/plaza/ - General/Random

The place to post!


New Reply[ร—]
Name
No-bump
Message
File 10MB total
Oekaki
Password
[New Reply]


How_can_you_say_you_love_her_if_you_can't_even_eat_her_poop.jpg
[Hide] (18KB, 480x360)
How can you say you love her if you can't even eat her poop?
If you are not willing to eat a girl's poop, then you don't love her.
Scatfiends begone
What about gargling her vomit in your mouth?
>>8083
Urine (*to some extent) is (the only non-option) within the limits of "how far is it okay for one to debase himself over a bad b?"
>>8084
Drinking her urine or letting her piss on you?
>>8088
Either but only in the heat of that "I want to feel like the marked property of this matriarch because I feel submissive like a little-" moment. Probably the most I'd be willing to debase myself for someone besides giving head. But giving head is better tbh. It may not seem as "humiliating" at first but making a sub orgasm (hands free (possibly multiple times (from what I've heard happens ti some people. crazy!)) from the mere act of pleasing ๐˜บ๐˜ฐ๐˜ถ while actively denying ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฎ๐˜ด๐˜ฆ๐˜ญ๐˜ท๐˜ฆ๐˜ด is the most honors you're gonna get as a dom IMO in terms of "wow I basically rewired thos person to (want to) serve me that bad they can't even help themselves."

Theoretically. Theologically. As I was told by a friend. I'm not into such indecenvies myself of course.
>>8090
I've never felt giving head to a woman was submissive. To a guy, sure. What about if she vomits on you? Is that humiliating? 

>I'm not into such indecenvies myself of course.
Sure...
>>8092
>What about if she vomits on you? Is that humiliating?
Only in part if tolerated, sure. But is it an effective choice for a dom? idk. Vomiting is going to be arguably even more uncomfortable for rhe person doing it than the one taking it. Why on earth would I want my baby boo hurting her throat like that if the point is to humiliate  ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฆ? No makey the sense! Same reason I alwaya found pegging to be eird as a concept.

>What is humiliating about a man getting... strapon action from his girl?
Nothing! My point here isn't to be homophobic. People can be homo all they want, I respect that. But when you;

>buy a plastic penis
>buy the apparatus to wear it
>convince your girl to use it on you
That just feels functionally rhe opposite of what a dom should be doing. The humiliation shouldn't be a dom's specific intent (unless she's specifically pissed) it should be an effortless byproduct of the servitude. You don't need to explicitly express the power so long as you can jist make me ๐˜ง๐˜ฆ๐˜ฆ๐˜ญ it.

I uh. I mean..
>>8093

The hentai in the OP (Night Shift Nurses) is actually about humiliating and degrading women, often by making them urinate and defecate into the rapist character's mouth.
simpsons-bart-simpson.gif
[Hide] (3.5MB, 452x344)
>>8028 (OP) 
>>8093
>Vomiting is going to be arguably even more uncomfortable for rhe person doing it than the one taking it.
I guess its subjective really. I heard about a woman who was really into getting her bf to lick her vomit. I guess it really depends on the person. Things that are painful to some people (running for a long time) become easy for others who are really into it (marathon runners).

>The humiliation shouldn't be a dom's specific intent (unless she's specifically pissed) it should be an effortless byproduct of the servitude.
What if she wants it? What if she didn't know about it and then you bring it to her attention and then she wants it? What irked me is that there doesn't seem to be much physical pleasure in it for the woman and maybe having a girl wear a fake penis is an insult to her femininity or something? Still I guess its all subjective.

>My point here isn't to be homophobic. People can be homo all they want, I respect that. 
Idk about that. I don't think people are hetero or homo but the real line is dominant and submissive. If you're dominant, I don't think you really care who you get your kicks out of. Homos are men who like sameness which is shallow. 

>>8097
I guess it can be dom if you're forcing someone to do something they'd find disgusting. I guess it depends on who the authority figure is and who's doing what but in a weird way doms are the ultimate subs because without the sub the can't be a dom so they are enslaved and trapped almost.
>>8097
.

