Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Thu 25/04/24 16:48:50 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 17591.2.3.1.1.1

Subject: Re: Re: Social acceptance and inertia

Date: Sat 13/08/05 22:36:29 GMT

Name: Vanwetthe2nd

Email: s_vankirk2002@msn.com

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

What a collection of perspectives, and such the intellectuals here. May I advance another thought concerning wet T shirt contests? How did that ever "catch on"? I am certain it was not a group of dedicated wet t shirt fetishists who commissioned themselves to change the course of night entertainment forever. I would believe it may have been club owners introducing this "outrageous" event through advertisement, word of mouth, .. a sign.

However, the wet T shirt contest is completely different from wetlook. In my opinion, the idea is more to the fun and attention by revealing of female breasts through the wet t shirt, and not the wet clothing itself, or the feeling. I would like to add as a student of television and film, television has helped the cause of wet T shirts. Society had already been conditioned to breasts by the gradual practice of close up cleavage shots. Television has been largely responsible for setting and following cultural trends. It's OK that men have been exposed to decades of breasts pervading into their homes, and this perversion (fetish) now generally accepted as normal in our society.

Social behaviors have their place in very specific situations, such as in nightclubs. Sexy behaviors have their protocol and issues. One day I was having a Corona at a bar when suddenly the bartender asked the patrons to help brainstorm new ideas to do something different for their annual big promotional event. Mud wrestling was mentioned. I suggested an outdoor kiddie pool dance which could easily be set up. The bartender loved the idea except for the liabilities involved with drunken patrons and 12 inches of water. Wetlook, wet floors, water and drinking are valid concerns, otherwise I feel wetlook would have found its way to the dance clubs long ago. What would be more fun and sexier than a wet dance floor? .. and more dangerous?

On MTV back in the 90's I remember a special segment about the "foam party craze". Several females interviewed expressed their reasons for going to foam parties, the fun of getting wet very slowly, and that the foam is sexy. One young female commented, "the foam conceals the body from the waist down so you can touch in places that nobody can see.".

If wetlook were to be sponsored by dance clubs, it must somehow be made safe. If the club owners would risk the likely event of accidental injury or death by drunken drowning in six inches of water, then we would have a chance for wetlook in our society.

I do agree the established conventions disallow public wet clothing activity, sexually oriented or not, it is considered as such! It is a shame, for I have overheard numerous conversations, and have had conversations with females who absolutely enjoy getting wet and have done so intentionally. Also note for children getting wet is accepted and expected, not the case as we become adults. This is not an inconsistency. I believe (my point of view)Wet clothes and wet high heels especially more so when intent is demonstrated, have extremely strong sexual implications which somehow strike a chord or dischords among us.

At the age of 13 I was introduced to wet clothing by my best friend's sister who I had a very big crush. It was first the shoes, the sensations of the flow into them and soaking through the socks. "Why do that?" I asked. Her answer was simply, "because it feels good". I almost did not, then, it did feel good. This kind of admission may cause even a fellow fetishist of THE SAME gender to squirm a little, for a self indulgent activity is personal and really inappropriate to discuss with strangers. This forum has a purpose... to discuss the various issues of wetlook.

We had a large pond nearby with the usual activities, fishing, swimming, ice skating. In my neighborhood, we had all kinds of wet encounters. Somebody always challenged the thin ice, breaking through into shallow water and always over the boots. This continued from childhood into high school. One day all the girls present were thrown in the pond with their mini skirts and shoes. The girls always wore pantyhose back then which (by the way) were designed specifically to be worn with the miniskirt. I was not present. The next day a friend would explain no more than the sketchy details about what went on, two of the girls actually entered the water voluntarily, one who we cruelly called "sexpot" but we were all just friends. Another encounter I missed and by a completely separate group. At a Church bar B Q after church, the Deacons threw all the girls in the pool still in their Sunday dresses.(and again back then the girls always, always were in nylons in my case bikinis are not among my fetishes so much better for Church so I may focus on the message) My best friend at that time who had NO IDEA I liked wet clothes chewed me out for not being there.

I wonder if more than half of the women in the world have the shoe fetish? This has been emerging more and more with time. THE shoes or HIGH HEELS have become THE symbols of female power and sexuality. I'll not get into the Freudian phallus implications, although it could be good and bad news for wet shoes fans that women love them.

Three ladies I overheard, were gossiping how another lady NOT present had waded through a flooded parking lot. "At first it didn't look that deep", she explained, "It rained so hard while we were inside, the parking lot had flooded so bad there was no way to get to the car. We decided to take a chance since it really didn't look that deep. Then it began to get deeper, so I said we'd better stop to take our shoes off. So now there I am in my stocking feet getting soaked, and I said I don't know, I think it's going to get deeper, why ruin a good pair of shoes? Then she says, 'but it doesn't look that deep' We keep going until it got so deep, it went all the way above her ankles. So then we get to the car. She never bothered to take them off, the wet shoes. She drove back that way. I don't know how she could stand it!"

