quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynnxz

quote:

ORIGINAL: smileforme50

All I could think about was how she was making great money by deceiving gullible men who would rather sleep alone and pay $3.99 a minute to be deceied into believing they were talking to someone who looked like a centerfold....instead of a rewarding a loving relationship with a REAL woman.

Here's a trait I find annoying....

Insecure women insisting that they are "real" women, as if people who keep themselves in shape are blowup dolls.

quote:

I don't begrudge anyone their tastes, but I always wonder about the emphasis we put on physical appearance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana

quote:

I don't begrudge anyone their tastes, but I always wonder about the emphasis we put on physical appearance.

What can I say, people are shallow monkeys.

Now personally I think we fall in desire/heat/lust/wanton passion with the package but in love (Which is a whole different deal) with the person inside.
The wrapping may catch my eye, but it ain't enough to keep me there.
For that I require substance.

But I'm also a realist-there has to be some form of physical connection for this cat. Not speaking for anyone else, only me.
And I can assure you, I have a couple of preferences that wouldn't matter if I could see or not. For instance, I like good skin. Bad oily greasy skin kinda creeps me out, gives me the heebie jeebies. That shit would bother piss outta me regardless of ocular capacity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2
I appreciate people speaking openly of their politically incorrect preferences in attractiveness and in partners. Makes me feel less guilty for having politically incorrect preferences of my own, even though I keep them to myself to avoid the personal attacks that invariably follow that expression.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynnxz

Here's a trait I find annoying....

Insecure women insisting that they are "real" women, as if people who keep themselves in shape are blowup dolls.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

Those who claim to be submissive. I could stop right there. Not possible. [>:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

Should be obvious:
The ones who claim to be submissive yet hide behind their vanilla responsibilities to escape their obligations to the D/s relationship....

Those who profess they live to serve a Mistress, but who don't have the foggiest idea what they're saying.

Men who say they're submissive but are in actuality BDSM bottoms who assume all Dommes are as sex-crazed as they are and live to Top anyone who breathes every opportunity that presents itself. (You mean we aren't raging Amazon nymphos?) In their private dungeon. (You mean we all don't have one at our disposal 24/7?)

At no cost, save a cup of coffee (when meeting), if that. This isn't a real date, after all, because we're not *real* women.

At no expense to them, sex toys are free, bondage equipment grows on trees in our backyards, we prefer to re-use butt plugs, vibrators/dildos we've used on other subs, right?...

If it costs anything to date and/or play with a Domme, then she must be a fin or pro, and I<male sub> never pay for my gratification. Dommes should be a free hobby.
(What are those lottery tickets and sports ticket stubs doing in my pocket? Those electronics, video game & Starbucks receipts? How'd they get there? Damn, forgot to cash in that stray gambling chip.)
I could go on and on ad infinitum, but will spare everyone since I'm so merciful. [sm=angel.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

Those who claim to be submissive. I could stop right there. Not possible. [>:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

Should be obvious:
The ones who claim to be submissive yet hide behind their vanilla responsibilities to escape their obligations to the D/s relationship....

Those who profess they live to serve a Mistress, but who don't have the foggiest idea what they're saying.

Men who say they're submissive but are in actuality BDSM bottoms who assume all Dommes are as sex-crazed as they are and live to Top anyone who breathes every opportunity that presents itself. (You mean we aren't raging Amazon nymphos?) In their private dungeon. (You mean we all don't have one at our disposal 24/7?)

At no cost, save a cup of coffee (when meeting), if that. This isn't a real date, after all, because we're not *real* women.

At no expense to them, sex toys are free, bondage equipment grows on trees in our backyards, we prefer to re-use butt plugs, vibrators/dildos we've used on other subs, right?...

If it costs anything to date and/or play with a Domme, then she must be a fin or pro, and I<male sub> never pay for my gratification. Dommes should be a free hobby.
(What are those lottery tickets and sports ticket stubs doing in my pocket? Those electronics, video game & Starbucks receipts? How'd they get there? Damn, forgot to cash in that stray gambling chip.)
I could go on and on ad infinitum, but will spare everyone since I'm so merciful. [sm=angel.gif]

FieryOpal, where on bloody earth did you even arrive at that I'm a fin domme or that I don't pay for my dates?
Unless I read your response entirely wrong. By the way, I'm 31, not 21. I'm intrigued by this :)

quote:

I don't begrudge anyone their tastes, but I always wonder about the emphasis we put on physical appearance.

quote:

I have to wonder.....if someone's physical appearance is very important to another findng sexual chemistry with them, what would happen if that second person went blind? Would you lose all ability to be sexually aroused? Would you just now need to rely on memories and imagination?

quote:

I think each and every human being has a politically incorrect to downright illegal preference—and probably several, at that. It feels strange to me that in a forum about adult practices and lifestyles, we'd be so afraid of voicing our opinions on what pleases and displeases us because it would be found "offensive" to someone in the crowd.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss

How does that work? I think perhaps those people are bottoms? That's totally fine, but perhaps it is an example of why definitions are important.

In my experience, sometimes people see something they really want and are willing to be someone else to get it—someone the object of their desires has expressly made clear he/she wishes. It's hard to uphold that facade for long, however. A common interest in the externals of D/s won't be enough to keep the relationship together once things start to unravel.