>>8101
>Marathon Runners
They don't suffer the way you think but I get the analogy I suppose. Those mfs build themselves for the task, by the time you see one functioning as a "marathon runner" they're already in the echelons far past "this is hurtful." But I get it. I had met a girl who was into (the fantasy of, without having experienced) pegging. Seemed odd to me in the sense of "what even is dominant about this act? you're exerting effort for the task more than the other person and don't get quite the lot out of it." But people are to each their own I do suppose.

>What if she wants it? What if she didn't know about it and then you bring it to her attention and then she wants it?
Depends on the girl does it not? I've had "kinky experiences" with past partners but (besides some cases) nothing good truly came out of them. Kinky might be hot but you don't do that with the [THIS IS TOO VALUABLE FOR ME]. Not that you just ๐˜ฅ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ'๐˜ต, but also generally ๐˜ค๐˜ข๐˜ฏ'๐˜ต. It simply is un-afford-able if you REALLY care about the long-term-health of the relationship. Respect is earned hard and can be lost easily if not treaded carefully, however "disappointing" that might seem.

>The real line is dominant and submissive
I think that part is pretty contextual and cycles around-about tbh. People generally enjoy cycling the roles, but I also feel like "being dominant" in itself is often service-work. You see people charging to be a dom, you don't see people charging to be a sub as much. Why? because submission is easier. What about DOMINATING someone then? How much strength are you willing to exert in order to bend the mere environment around your person of interest, and their psychology, jusy because you want to watch them kneel right in your grasp? You think someone into that could hust "not care who they get their kicks out of"? I'd disagree I think. A worthy prey first and foremost, someone that is... ๐˜ค๐˜ฉ๐˜ข๐˜ญ๐˜ญ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฏ๐˜จ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜จ, someone that REFUSES to bend easy? Someone with ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ฆ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ? Someone with BRAINS? Someone who knows how to ๐˜จ๐˜ช๐˜ท๐˜ฆ ๐˜ค๐˜ฉ๐˜ข๐˜ด๐˜ฆ? That is what'd be fun to dominate. Not someone who just... turns the belly and goes "mmm yes. step on me please."

And, well... do you feel like all that effort would lead someone to go "mm okay. I had my fun. Enough is enough now :)" I think I'd disagree. I think Sade, would disagree!

Well, anyways. Hypothetically speaking, but of course. Right?
I love squeezing shit out my asshole. I can't get enough of it. Especially if I've been holding it in my colon all day. The relief is unbeatable
yall people nasty af frfr no cap cuh ong
Last edited by Hidden User
ahem.gif
[Hide] (732.4KB, 359x200)
>>8102
>>8109
Anyways as I was saying. I think for someone I REALLY, genuinely, completely, truthfully want as BAD as it gets, from the bottom of my heart, what I'd PROBABLY do is I'd FIRST convince them that I DON'T want them, that I absolutely DON'T care about them, that I don't even ONCE remember they exist throughout my day, COMPLETELY deny them a crumb of attention, make sure they think I'm TOTALLY messing around, always show up late and appear very reckless and careless...


Then proceed to make sure I have EVERYTHING covered underneath the hood. That is, IF I wanted someone that bad, obviously, for which, I clearly don't!
>>8102
Yeah, I'd agree. I'd see it as a subtle and fluid spectrum rather than a light switch. I don't think some people are as intense as others and in all relationships there can be subtle dynamics that only the couple involved really understand. In general, there are two sexual orientations: the person who wants to dominate and penetrate others and the person who wants to submit and be penetrated but these aren't set in stone simple things. 

