Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Fri 26/04/24 15:02:36 GMT |
Message # 31274.2 Subject: Re: Wetlook: benign fetish or sexual deviency? Date: Sat 01/09/07 22:31:45 GMT Name: Roscoe_BC |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
I couldn't find a single solid definition of either term, so I think it would be pretty hard to characterize it either way.
Whether it's benign or not, I think, depends on how bad your wetlook jones is, and whether it's tied up with bondage, sadism, domination or the like.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Sexual+deviant : Paraphilia, sexual deviation (in Greek para παρά = besides and '-philia' φιλία = love) - in psychology and sexology, is a term that describes a family of philias that reference sexual arousal in response to sexual objects or situations which may interfere with the capacity for reciprocal affectionate sexual activity. [citation needed] Paraphilia is also used to imply non-mainstream sexual practices without necessarily implying dysfunction or deviance. Also, it may describe sexual feelings toward otherwise non-sexual objects. As the -philias within it have derived nouns, the noun derived which could be used to describe the collection of persons with paraphilias would be paraphile.
If you are fully sexually finctional without any wetlook, but wetlook can add a little icing on the cake, then I'd call it a benign fetish. If you can't have sex without wetlook involved, then maybe it's deviance? It's all so vague and subjective. Some would say that any sex besides in the missionary position, between married people, for the sake of having kids would be deviant, so I think trying to come up with a generally accepted term is impossible.
I know I have a relatively rare fetish, and it's probably hard for some women to understand, although I've been with some who couldn't care less if it's unusual, as long as it led to a good time. But I often feel lucky that if I had to have a sexual oddity, this one beats the heck out of a penchant for kiddie porn or rape.
I think that sex being such an undiscussed subject leads to all kinds of variations. Personally, I think in the house I grew up in, sex was such an avoided subject, I grew up thinking it was dirty. Having the desire to see naked women was unacceptable. I don't think sexuality can be supressed, it comes out someplace. For me it snuck out in lusting over women who got wet, their clothes got clingy and/or transparent, they looked hot, but they weren't naked so I wasn't doing anything wrong. For some reason. I think that became my way of lusting over girls without being naughty and looking at nude women. I still find graphic nudity uncomfortable.
But I don't worry about it much. Variations on sexuality are common, and this one is pretty harmless. I think worrying about it does more harm than anything. |
In reply to Message (31274) Wetlook: benign fetish or sexual deviency?
By Wet Guy - Sat 01/09/07 21:48:54 GMT Just wondering what you guys think about this question. Where do you think the line is drawn? I'm going through some issues at the moment and would be pleased to get the insights of others in the community. Thank you. |
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 ]