minx

Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Thu 28/03/24 20:59:46 GMT

Translate page FROM gb -> TO de fr it nl es pt jp

Translate page TO gb <- FROM de fr it nl es pt jp

MyWetloook

Message # 39121.2.3.1.1.1

Subject: Hello Gatorade shower

Date: Sat 21/02/09 01:08:20 GMT

Name: Terry us

Email:

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: Make Donation (you can change amount)

Previous Reply
Next New Message
Active List Archive

Wetlook-Online
My two cents on the Gatorade shower...

 

If they dump it on the coach it's not wetlook.  If they dump it on a cheerleader, go team!!!

In reply to Message (39121.2.3.1.1) Hello Re: ..an interesting philosophical debate

By Poliut - us Fri 20/02/09 23:21:58 GMT

Website:


"It's kinda ironic that wet clothing below the belly button (meaning topless!) is considered wetlook, yet wet clothing above the waist is not."

Well, using my first example, there's wet clothing from shoulder to sole, yet there I don't consider it to be wetlook.

 

 

I guess it's (Wet T-Shirt Contests) one of those things where the more you think about it, the more it actually is wetlook, even though you may not see it that way.

 

Take for example the Gatorade Shower. At the end of a football game (where it's most commonly seen), few people consider it to be wetlook; but if Leon Moomin films a clip where someone dumps a 10 gallon jug of Gatorade on someone else, people consider that wetlook. Exact same act, exact same amount of clothing, exact same amount of liquid. It goes back to context - like MK stated - and standards for wetlook, and both are subjective criteria.

In reply to Message (39121.2.3.1) Note Re: ..an interesting philosophical debate

By wetwhiteandblue - us Fri 20/02/09 22:29:48 GMT

Website:


I don't consider the wet t-shirt by itself wetlook.  But if the contestants are all wearing full clothing (jeans, skirts, shorts), then the whole concept of the wet t-shirt contest is considered wetlook.  It's kinda ironic that wet clothing below the belly button (meaning topless!) is considered wetlook, yet wet clothing above the waist is not.
In reply to Message (39121.2.3) Hello Re: ..an interesting philosophical debate

By Poliut - us Fri 20/02/09 20:41:18 GMT

Website:


And just to add to the term context - I think perception also has a key factor to it.

 

 

For example, take a football game played in the rain (BTW, American and Canadian Football = Football | Rest of the World Football = Soccer). Everything about it can qualify as wetlook: Nonstandard swimwear clothes getting wet (and muddy) - wet socks, wet shoes, wet pants, wet jerseys, wet shirts, wet gloves, wet armbands, etc. - yet not too many people would consider it wetlook. I know I don't.

Example:

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/catch_all/nfl_image/AJ_Feeley_040926_2_gallery_600.jpg

 

(Rest of the gallery can be viewed here - http://www.nfl.com/photo/photo-gallery?chronicleId=09000d5d80154067 )

 

Another example would be the "Wet T-Shirt" contest - that itself is something that gets debated on this forum as to whether or not it's considered to be wetlook, even though it meets the requirements of being wetlook.

In reply to Message (39121.2) Hello ..an interesting philosophical debate

By MK - wamtec@comcast.net ex Fri 20/02/09 17:27:20 GMT

Website:


...i.e. what turns you....is it "the fabric".....or "the context of how that fabric is used".

 

- if denim is your fetish....then you don't care how it is used...wet or dry...denim turns you on

 

- if wetlook is your fetish....then "context" is EVERYTHING...cos if you use a fabric in the wrong context (i.e. making a denim bikini) then it totally misses the concept you are looking for...

 

Nylon and satin are great fabrics for wet clothing scenes too....but a nylon swimsuit is not the right context that wetlook fans want to see....they would rather see a wet nylon shirt or slip dress or pants etc.

 

For me....wetlook it is all about "context" these days....and if something is purposely designed as a "swimsuit".,...then no matter how you look at it...it's a STILL a swimsuit....and thats "the norm"...and if I was a normal person...I would not be on this forum....ha ha.

 

I feel the same way about muslim burkhinis too....i.e. that outfit is purposely designed for swimming in....so it does nothing for me.....but an Indian sari is a different matter...cos that is not designed for swimming...so Indian wet sari scenes are much better than muslim burkhinis (even thought they may look similar) cos a sari is interesting...cos you know that was not designed for swimming in...whereas a burkhini is a big yawn cos it has no wetlook context....

 

but I am sure many of you have differing opinions....so I will turn the debate over to you guys...

 

MK

 

In reply to Message (39121) Hello No Subject

By micater - de Fri 20/02/09 15:34:51 GMT

Website:


http://www.trenddelacreme.com/2009/01/ready-to-get-your-denim-wet.html

 

what do you think about that...!? i'd like to see them wet!

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

All WAM Drunk Sex Orgy Wetlook-Online
Clips4Sale

Minx Movies - M12 - Dressed in Wet is now in the Download Store
Download Store

Minx Movies - M15 - Wet Me Now is now in the Download Store
Download Store

Minx Movies - M14 - Get Wet With Me is now in the Download Store
2ipmd65.jpg2ipmdg2.jpgckfbj77.jpgjapgs25.jpgzgjbt99.jpg Download Store 2fpbs94.jpgkijws74.jpgrlsps97.jpglasbjg7.jpg2fptg96.jpg2gpdde7.jpg


Minx Movies - M8 - Mask Of Wetness is now in the Download Store
Download Store



[ This page took 0.025 seconds to generate ]