>I also feel like "being dominant" in itself is often service-work. You see people charging to be a dom, you don't see people charging to be a sub as much. Why? because submission is easier. 
Hmm I don't like that so much. I wouldn't see it as work necessarily. I'd say the people charging for it are really more interested in pecuniary gain which is a cheapening of a relationship. The people that do that are like actors in a stage play, they are charging for a shallow performance. Good relationships are really about symbolic exchange, something that can't be quantified or sold. One partner gives or takes from the other and this must be reciprocated. So there's a constant giving and receiving in some way that is always going on and this dynamic determines whose dominant and whose submissive so its not like a service profession at all.
>>8114
Give and take you say? A symbolic exchange? What a detached cadence...
Seems rather, cold! Energy still, does it not flow? Winter's the season, indeed, it is freezing outside! You need warmth to embrace you! Or so I feel, sensed nervousness from the sentences you spill!
>>8114
I also just feel like... I don't quite know. Something feels *wrong* about being explicitly sexual with someone I love from the bottom of my heart. Like. Let's say you really, REALLY love someone right? And you get the kinds of "I want to choke you on my - but only because it feels like you own my soul too bad I compensate for it with bed-time-revenge-fantasies." Thoughts about your loved one. How do you even sau that to their face just like that? I know I sure wouldn't. Like I probably would wish that I could but I probably just wouldn't.
i am not gay and do not hate females, but any physical contact with them makes me feel disgusted with myself. that includes when they initiate it. i really hate seeing men handle women like objects, and the small possibility i could misunderstand a signal and inadvertently do something creepy terrifies me. i wonder how many inappropriate messages the average woman who is active on social media receives every day. i knew a couple women through video games who pretended to be men probably because of that. it would be very annoying if you liked playing a game like world of warcraft and random horndog men kept interrupting your entertainment to solicit you. if i were a woman, i think i would pretend to be a man on the internet too.
>>8150
weII that'''s an issue! yuknow, ะผost of de peopls et hate men probadly r well XPosed to deir kreep shenanigans , , , 'KUZ tees men who akt liKk a kreep  r morr likkly to appeer on yer soshel media feeD , which is KOOl since spreadinn awarness is FINE, jus the perfomativness of der behavor overfluds sosh media and women PinnIT in der heds that "men r kruel n kreeps" all wwile ther R qite enouhh of pretty much NormAL men 'raund . But normal men Rn't that perfomativve! N what itt leeds to? wer r being silennced by der kreeps fallin under the "kreep" unbrella in sight of der poor kreep-Xposed women makin'' it looK likk der R no kool men 'raun. SAD to know yknow ?  ? ? :E
>>8150
I'm gonna sound like "a sexist incel" for spelling the elephant in the room here but;
>all signals that are understood are functionally misunderstood (at least if we're talking sexually/socially competent attractive women)
>they will almost always weaponize it whenever it becomes necessary or useful
>the inappropriateness is generally post-hoc (unless you're un-charismatic and deliver poorly, which is a you-problem first) in that "someone decided to retroactively withdraw consent/claim it was weird/creepy only because thy climaxed and want to maintain the position of power/moral highground" etc.
also
>a woman
>playing WoW
>solo
>a woman playing WoW (an MMO (widely known as "massively multiplayer")) solo without the intent to socialize
feels like your post is bait ngl. I met a fair amount of women through MMOs back when I used to play and they tend to be social birdies.
>>8154
you misunderstood me, the handful of women pretending to be men i met on games did want to socialize because they were found on multiplayer games, but they hid the fact they were women. one example: often did dailies and leveled alts with one woman who played male tauren with male names. after playing with her a lot over a couple months, she sent me a teamspeak address and password for her guild server. first time i join it to voice chat, i hear a woman's voice when i expected a man's. she self-identified as a woman too. most women i met on multiplayer games were either obviously women or men posing as women (ie catfishing for free stuff). we played with a couple other guys occasionally and i think they knew her longer than me and never said anything to give away she was a girl, so i took it she was actively trying to pass as a male gamer to avoid certain interactions.
>so i took it she was actively trying to pass as a male gamer to avoid certain interactions
yes. this is the part I say "you self-filtered yourself out because you presumed she was trying to avoid certain interactions and made your decisions based off of that which helped her subconsciously filter you out for being a non asserive pushover" and you tell yourself "he's just being weird. women don't think like that, right...??"
>>8162
i wasnt talking about personally wanting to be romantic or sexual with women. any physical contact with them makes me feel creepy so i never plan to be intimately involved with anyone. when i find out someone who i thought was a man is actually a woman, i dont treat or think of them differently. i can still think a lot men are sexually aggressive in an unhealthy way. i doubt visible women on the internet like receiving unsolicited messages with photos of penises and requests to see them naked.
>>8150
You shouldn't feel disgust and fear about wanting to interact with others. Whatever you're feeling is actually a lot worse and more fucked up than whatever women feel when they get too much attention online. If someone doesn't want to talk to you then it should be obvious. Insofar as the feminist narrative is true, it doesn't apply to people like you because you (I assume) care about and listen to the feelings of others.

