Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Sat 20/04/24 01:17:41 GMT |
Message # 22712.4.1 Subject: Yeah but are there people whose only interest is getting wet in clothes? Date: Mon 29/05/06 13:55:16 GMT Name: Telcontar Email: mrnemesis@ntlworld.com |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
And thus are not especially sexually attracted to the opposite/preferred sex because they're wet, and don't visit fora like these, trawl Webshots and buy wetlook videos and DVDs?
People who go swim in clothes just for fun.
Or are even all of those people still partial to wet women/men? |
In reply to Message (22712.4) I think wet clothing is clothes that are wet....wetlook is the attraction
By WantingWet - Mon 29/05/06 13:47:25 GMT to the wet clothes |
In reply to Message (22712) "Wet clothing" or "wetlook" -- the difference?
By Telcontar - mrnemesis@ntlworld.com Sun 28/05/06 18:48:48 GMT Still thinking about this Wikipedia article, and trying to track down a good example of a wet clothing photograph.
I've been struck with a thought -- is there not a distinct difference between wet clothing (e.g. Nasse Klamotten, Wet Clothing Club Berlin, NJCO) and wetlook (e.g. modelled wetlook, candid wet pics)? Wetlook is all about how people other than oneself look, but when you swim in clothes for fun, that is wet clothing -- you're doing it for the experience, not the look.
As such, should these not be kept as separate articles in Wikipedia? And if so, do I now need a new second picture to illustrate the wetlook article? And of what?
And does anyone here feel qualified to write an article about wet clothing as an activity? I barely feel qualified to work on the wetlook article as I know so very little about wetlook really, but it's always the least qualified people who end up having to do it :P
|
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)
|
[ This page took 0.024 seconds to generate ]