Role playing/costumes

[Disenchantedly Yours]

You are that special snowflake, no doubt about that, but you take too much liberity in self congratulating yourself.

 

Putting me down simply because I said I think differently from the popular majority of the website? Lame Imported. A) I didn't say I was "better. B) Other posters have said the same thign to me at various times. So save me the "special snowflake" comment.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

 

It's a pretty universal fantasy. But it's nostalgia, not pedophilia.

a

 

I do think it's a fantasy very popular with alot of men. But I don't think it's a simple matter of nostalgia for everyone. I am also not saying it's pedohphilia exactly. I just think it's a big jacked up. I don't see why people take that so personally. It's kind of messed up that the "school girl" image is sexed up to be a porno fantasy to a lot of guys.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

It originates with desire and fantasies. From both sides.

 

I don't think most women want to have to pretend they are back in high school to make men happy. But maybe I am wrong. I just can't see that being true.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

DY - At one point in life I also used to think that porn and dressing up was a male invention to objectify women in a degrading way. That changed after I had more experience, developed sexually and became less inhibited about what I like and need.

 

In my generation, growing up as a woman, it has always been taught us that it was not okay to have sexual desire and we were never encouraged to develop it. So we stuck with the idea that sexual images etc is a male thing.

 

But it's not. It's a human thing. When people let go of inhibitions and what religion/parents/family/friends tell them is right or wrong to do sexually, they are able to develop these fantasies and have a lot of innocent healthy fun with them. Sex is about fantasies (I think, for most people? But some say it's more spiritual, whatever that means). So it makes a lot of sense for both sides to dress up and play with stories, mainly in LTR when things cool off. It doesn't mean they want to do it in real life or are perverts.

 

Well let me start off by saying that I don't think having inhibitions is a bad thing. We actually all have them and practice them everyday to work well in society. We don't tell everyone everything that pops in our head, especially if it's hurtful. We don't just simply act on our feelings or hormones. Infact, it is when both men and women simply act on their feelings and hormones, that sometimes gets them in trouble with one another.

 

I also don't think having inhibitions in the bedroom is always a bad thing. There are moments to let go and there are moments when to reign it in and that is individual to each person and who they are.

 

I also don't believe that sexual images or sexual desire or sexual expression is a male thing. I do think a lot of what is pushed into pop culture is heavily domianted by male influence and what men desire women to be. While there are increased pressures for men now-a-days, it's largely about selling women as the props to sexual fulfilment. Which is sometimes why I think some women see themselves outside their own sexuality and see themselves as really a prop for his sexuality. I was like that when i was younger because I cared more about the guy liking me then being pleasured or satisfied. I suspect a lot of young women easily fall into that trap. Sometimes acceptance is a greater desire then sexual pleasure, for some women. And a lot of young girls sometimes I think sacrifice what they really think and feel for acceptance.

 

I don't think women would get implants or starve themselves if that wasn't the type of body that was very popular. I know there are women that say they do it for themselves but the reality is they do it to fit into a perception of what they think they have to be to accepted and loved at the base desire of it all. The big reason some women believe their bodies are "more" "proportional" is because of what has become a popular image of the female body. I don't think most women would choose to dress up in little school girl skirts and pretend they are younger then they really are if some men didn't want women to pretend they were younger then they really where at some level.

 

I also don't believe that sexual inhibition is equal to doing things like dressing up and engaging in wild sex acts. Sure, dressing up and engaging in wild sex acts CAN be sexually unihibited. But that doesn't mean that people that don't do that are prudes. And it doesn't mean the people that do it are more sexually evolved. Sometimes it seems like people need all these bells and whistles and additives to sex because they don't think sex is good enough by itself. Which is why you hear a lot of people say how easily bored they get. But I think the reason we get so easily bored, at least sometimes, is because an over exposure to these overt sexual images. Like with Halloween. Every year that are lots of women and girls that dress up very sexually. I think it gets boring when you see it too much. It's like "oh yeah, there is another "sexy" Pirate" costume.