Ironically, the other guy giving you advice actually harasses women.
Not sure if this would be the thread for it but something I enjoy pondering is the nature of sexuality in itself. I feel like I have a very specific internal divide, though I'm not too sure.

Take renaissance nudity for example. It's Most well known for the artists intentionally denying the viewer any kind of aesthetically appealing genitals, which, is pretty wack imo. That feels like an extra step to cover up what's already naturally there, like we should be ashamed of the nature of the human body. That feels wrong.

But then I look at modern media, and then that feels wrong too. Take street fighter or just about any-most pop-art sexuality for example. I get that street fighter, being a fighting game, naturally leans into an idea of "fighting = primitive = primitive sexuality" but it always felt cheap to me. Juri is a character who's design philosophy feels like nothing more than the 90s cartoons where they let the pilot episode fly ONLY if it had enough toy-able designs. That's wack. That's extraction first. "Intent to please the audience" shouldn't be "Intent to profit" imo. Appropriately sexualized character design, I feel like, would be things as such;

>Sexualized so over the top that it feels like it's a parody of itself
>Sexual characteristics that are personality/narrative traits first and bodily second
>Sexuality as intimacy, not flesh-rubbing

I could genuinely never understand how people can spend time oogling at big butts online or things like that, even though I'm sure that sounds like posturing. It just feels dumb. There's a bointillion butts out there. OF kinds of photoshoots and whatnot also fall under that category for me I guess. 

I feel like appropriate sexuality is about tone, atmosphere, exchange and interactions, pacing, and ultimately connection. Not from the hollow, primitive pull to rub flesh onto flesh but for the intent of creating or maintaining a kind of bond or exchange between people, something that has meaning and contributes to a dynamic. Not just "I just got back home from work and I want to fuck" or such. Not sure why I had the pull to ramble about this it just came to my mind seeing how people really do spend an insane amount of funds on things like anime figurines. It's not even that I'm critical of "why spend that much money on plastic?" angle, that'd be petty. I just feel like the pull-to-appeal in that drive feels weak to me. It feels like sexuality marketed towards people who've never experienced sexuality before. Real sexuality, between two people is often far, far less about the bodies than inexperienced people think, because everyone has insecurities about this or that part of their body. The reality of appeal comes down mostly to things like;
>The moment's exact mood
>The dynamic between the people
>One or both side's momentary pull towards doing something unexpectedly taboo
No one most generally cares if you're ugly in parts for example. But they would care if you seemed specifically disappointed in your body. People like confidence. People like "this mildly less attractive person is so completely confident in their ability to seduce me" far more than any kind of "this person looks perfect on the physical parts but seem like they've never done this before and are immediately worried about what to do right now."

Another topic of interest I'd like to talk about maybe is that sexuality in practice does feel a lot more fluid than people (I believe) would like to admit. A lot of the people I've met throughout my life who "had very strong sexual identities" always seemed like they were halfway about to break it. Which I don't judge actually. Steadfastness of the self is probably a most self-sabotaging thought more than anything else. We'd like to believe we're more rigid than we actually are, which seem scary to think of at first in terms of "so we can change that fast that easy?" but I honestly feel like people's main problems stem from trying to box themselves (and others) into neat labels that don't functionally reflect anything about the people. If you think you're ugly/mid/etc. you probably make it out to be far worse than how anyone else would think of you. If you feel like "I'd perform bad in bed because [insert your typical insecurity]" then you're probably wrong on that too. The main function for being able to be attractive has to do with your ability to "market" your traits. Short people can still be hot if they know how to pull the "yeah I'm short" bit, or any kinds of other things you might perceive as a personal shortcoming. 

