COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Ignorance/Factual errors (Pet peeves)

Oh and sr71plt there are people who are INTO those clinical details. There are people with enema fetishes, medical fetishes, pissing fetishes. People in other words who get off on those exact details that you're annoyed by. You're not one of them obviously and that's fine, but no one on here is writing JUST for you.

There will always be plenty of wank writers. Start a thread for them, your advice will be appreciated there. THIS thread, as it says right in the title, is about IGNORANCE/FACTUAL ERRORS. The (Pet peeves) is in parentheses to indicate that the pet peeves being discussed relate to the main title.
 
Thanks for the response.

stlgoddessfreya said:
... I assume you're asking about whether it's possible during sex in either the missionary position or with the man seated and the woman straddling his lap.
Click to expand...

Well, I was thinking about the missionary position, woman on her back.

You mention man seated, woman straddling his lap - now that you point it out...
 
sr71plt said:
Many of my stories just assume some of the preparations without ruling them out--because to include more than the necessary for the story is just bogging the story down to try to pull along people not capable of imagination. So, I guess you'd best not read my stories. (And before "someone" rings in to point out that most of my stories under this account are GM, I'll note that more than 100 of them aren't--which is still a damn sight more than what most other authors here have on their list.)
Click to expand...

Youre older and shit more than most, too. Help me put my finger on the link from more to meritorious.
 
Trixareforkids said:
Oh and sr71plt there are people who are INTO those clinical details. There are people with enema fetishes, medical fetishes, pissing fetishes. People in other words who get off on those exact details that you're annoyed by. You're not one of them obviously and that's fine, but no one on here is writing JUST for you.
Click to expand...

Yes, I posted that already--including the "no one on here is writing JUST for you"--which I already directed at you. (You didn't read my post?) That doesn't mean they are right to tell everyone else to write that way. You're the one telling people how they should write, not me. You might actually read the thread.
 
sr71plt said:
Yes, I posted that already--including the "no one on here is writing JUST for you"--which I already directed at you. (You didn't read my post?) That doesn't mean they are right to tell everyone else to write that way. You're the one telling people how they should write, not me. You might actually read the thread.
Click to expand...

Not telling EVERYONE how or what to write. We're discussing writing with realistic details for more true to life, believable stories.

It sounds to me like you're writing straight porn. Not a thing wrong with that, lots of people are looking for straight porn. I like a bit of it myself. It's my experience that people who do not care about details don't read for enjoyment very much and when they do it's all short condensed material. Articles, wank porn, quick internet stories. That's all well and good. That's not MY audience. My audience is the pleasure readers. The people who like sex with their stories or for their sex stories to be good literature.

I don't do fast and dirty and I don't like fast and dirty. I do like some fast and clean and when doing that it's not hard to throw in just enough detail for realism. For those that completely suspend belief and just roll with gist you may be a very fine writer. Sounds like you're prolific and possibly have a regular readership. Kudos for that. How about we just agree to disagree on what we feel are necessary and unnecessary details. If you're not my readership and I'm not yours we're never going to see eye to eye.
 
My partner and i can no onger do what you describe, but most couples who are relatively supple, and not obese can certainly accomplish it. One way is if the woman is sitting in his lap. In our younger days, I sucked milk from my partner's breast at the point of our mutual orgasm. Whew! There is a greatscene in Ken Follet's "To Lie Down With Lions" in which the male protagonists sucks milk from his partner's breast while inside her. I don't know if a guy who is say 6'7" can suck the breast of a 4'11" woman, but i would imageine even that is possible if they are young and supple.
 
My pet peeve is about breasts. Women have areolae around their nipples (areolas alternative US plural - singular areole).

Aureole has a totally different meaning, nothing to do with breasts and editors should pick it up as a fault.
 
One of my teachers told me: "A story does not have to be true, but it must be true to life."

If one writes a woman who is lying on her back, with another woman straddling her face, whose clit she is licking, it is not likely she can see her husband's tongue in the same woman's ass.
 
Then why, JBJ, do you insist upon being one? YOU THINK (without the slightest bit of evidence) that the g-spot is an extension of the clitoris! Yes, the clitoral shaft extends into the interior of the vagina, but it is not the same as the g-spot, which also involves Bertoli's gland and several other glands and nerve centers located nearby which may or may not all together comprise the g-spot. The evidence is not conclusive enouhg for the exactness you imply.
 
Last edited:
My peeve is about breasts. Women have areola (singular) or areolae (plural). Aureoles are reserved for angels or goddesses.
 
robertreams said:
Then why, JBJ, do you insist upon being one? YOU THINK (without the slightest bit of evidence) that the g-spot is an extension of the clitoris! Yes, the clitoral shaft extends into the interior of the vagina, but it is not the same as the g-spot, which also involves Bertoli's gland and several other glands and nerve centers located nearby which may or may not all together comprise the g-spot. The evidence is not conclusive enouhg for the exactness you imply.
Click to expand...

Bobby? When I was a larval psychologist fags were mentally ill, now they aren't. When I was a larval psychologist mom's caused schizophrenia, now they don't. Harry Stack Sullivan MD usta beat his schizophrenic patients up cuz he thought their moms protected them too much, as children. Starting to get the idea? Even if youre right, youll prolly get laughed at next week when anuther genius with anuther idea comes along and rolls her eyes at you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top