 

And lastly, I actually believe there is a lot of truth to what you are saying and a lot of truth to what I am saying. I think that a lot of people here have brought up good points and that it's partially true, just as mine is partially true.

[Nightsky]

Have you seen American Horror Story? One of the ghost is a maid. The husband see's her as a young maid and the rest of his family sees her as an old maid. They don't realize she is a ghost either.....I think. Only saw the pilot so far. Young maid is sexy.

 

 

YouTube

 

Yeah that maid was really hot when she wasn't the old version

[Lonely Ronin]

I do think it's a fantasy very popular with alot of men. But I don't think it's a simple matter of nostalgia for everyone. I am also not saying it's pedohphilia exactly. I just think it's a big jacked up. I don't see why people take that so personally.

 

Jesus DY, how can you not see why people are always on your case? You intermix negative comments with neutral or positive ones all the time. Like above you say "I am also not saying it's pedohphilia exactly. I just think it's a big jacked up" is a perfect example of a neutral comment immediately followed by a negative one. Couple your posting style with your posting history, and that's why you get hammered on about anything related to sexuality. Maybe you are just misunderstood, but it's your job to make the world understand you, not the other way around.

 

Back on topic:

A girl I dated in college wanted to dress up in cheerleader outfit, and me in my letter jacket. The reason she wanted to do it, was because she wanted to enact something she never did in high school, but wanted to. It had nothing to do with me, or wanting to look/be perceived as younger.

[edgygirl]

I don't think most women want to have to pretend they are back in high school to make men happy. But maybe I am wrong. I just can't see that being true.

 

I think you are talking about yourself, not about most women.

 

I don't want to dress up in whatever costume to make men happy. I would do it for both of us and because it's fun. For both of us. I don't see how you can't get that playing a part can be fun for you as well.

 

This sounds very un-playful to me. And for me, and many people: un-playful in bed = boring sex. Even when it doesn't involve role play.

 

I wish having missionary sex forever would be fun enough. So easy, right? But it's not, for tons of people.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Jesus DY, how can you not see why people are always on your case? You intermix negative comments with neutral or positive ones all the time. Like above you say "I am also not saying it's pedohphilia exactly. I just think it's a big jacked up" is a perfect example of a neutral comment immediately followed by a negative one. Couple your posting style with your posting history, and that's why you get hammered on about anything related to sexuality. Maybe you are just misunderstood, but it's your job to make the world understand you, not the other way around.

 

Back on topic:

A girl I dated in college wanted to dress up in cheerleader outfit, and me in my letter jacket. The reason she wanted to do it, was because she wanted to enact something she never did in high school, but wanted to. It had nothing to do with me, or wanting to look/be perceived as younger.

 

Huh? So there is something wrong with clarifying that I am not saying someone is a pedohphile but at the same time saying I still think it's jacked-up? What is wrong with thinking it's jacked up to want women to dress up as "school girls"? I'm seriously not allowed to have that view point without it having to mean I am calling someone a pedophile?

 

Whatever your "ideas" are on neutral, positive or negative statements, doesn't mean that's how everyone else sees it Ronin. I also will remain true to myself and explain myself the best I can just as everyone else on this board will most likely do themselves. And by the way, who ever said that a group of posters on a message board was the whole world? You?

 

Despite your personal experience, it is not as common for men to dress up as "school boys" as it is the reverse. Can we at least be hoenst with ourselves about that much.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

I think you are talking about yourself, not about most women.

 

I don't want to dress up in whatever costume to make men happy. I would do it for both of us and because it's fun. For both of us. I don't see how you can't get that playing a part can be fun for you as well.

 

This sounds very un-playful to me. And for me, and many people: un-playful in bed = boring sex. Even when it doesn't involve role play.

 

I wish having missionary sex forever would be fun enough. So easy, right? But it's not, for tons of people.

 

Nope. I am talkign about what I believe to be the truth about most women, not just myself. Which is why I said that.

 

I also never said that playing a part wasn't fun for two people. That is an assumption you made. All I said is that alot of the time, the pressure is on the women to dress up and be the visual object of desire.