Lastly I feel like ranting about a very specific, odd, funny insecurity that people believe to be true is (much as I hate this wording here) "dick size" and people actually believe that is shocking to me. People think women have some kind of ruler-measurer system in their vaginas that measure your length or something. Even from a biological perspective, if I remember correctly, female orgasms are known to be far less mechanical than that of men, for example. A woman most appreciates feeling (safely) desired more than anything else, which is a very specific mixture of feeling that takes a different kind of effort for each individual to make them feel that way. Pornography has a weird way of making people insecure about the kinds of issues that, basically everyone has. I think I wanted to share my thoughts on that ty for reading :)
>Marzichan
>>8710
Sexuality is a trap. What is this word? Once upon a time there was no sexuality, only sex. Nowadays, people obsess over sexuality, not just the act of slimy genitals rubbing, but a whole bunch of associated stuff: orientation, identity, fantasies, positions, labels. Why? Because sexuality is an instrument of power. Itโ€™s an idea which is a tool for population management, control, and surveillance cooked up by shrinks, demographers, medical doctors, and bureaucrats. By searching for a natural and authentic sexuality, we are falling into the trap of taking a tool of power and making it natural and normal and everyday. 

In this brainmelting post-truth hyperreality, we have lost all sense of sex. The sexual revolution (counterrevolution really) has left us all searching for our true sexual and gender identity. We donโ€™t fall in love anymore because weโ€™re in love with ourselves. Yet nobody is actually having sex. They consume porn instead. The massive overproduction of images has killed physical reality, made it more and more irrelevant. People come out as gay, really they are just modeling themselves after a cookie cutter template theyโ€™ve seen in media but have convinced themselves they are liberating who they really are, that they always were this way. Sex isnโ€™t even pleasurable anymore because it can never live up to pornographic expectations. The consumerism of sexuality has left actual sex in the dust, dead in the ditch on the side of the highway. 

>I could genuinely never understand how people can spend time oogling at big butts online or things like that
The simple explanation is that people wanna see butts and pix of butts are made for people who wanna fap to it. Basically, fap material is made so people can fap to it. This is wrong. People are now shaped and molded by the media to consume fap material for the fap materialโ€™s own sake. Production is like an idol, it doesnโ€™t serve us, we serve it, and the same goes for porn. We are enslaved to the very stuff we make and that made up stuff becomes like a god to us. 

>Not from the hollow, primitive pull to rub flesh onto flesh but for the intent of creating or maintaining a kind of bond or exchange between people, something that has meaning and contributes to a dynamic.
Thatโ€™s a good idea but how do we do that in a world where meaning has collapsed? Not so much collapsed but imploded from the sheer amount of images, text, video being pumped out endlessly. In the distant past, sex was a ritualistic activity embedded in family, religion, spirituality etc. All thatโ€™s gone and nobody wants it back. Weโ€™re too addicted to jerking off. 

Thereโ€™s no real sexuality to experience anymore. We donโ€™t need freedom to indulge in sex stuff, we need emancipation from sexuality itself. When something is fucked up beyond all repair, the sane thing to do is walk away and not let it define you.
>>9640
So two rights R making the third right, alright, got it
>>9641
went from low tier provokation to high tier provokation it seems. someone around here sure can't take it past "pretending to be retarded" and "pretending to be retarded with slightly better dressing" I do frankly think so.
>>9648
If I had to B retarded, I'd have to have some good taste in clothes at the very least! Have you noticed how such a simple post provoked this?! Who knows how to read these days anyways :)
>>8710
>>9640

I wanna have sex with you.
>>9693
Have sex with me instead. I'm confident enough you'll choose me over nonnie.
[New Reply]
33 replies | 3 files
Connecting...
Show Post Actions

Actions:

Captcha: