -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:30:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level I think genitalia means the reproductive organs, so she is correct. I just checked by googling "are breasts genitalia?" which came up with, among many, this scholarly book: "Pathology and genetics of tumours of the breast and female genital organs" which leads me to believe breasts are not female genital organs. Certainly enlarged breasts are secondary sexual characteristics as someone already pointed out; but they're apparently not genitals, per se. But what part of this topic has anything to do with tits? (tits sounds so much more exciting than breasts or boobs!)

Level -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:33:44 PM)
Well, boobs shouldn't be included, true, but should this thread be in BDSM?

DOM68005 -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:34:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Um. By my estimate, I'd say that maybe 1% or less show their vagina pics on collarme. What is this "large margin" you speak of? Respectfully, you and I are looking at different samplings. Otherwise, I would not have posed the question.

DOM68005 -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:39:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level Well, boobs shouldn't be included, true, but should this thread be in BDSM? Maybe not, but I failed to find a general topic section other than this one. I have from time to time seen other comments about CM profiles in this section, so I thought I was following that lead.

LaTigresse -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:43:18 PM)
Completely lacking any respect at all..........did you bother reading the two threads I linked for you???

Snitch -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:43:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DOM68005 Respectfully, you and I are looking at different samplings. Otherwise, I would not have posed the question. Every profile has a purpose (which may or may not be what is stated on the profile). One way to tell if your sampling is fair is to right click reverse image search the profile pics. More often than not, the pics you are attracted to are actually stolen off the web so you must discount that profile if you're looking for what 'real women' do. I've studied this a lot, and, I'd say maybe 95% of the profiles that show female naughty bits are going to be of stolen pictures (see collarmefakes for the pictures showing where they came from and the profiles, side by side). Perhaps 50% of the pics that fool you are also stolen off the web (as evidenced that they're a set from model's pictures, which go from clothed to raunchy, where the profiler purposely picks the more mundane of the bunch to portray the profile). These, I must emphatically state, are not intuitively obvious - but these are not the ones you appear to be talking about anyway. So ... my assessment? Probably 95% of the pictures you're referring to are of men posing as women for various reasons, not all of which are scams.

xssve -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:50:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DOM68005 quote: ORIGINAL: DOM68005 Why is it then that females by a large margin put their front lower bits in many profiles and pictures? I fail to see how breasts entered the responses. I am a "breast man". I enjoy a nice form capped by a set of nice nipples. By defination, breasts are not "front lower bits". Perhaps, I should have said genitalia. It's just not a term that I normally use except when talking to medical folk in a medical context. I misunderstood "front lower parts", but I suspect that it is because a lot of guys are pickerier about womens bodies, big belly is a deal breaker for a lot of guys, so unless her belly is taut and top shelf, she saying "if you can't handle this jelly then see ya". Otherwise, she is doing to you with her belly shot what you want to do to her with your cock shot. If you're talking about a twat shot, it indicates she's a bit of an exhibitionist, if you are talking about below the waist shot in general, she doesn't want a pic of her face all over the internet. With a guy it can indicate exhibitionism, it might also indicate narcissistic self absorption or something, there tend to be more negative traits associated with male exhibitionism than with female, them we pay to exhibit themselves, lol.

Level -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:57:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DOM68005 quote: ORIGINAL: Level Well, boobs shouldn't be included, true, but should this thread be in BDSM? Maybe not, but I failed to find a general topic section other than this one. I have from time to time seen other comments about CM profiles in this section, so I thought I was following that lead. You're right, there have been those threads here (I think that's what LaT posted links to), and the mods left them here, but there is an Off Topic section, that's a good place for general, non BDSM threads.

Muttling -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 12:59:05 PM)
In case you haven't noticed, men and women are different. Different rules and different standards apply for attracting the opposite sex. If pussy shots offend you, don't message those ladies.

EsotericLady -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 1:02:18 PM)
Considering that there have already been 36 posts made BEFORE this one... does the OP REALLY need to be throttled for beginning his thread here, and now need to move it? It seems rather a moot point by now...

Level -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 1:06:27 PM)
Who's "throttling" him?

OsideGirl -> RE: Good for the goose as well as the gander? (2/10/2013 1:09:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Um. By my estimate, I'd say that maybe 1% or less show their vagina pics on collarme. What is this "large margin" you speak of? I thought the same thing. And actually, a lot of the pussy pictures are on male profiles.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625