Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Fri 19/04/24 18:34:36 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 55354.1.1.1.1.1

Subject: Re:Interesting because....

Date: Thu 23/08/12 15:11:32 GMT

Name: MK

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: (you can change amount)

Good points.....

Madonna has always been a master at voyeurism and exhibitionism, doing anything to get attention and publicity....so it is pretty obvious that she has no pesonal interests in wetlook and whatever she does is merely just another device she uses to get attention. And....these days she has to work a lot harder now to set fashion trends and get attention....cos her time has come and gone now, cos she has been eclipsed by much younger puppy called Lady Gaga now....who is the now leading trend setter and attention getter.

As for your key question ..... "can wetlook be something that greatly enhances a person's sexual preferences, but fall outside the definition of "fetish"

Well....I have chatted with several thousand wetlook fans over the last 20 years....and for many of the people I know wetlook is their ONLY sexual preference, and without it, they are not able to achieve orgasm....so for many people wetlook definitely IS a fetish....cos it is the catalyst that gets them going, and without it.....they are like a stick of dynamite that has no fuse. There are some lucky people where wetlook is merely something that "enhances" their sexuality and lifestyle, and wetlook is not essential to their lifestyle....and so for them...it is not a fetish...and merely an optional foreplay device. But I think those folks are in the minority and for the majority people I know, wetlook is definitely an essential ingredient and so for those people...wetlook it is definitely a fetish cos they cannot have a sex life without it.

Basically....if wetlook is essential to your sexuality and lifestyle and you cannot live without it, then you are defacto, a wetlook fetishist. But if wetlook is totally optional to your sexuality and lifestyle, then you are a wetlook hobbyist. If you feel strongly that you are not a fetishiist, then ask yourself a question...how many times have I have traditional sex without wetlook in the last 12 months....am I married or in a long term relationship, or am I a single guy....cos most of the wetlook fans I have chatted to and known for years are the same as Trekkies or Star Wars fans....i.e. married to the internet and fan forums.....and they have not been in a long term relationship for many years.

From the many people I have chatted with over the years.....it seems the majority of people are fetishists and a minority of people are hobbyists.

It would be interesting to conduct a poll on this forum to see if people will admit which category they fall into....cos there are also a lot of people I know who are in a perpetual state of denial too....i.e. they think the word fetish is a dirty word and they refuse to think of themselves that way.....so many people I know will claim they are not fetishists because they only like to see fully clothed women and they criticize erotic wetlook and nudity.....and they think this makes them a better person than those of us (like me) who like erotic wetlook ....ha ha.....and that is silly, cos whether you like fully clothed wetlook or erotic wetlook with nudity is not relevant......and just because you prefer fully clothed wetlook without nudity over the more erotic forms of wetlook that contain nudity it does not make you a better person than the erotic wetlook fans.....we are all in the same boat here......and I do not agree with some of the folks who try to define "high class wetlook" (i.e. no nudity) and who decry "low class wetlook" (erotic wetlook) and call it porn.....cos there is no such thing as high class or low class wetlook in my opinion....wetlook is wetlook.....cos.it is all being used for the same end-purpose.

In reply to Message (55354.1.1.1.1)

Re:Interesting because....

By guitar guy - Thu 23/08/12 05:59:13 GMT

Website:

MK, I believe fuzzy logic applies here. Madonna's music has always been sexual, and often containing irreverent lyrical references (Papa don't Preach) and/or risque sexual content (Open your heart video) which suggests a very inappropriate form of voyeurism.

I do not agree with the black and white definition of fetish, as a fetish being the only way a person can obtain an orgasm. There are layers of it. I believe it's plausible to say, Madonna may fall into the gray area, especially since she seems to enjoy the "shock factor" as part of foreplay, and please excuse me for putting it bluntly. This would involve some degree of public display, (voyeurism) such as the waiter walking in on them with their order. They ordered dinner, so Sean and Madonna KNEW in advance the waiter would be arriving. They ware waiting for him, and purposely went in the tub with their clothes on. It is reasonable to assume that Madonna enjoyed her wet clothed experience, otherwise she could have thought of some other creative way to "shock" the waiter. Can we call this a wetlook fetish, maybe yes, maybe not. It sure appears almost like she is one of us. Alcohol and/or drugs only influence a person unless overdosed or completely inebriated, two drinks, or four, most people are still well aware of what they're doing.

I think we can all agree there are non-wetlook situations, that the wet clothed person has zero concern for the wet clothes, maybe complete dislike of the experience.

I consider myself as a wetlooker! I do not fit the definition of a fetish, though. (since I can have relations without wetlook) If anyone were to tell me I do not have a wetlook fetish, I would tell them to go fly a kite over Phoenix. It's not an every day thing with everyone. Wetlook can exist outside a fetish, sometimes for curiosity, or just fun, or money if you're female and pretty and happen to cross paths with a good wetlook producer :)

My question is, can wetlook be something that greatly enhances a person's sexual preferences, but fall outside the definition of "fetish"? I believe it can. For some, maybe it's a phase, for others a daily need.

In reply to Message (55354.1.1.1)

Re:Interesting because....

By MK - Thu 23/08/12 00:53:58 GMT

Website:

I am sure that story is true...but had nothing to do with either of them being wetlook fans....and more to do with 2 other factors....i.e. alcohol or drugs....cos people do strange things without any cognisance of their clothings when they are under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Thats the distinction between us and them.....i.e. wetlook fans are cognisant of their clothings when getting wet.....and do not need drugs or alcohol ....whereas non wetlook fans may engage in wetlook activities without ever being cognisant of their clothings.

True wetlook fans PURPOSELY wets their clothings.....whereas non wetlook fans can get wet unintentionally without any cognisance of their clothings.

So...I am pretty sure that what happened with Madonna and Sean Penn in that bathroom had nothing to do with wetlook.....and was more to do with a couple of bottles of champagne and some larking about and foreplay in a hotel bathroom.

The Who's former drummer Keith Moon had a constant habit of throwing tv sets out of hotel room windows.....and I don't think he had a fetish for smashing tv sets or guitars.....he was just a nutter when he was on drugs or alcohol.

In reply to Message (55354.1.1)

Interesting because....

By Milos Stankovic - Thu 23/08/12 00:21:46 GMT

Website:

I remember reading an article when I was a teenager from about the time Madonna was with the actor Sean Penn and in the article it mentioned that room service had taken up a meal to their hotel room and found Madonna and Sean Penn both sat in the bath together fully clothed.

At the time, before the internet, being a kid that was pretty wacky to me, then she did the cherish video and well maybe she is one of us.... :-)

In reply to Message (55354.1)

...what is up with her ?

By MK - Tue 21/08/12 22:51:38 GMT

Website:

One wonders why she keeps doing this....cos these latest pics of her from France are nothing surprizing....cos she seems to swim clothed all the time in different cities....and cos here she is from Miami 10 years ago....

http://thewambank.com/celebrities.php?id=97&list=5

and here she is again in Romania in 2009....

http://www.evilbeetgossip.com/2009/08/28/madonna-goes-swimming-in-her-jamies/

I am pretty sure she is NOT a wetlook fan....she just seems reluctant to wear a swimsuit or anything sexy (as she does not stage)....and so she likes to pick out the ugliest pair of baggy pants and a top for her swimming rituals.

I don't think think her bathing habits have anything to do with wetlook or her kabbalah religion.....I think she is probably afraid of the sun and melanoma.

She is certainly not covering up for modesty reasons....cos in her latest concert tour she bares her 54 year old tit on stage every night....so she has no shame there.....

In reply to Message (55354)

madonna wetlook

By max - dpmmassimo@tiscali.it Tue 21/08/12 20:43:55 GMT

Website: www.eg.ru/daily/worldstars/33416

madonna france 2012 swimming full clothed link www.eg.ru/daily/worldstars/33416/

<a href="http://www.eg.ru/daily/worldstars/33416/" style="border: dotted 1px #666;">Мадонна стесняется показаться на людях в бикини</a>

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)