The evidence is overwhelming, yes, some ladies have shown a penchant for getting wet and some with regularity. I have a long list in memory of wetlook among women more so from conversation and near misses. My former girlfriend dressed to get wet for me, but not according to her own whims. Some ladies do get wet for enjoyment. Back in the 90's I had become friends with a young woman working for a major electronics chain. She was always overdressed for the job in the opinions of her fellow employees, usually a sharp business suit with loafer heels or classic pumps. Some certain days I noticed her nylons appeared soiled about and below her ankles, (the prettiest slim ankles ever) which I thought not corresponding to the crisp neat appearance of the rest of her outfit. The loafers and heels also appeared a bit misshapen every time I noticed. One day I asked about it, she explained part of her job was receiving and cutting open boxes, "they (her nylons)get pretty dirty", smiling widely and whenever I noticed them, she angled the heels attractively to the eyes of man who fought gallantly to restrain. Shortly after she purchased a new car. She asked me if I'd like to see it, then walking back to the service entrance something unexpected happened. She shoulders me over veering off to the side to this huge pothole filled with water. I immediately became too excited, embarrassed over my pathetic condition therefore felt I HAD to stifle it. What was I to do or say, remain in the back lot after she did this and she goes back inside? It was an amazing feat of self control. If I did over again I would have not said "K the door is over there!" .. only one step away, and LET her dunk her heels in the dam mud puddle. I did not wish to deal with the embarrassment.

Women Love feeling good, and being sexy.

In reply to Message (17591.2.3.1.1)

Re: Social acceptance and inertia

By Kragoth - Sat 13/08/05 03:28:59 GMT

Website: http://www.wandanet.no-ip.com

> These contexts make up a good 75% of our lives

Ah, but we can change our lives -- in fact we need to do that in many ways, in order to educate the public, because most people are followers who are scared to try anything new (and automatically think it's bad because ''it's not done'')

That is how society grows up! Think of society as an arrogant teenager who needs spiritual enlightenment but is too ''dignified'' (proud) to allow it. Mutual peer pressure and social acceptability is largely responsible for the inertia (resistance to change) in civilization, just as inter-particle forces (bosons) are responsible for inertia (heaviness) in physics... But both can be a bad thing -- aeroplanes made of lead and concrete don't fly, nor do people who are subservient to the preconceptions of societal behaviour. (Sorry bout all the philosophy here -- lol)

We wammers must ''push the envelope'' gradually, as fast as a sick society will understand, but no faster, in order to minimise alienation and backlash. Look at the history of swimwear, for example. Over the last fifty years people are showing more and more skin, not less; resulting in less understanding of those who realize ''this is not for me'' and just jump in the water as they are! Gradually (due to sunburn, skin cancer, and ''global wamming'' hehehe) more people at the beach are seen swimming in clothes -- this starts with the teens and twenties, as they are more spontaneous and have less linkages to rearrange (less particulate inertia), and as soon as a critical mass is attained, swimming in clothes spreads by the ''hundredth monkey'' effect -- it becomes socially acceptable :-)

SW, FW, and BH :-)

In reply to Message (17591.2.3.1)

I SAID on a subconscious level.

By JustKeepSwimming - Jumalte1271@yahoo.com Fri 12/08/05 20:51:21 GMT

Website:

I agree with the different viewpoints expressed.

I still think it's because it is a sensual experience that it is frowned upon. It depends on the context of where you are at. You can't give someone a full-body massage in a library, without getting kicked out. You can't french-kiss in church. You can't cuddle up in someone's lap in the middle of 5th period in high school. And you can't give someone a hickey in the middle of the call center for IBM at peak hour. These contexts make up a good 75% of our lives.

Wetlook is more abstract than these, but still, to get wet in clothes in a premeditated sense to enjoy it is, kind of sexy. Not necessarily the end result, but the underlying emotional priority involved. A person can subconsciously draw a link between the desire for self pleasure inherent in more adamant and blatant sexual behaviors that are forbidden, and getting soaked in clothing. Which is why there are fewer wetlookers, and why conservative peoples would feel uncomfortable with it in their midst.

Just one way to look at it.

In reply to Message (17591.2.3)

Re: Re: Why are there so few wetlookers? What do you think?

By klm4748 - Fri 12/08/05 09:39:49 GMT

Website:

I've never had the sense that parents objected to kids swimming with clothes on due to any sensual aspect. Instead, it was just Keeping Up Appearances. "Oh, dear, I mustn't let my child get his/her clothes wet, it would be so unseemly!" In that sense, it's like making the bed. It's in a separate room with a door, and guests usually don't go there. So why the heck should the bed look nice and neat? Because Mom taught you that way. And so it is with keeping clothes dry, I think.

I remember a family friend who came to a lakeside party. None in his family had had any plans to swim. But someone had a boat and water skis. So he tried it, in his corduroys. Some of the other adults shrugged their shoulders, knowing him to be an unusual guy. _I_ envied him his self-assurance to do such a thing.

And yet I still remember a Sesame Street clip, which is probably older than I am. It was one of those musical interludes without any speech. A bunch of kids come to the local watering hole and don't take off a thing, they just get in, splash around and generally have fun before wandering off, sopping wet, to go home. I sure as heck couldn't have gotten away with that, who were those lucky kids?!

