Cock Map

[hotwords229_A]

What?!?!?!



Oh. You mean Aussie, don't you.

No, you. If you were drawing those pics in public books.
That’s one of the first signs of needing . . . something.

 

[Endless_Night]

No, you. If you were drawing those pics in public books.
That’s one of the first signs of needing . . . something.

Omg. I can't decide if your talking future serial killer or salt peter!

 

[hotwords229_A]

Omg. I can't decide if your talking future serial killer or salt peter!

Or a salty peter!

 

[Endless_Night]

Or a salty peter!

That was . . . terrible.

There is not covered ears emoji it seems. Should be.

 

[hotwords229_A]

I searched for Cock Map, turned my “safety” to off and this was the first image to come up.

 

[Endless_Night]

Damnit!!

*my eyes*
*my eyes*
*my eyes*

Omg. Put the safety back on!

 

[hotwords229_A]

Damnit!!

*my eyes*
*my eyes*
*my eyes*

Omg. Put the safety back on!

What algorithm connected cock map to that?!

 

[Endless_Night]

What algorithm connected cock map to that?!

I cannot even imagine.

But it should be illegal!!

 

[Azuldrgon]

what the hell was that?
Looks like some weird art project.

 

[Ricardus]

It vaguely reminds me of those huge weird mascot-like statues you get outside old-fashioned chain diners, like Big Boy's, but designed by Roy Lichtenstein having a wet dream set inside a nightmare.

 

[Ricardus]

I'm just going to leave this here for @hotwords229_A because I know he has a penchant.

The word "dark" in the tagine there is hilariously redundant. Assuming I could dissociate kidnap erotica from the reality of what such a situation would be like enough to be aroused, the word "hucow" may be the most comically (but also sadly) unarousing concept that's intended to be erotic ever invented.

And it really takes effort to make something as gorgeously and gloriously arousing as a lactating woman unerotic. However, presenting her as not human will do it!

 

[Bbl87]

the word "hucow" may be the most comically (but also sadly) unarousing concept that's intended to be erotic ever invented.

Could not agree more.

 

[Endless_Night]

And it really takes effort to make something as gorgeously and gloriously arousing as a lactating woman unerotic. However, presenting her as not human will do it!

Could not agree more.

I am a bit surprised by these three successive negative reactions. I mean, I was certainly taken aback the first time I ran across this, uh, type of thing. Like, a lot.

But my assumption was someone out there, mostly male, was liking the idea. Maybe it's more niche than I realized.

So.

We're back to objectifying women as okay, but just let's not liken them to animals?


I kid. I kid.

*zoom*

 

[Photog1rl]

more niche than I realized.

I've been hoping so ever since I first read about it. Is it better than being masticated-yes-but not like a power of 10 better.

 

[Ricardus]

I am a bit surprised by these three successive negative reactions. I mean, I was certainly taken aback the first time I ran across this, uh, type of thing. Like, a lot.

But my assumption was someone out there, mostly male, was liking the idea. Maybe it's more niche than I realized.

So.

We're back to objectifying women as okay, but just let's not liken them to animals?


I kid. I kid.

*zoom*

Well, since you ask...

First of all, of course someone out there is liking the idea, or you'd never have heard of it. I am not sure that it's mainly men, but it might be. There definitely are women who like the idea. In any case, that doesn't mean that many people are into it at all, or that people who aren't won't find it incredibly weird (because it is). Anything that's a true fetish is pretty niche, by definition. Anything that involves the idea that a person is more attractive when likened to or considered as a (non- human) animal, is pretty far out by most people's standards, to put it politely.

As to objectifying women...I wouldn't say that's okay, myself. I think sex is powerful because it's between entire real people - not just particular physical bits of them, and not people reduced to particular things they can do. For example, since we're talking about the "hucow" idea, I really like breasts and lactation. However, I do not find them erotic as separate things on their own. I love breasts because they are one beautiful and distinctively feminine part of a woman's body, and lactation as one beautiful and distinctively womanly aspect of how her body works. None of that is erotic without having the sense of a whole person, and her personality, energy, and sensuality.

Even if you come across an isolated image -- say a drawing or a close-up photograph of a single breast -- if it arouses you, it's only because your imagination instinctively begins to fill in the rest of her, what she might be like, and how you might relate to her. So, if I happen across a mother feeding her baby somewhere in public, and even catch a glimpse of her breast, I might think she was lovely, but it's not going to be arousing, because there's no sexual connection; she's focused on taking care of her baby and has no interest in the man who happened to walk by. However, if I have a personal connection with a woman, and I know she is closely attuned to the sensuality of her breasts and has a strong desire to give them to me, whether she has milk or not...that's very different. And it's also a world away from the dehumanizing idea where this conversation started

 

[Ricardus]

I've been hoping so ever since I first read about it. Is it better than being masticated-yes-but not like a power of 10 better.

For one thing, it's not entirely mutually exclusive from being masticated. I suppose it mostly involves getting manhandled, but you might find parts of you being masticated at times...just not in such a way that they get separated from the rest of you and swallowed!

But yes....I think it is a very minority interest.

 

[hotwords229_A]

I think we all objectify women, I know I do. But just objectifying them alone is where the negative part of it comes in. I love a woman’s body—every part of it. Especially when they are naked and wet (both kinds of wet ).

If I see a hot body, I look at it and enjoy it. I realize she is a human being, but she is also a hot body and I don’t apologize for liking that. Obviously, I’m not a freak who stares, whistles and catcalls to make anyone uncomfortable, but to pretend not to like what I see (while keeping it to myself) is fucking weird and unnatural.

I’ve known plenty of unbelievably women who were scumbags and I’ve known plenty of women who are not traditionally attractive but have hearts and souls of pure gold who then became hot to me.

The body and the person are two separate things. And it’s okay to “objectify” both. At least, the way I do it.

But none of them are cows.

ETA: We should also objectify men. And we kind of do. So that’s good.

 

[Photog1rl]

We should also objectify men.

Ahem…
I kind of feel this was a call to objectify one particular man…

I’m holding out for a Hotwords trouser snake pic

And yet you have failed us-so far

You mentioned liking wet and wet on women. How about hot(words) and wet

 

[Endless_Night]

But none of them are cows.

It's such an amusing rarity to see you stuck on anything like this!

Ahem…
I kind of feel this was a call to objectify one particular man…

And yet you have failed us-so far

You mentioned liking wet and wet on women. How about hot(words) and wet

I mean, *big eyes* whoa.

 

[Photog1rl]

It's such an amusing rarity to see you stuck on anything like this!


I mean, *big eyes* whoa.

I am so teasing. I hope everyone knows that. I like to be little saucy sometimes.


I would still peek though

 

[hotwords229_A]

Ahem…
I kind of feel this was a call to objectify one particular man…

Is it me?

And yet you have failed us-so far

You mentioned liking wet and wet on women. How about hot(words) and wet

Being objectified and giving in to the objectification are two different things.

It's such an amusing rarity to see you stuck on anything like this!

It’s still a new idea. And it hasn’t aged well with me.

 

[Photog1rl]

Being objectified and giving in to the objectification are two different things.

 

[Ricardus]

You can't say she isn't practicing what you're preaching

 

[Endless_Night]

Is it me?

This tearing up emoji just does not get old.

Being objectified and giving in to the objectification are two different things.

Note how he just downright diverted that request.

 

[Endless_Night]

So, I've had some conversations about Dominance and Submission lately, and it recalled when I first joined Lit. My first postings were on the BDSM board, and there was a fair amount to navigate. Everyone had a different idea what BDSM was and no-one agreed.

At one point, I started trying to make a type of Dominant list. To little avail, there was just too much.

Out of curiosity. (Because, always. ) I did a quick search.

Low and behold.

What gets me is there's no Fitness Dom.

(Okay, that's not really what gets me, but I distinctly remember there being one on the board when I first joined.)

Anyhoo, this site gives information. But the kicker is there are several points in the read where it offers you the opportunity to submit to the author of the site.

This seems . . . unethical?


That's all. I just felt the need to share.