Aside of this, some people are lust plain incompatible, and yes, their intuitive understanding of the meanings behind definitions can be markedly different, as it turns out, even after extensive dialog where they seem to be in alignment with me. This is why I tend to move slow in vetting someone and deeply explore their visions, fantasies, and comprehensions of things three or four times over before agreeing to even meet for the first time (if we met online, that is).

I enjoyed that typo [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

quote:

I don't begrudge anyone their tastes, but I always wonder about the emphasis we put on physical appearance.

I believe for many of us, the emphasis we place upon physical appearance is due to our wiring, which ties directly into our conditioning during our formative years.

quote:

I have to wonder.....if someone's physical appearance is very important to another findng sexual chemistry with them, what would happen if that second person went blind? Would you lose all ability to be sexually aroused? Would you just now need to rely on memories and imagination?

My guess is that in most cases, the sense of touch would evolve to play the primary physical role in maintaining arousal based upon prior memory and current imagination... assuming that debilitating depression doesn't develop as a result of the blindness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

I DO have psoriasis but I keep it under control with healthy eating, meds, keeping away from stress, etc...except right now I had a bad case of it on my hands which the meds are not helping with at all so now I have to go back to the dr for most likely Humira injections.

Is it a dealbreaker right now? No because it's normally in remission. Was for 10 years before he met me and only started the outbreak this year.

Now had when he met me, I had an outbreak I can guarantee he wouldn't have wanted anything to do with me. If it continues to get bad to the point I had it as a child where it's uncontrollable again, I wouldn't blame him for leaving. I would leave too! Thankfully today there are many other meds on the markets to keep it under control. When I was a child, those didn't exist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

Yes, actually you did read it wrong, as we are discussing submissives not Dominants. I quoted you in agreement. I've had this happen to me before, the plethora of excuses, cancelling, setting aside my schedule to reschedule with a new sub. (That's why I don't care to deal with the added complications of a commuter-distance relationship, much less a long-distance one.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

Those who claim to be submissive. I could stop right there. Not possible. [>:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

Should be obvious:
The ones who claim to be submissive yet hide behind their vanilla responsibilities to escape their obligations to the D/s relationship....

Those who profess they live to serve a Mistress, but who don't have the foggiest idea what they're saying.

Men who say they're submissive but are in actuality BDSM bottoms who assume all Dommes are as sex-crazed as they are and live to Top anyone who breathes every opportunity that presents itself. (You mean we aren't raging Amazon nymphos?) In their private dungeon. (You mean we all don't have one at our disposal 24/7?)

At no cost, save a cup of coffee (when meeting), if that. This isn't a real date, after all, because we're not *real* women.

At no expense to them, sex toys are free, bondage equipment grows on trees in our backyards, we prefer to re-use butt plugs, vibrators/dildos we've used on other subs, right?...

If it costs anything to date and/or play with a Domme, then she must be a fin or pro, and I<male sub> never pay for my gratification. Dommes should be a free hobby.
(What are those lottery tickets and sports ticket stubs doing in my pocket? Those electronics, video game & Starbucks receipts? How'd they get there? Damn, forgot to cash in that stray gambling chip.)
I could go on and on ad infinitum, but will spare everyone since I'm so merciful. [sm=angel.gif]

FieryOpal, where on bloody earth did you even arrive at that I'm a fin domme or that I don't pay for my dates?
Unless I read your response entirely wrong. By the way, I'm 31, not 21. I'm intrigued by this :)

From posts of yours I've read, I know full well you don't claim to be a fin-Domme. A couple of friends of mine are fin-Dommes, so even if you were, I wouldn't hold it against you either. Did somebody else insinuate you are a Pay Princess? because I didn't and don't see where this fits in.

I was speaking about male subs, tongue-in-cheek[ily].

Why would you be paying for your own dates? It's up to you if you do, but I sure as hell don't. I turn down enough old-fashioned vanilla dinner dates as it is--no sub is getting off scot-free from properly dating me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Just a thought on the "fat" issue...

Body type fashions change and cycle over the years. I think what we are seeing more and more today is the return of the titless waif look that was popular in the 1920s.
Compare your average fashion rag to the portraits of beauties by Rubens or even photographs of pin-up models from the 1950s. Heck, some of the classic beauties from the 1950s are "obese" by current medical doggerel.

It's all fashion and I've let my subscription run out on that. Looks may get the attention for a moment but it is what is between the ears that keeps it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: smileforme50

quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

quote:

I don't begrudge anyone their tastes, but I always wonder about the emphasis we put on physical appearance.

I believe for many of us, the emphasis we place upon physical appearance is due to our wiring, which ties directly into our conditioning during our formative years.

quote:

I have to wonder.....if someone's physical appearance is very important to another findng sexual chemistry with them, what would happen if that second person went blind? Would you lose all ability to be sexually aroused? Would you just now need to rely on memories and imagination?

My guess is that in most cases, the sense of touch would evolve to play the primary physical role in maintaining arousal based upon prior memory and current imagination... assuming that debilitating depression doesn't develop as a result of the blindness.

(Comment on emphasis added) This is exactly why I dont understand it. Because I distinctly remember in my childhood being taught to NOT judge people by what they look like. Over and over and over I was taught by all the adults around me...."It's what's INSIDE that counts" Trouble is, I took their word for it and didn't learn the REAL truth until I was much older. I never had any kids, but when that realization finally came to me, I decided that if I ever did have any, I wasn't going to feed them that line of bull and I was going to make sure they knew how important their appearance was in the world.

quote:

Also....what about people who are born blind....or go blind before they are able to form such experiences, memories and judgements?