Still, maybe we need more 'advertising' of that sort. Clips of kids and/or adults getting wet clothed, especially female but without ANY hint of sensuality/sexuality, slipped into appropriate contexts. Then we might raise 'awareness' and improve the 'okayness' of getting wet clothed.

In reply to Message (17591.2)

Re: Why are there so few wetlookers? What do you think?

By JustKeepSwimming - Jumalte127@yahoo.com Thu 11/08/05 16:18:41 GMT

Website:

I'll try my best here.

There is a large, and growing, conservative part of our culture. (I think it's been there since Rome) Here's the ironic part - conservative parents will not view getting wet in your clothes as something immoral, however, they will discourage people from doing it as much as possible.

Essentially, getting your clothes wet is a rather sensual experience that all people enjoy in a mildly sexual way, either by doing or by watching. It is like an all-over, cool body massage, that sinks into you and touches you everywhere. On a purely emotional level, the enjoyment of sex, or of something sexy and sensual, gets a lot of people's panties in a bunch,(pardon the pun).

So, while there is no actual censorship or moral objection to the activity of wetlook, conservative people will discourage it in many ways, on a purely abstract, or subconscious, emotional level. It is simply an activity that conservative people find too sensual, too enjoyable, and too sexy - to the point that they refuse to entertain it.

Of course, their rebellious kids will - whenever they can, like at a keg party, or at one of Leon's booths, or on the last day of school, and then they will enjoy it even more because it is more of a guilty pleasure, "un-ladylike" behavior, taboo. So, while they are in the moment, they will enjoy it, and then go back to their conservative-parent pleasing behavior.

In regards to the "small number of wetlookers", I think that most or all males enjoy looking at girls in wet clothes, but 95% of sexual men see it more as a means to an end, than an end itself. If you take a look at the GARGANTUAN level of wetlook used in TV commercials and in TV show trailers (who can forget the shot of Jessica Alba emerging from the pool in a red dress for 'Dark Angel') then you can reach the conclusion that seeing a pretty girl soaked in a sexy outfit gets all men's blood pumping - but as a prelude to sex or nudity, not as an orgasm inducing event in itself.

To sum up, I think that the activity of wetlook is a very sensual and sexy activity. However, in the various conservative-controlled environments that control our lives, ANY activity that borders, or hints on sensuality, sexyness, or bodily pleasure is frowned upon. So, if a girl "gets pushed in", "falls in accidently", "gets caught in the rain" in her clothes,that is questionable, but acceptable behavior. However, if a girl pre-meditatively goes in the pool in a pretty dress, because she wants to experience the sensual, body clinging sensation, that behavior would be viewed as unacceptable by many conservative views.

Nuff said.

-J

In reply to Message (17591)

Why are there so few wetlookers? What do you think?

By Victor - Thu 11/08/05 15:05:06 GMT

Website:

The number of wetlookers in the world is very small.

Still, judging by candid tapes, webshots and what we see at pool parties there are many people who enjoy wetlook. At least from time to time, spontaneously. They get wet, and look at their happy faces! They love it! And they enjoy swimming in clothes more than, for example, their friends swimming with them in usual swimsuits (You have seen pics like this, haven't you?). But they don't repeat it or it takes quite a long while till they do.

WHY?!

In my opinion, first, it is due to the common streotype that wet clothes are unpleasant. Thus, having tried and enjoyed it once, one still thinks, that "at that time" he/she was carried away by the moment, or if it was a pool party, was influenced by the atmosphere of the place, but in general, swimming in clothes is not a good idea.

Secondly, very few people know anything about wetlook. Only wetlook fans themselves and their close relatives and friends do! Even keepers of sex-shops or scientists who study fetishes know nothing. Therefore one just cannot decide upon being a wetlook fan. I'll try to explain what I mean. Let's say (sorry for the comparison, I give it here just as an example), everyone knows about gays, and a man can decide upon being straight (if he likes women), or a gay (if he likes men). In our case a person who once enjoyed swimming in clothes more than in a swimming costume can't decide upon being a wetlook fan, for he knows nothing about wetlook and is unable to understand one's feelings.

Another reason is that swimming in clothes is against the norm, though it isn't against public morality. So if a person happens to be on a beach without a swimsuit and willing to swim in one's street clothes as a rule one cannot make up one's mind. It is because of the fear of attracting undesirable attention and of looking odd. I've seen it happen many times. It is especially dificult to go fully into water if you are the only person who is doing it. If you do it with someone it is much easier. Best of all to do it with a female partner.

Or if you see a few people swimming in clothes it is an encouragement for you. On the contrary if the beach is overcrowded with sunbathers it is a discouragement. And there comes a question of a "critical mass". If there are enough people swimming in clothes it seems quite OK and all people who doubted join, and even some of those who would never fancy it join too. (We used to see in Trafalgar Square. Yes, unfortunately USED TO). So if wetlook was more wide-spread, if there were more places like this, more people would do it.

And a question for you all. What do you think, if all people knew about wetlook, would there be more wetlookers? Thank you for reading the message. I hope I haven't bored you. And thank you in advance for your opinion.

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)