 

I don't really care if I sound un-playful to you. I am not looking to have sex with you or prove my sexuality to you. I think it's funny that you've tried to link my comments here with my own sexuality. It's a common shaming game people use to shame other people's sexuality and also a way to feel superior as if they are much more fun and adventurous in bed.

 

I also never said anything about having missionary sex forever. You are jumbling a lot of my message.

[edgygirl]

Nope. I am talkign about what I believe to be the truth about most women, not just myself. Which is why I said that.

 

I also never said that playing a part wasn't fun for two people. That is an assumption you made. All I said is that alot of the time, the pressure is on the women to dress up and be the visual object of desire.

 

I don't really care if I sound un-playful to you. I am not looking to have sex with you or prove my sexuality to you. I think it's funny that you've tried to link my comments here with my own sexuality. It's a common shaming game people use to shame other people's sexuality and also a way to feel superior as if they are much more fun and adventurous in bed.

 

I also never said anything about having missionary sex forever. You are jumbling a lot of my message.

 

How can you possibly know what most women want or feel? Have you asked them? You are indeed, talking about yourself only.

 

If I want my partner to wear a bunny costume, I'd ask him. I don't have any problem of getting a man turned on by me being dressed up.

 

I don't see anything wrong that women dress up more often than men and therefore this implies that men usually are the ones who derive more visual pleasure out of it. I take pleasure out of a male acting in a masculine way. Do you see them around complaining that it pisses them off that they can't have more tenderness and be less masculine? Men and women do have, historically and biologically, a place in bed and in sexuality. I don't have any problem with that whatsoever. And if I want to revert places, I just ask . And I don't have any problem with you not wanting to do it. Don't do it, it's very simple. If other types of sex makes you happier, do it. I just find it hypocritical to criticize what turns someone on, and bash a whole gender for being visual creatures which is not even a conscious choice - it's probably based on their hormones, history and evolution.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Originally Posted by Disenchantedly Yours

Nope. I am talkign about what I believe to be the truth about most women, not just myself.

 

But … maybe one in 20 women here, anyway, concurs with your "truth" about sexuality. The rest of us are NOT aligned with your "truth." It has nothing to do with "most women," regardless of what you believe. Do the rest of us a favor and stop being a spokeswoman for "most women." I'm sure there are others like you, but there are also a whole bunch of us who love sex, love men, and love male sexuality. We'd dress up, and like it!!! Imagine! Just because you hate (fear) all that stuff, please refrain from hurling your neurosis over the rest of us wimmins!

[Disenchantedly Yours]

How can you possibly know what most women want or feel? Have you asked them? You are indeed, talking about yourself only.

 

It's based on my personal experiences and conversations I have had with women. All of us have our own belief systems based on our life experiences. This has been mine. While I know there are women that will fit outside that box, there are women from my experience that will agree with me. I understand you don't agree and obviously that's fine. But no, I am not only speaking of myself only.

 

 

If I want my partner to wear a bunny costume, I'd ask him. I don't have any problem of getting a man turned on by me being dressed up.

 

So what? What does this have to do with my point? I didn't say you would have a problem with a man being turned on by you dressing up. I said that women are much more subject to being the visual object. While I don't think there is anything wrong with you happy to visually turn on your man, I do think there is something wrong in a culture that makes women the visual object. Granted, it's a very complex issue. Unfortunetly, a lot of women and young girls are submerged in a culture where they have expectations placed on them on how to look and act to be considered pretty or sexy. Alot of women easily begin practicing these roles from an early age and aren't given alot of time or space to really figure out what they really would have liked without the influence of media and social messages. Men are under the same strain but it's usually not in regards to sex since society still largely slaps men on the back for sex but sets women up into all kinds boxes for sex.

 

 

I don't see anything wrong that women dress up more often than men and therefore this implies that men usually are the ones who derive more visual pleasure out of it.

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with "dressing up". I do think certain fantasies like the school girl thing are jacked-up. And I do think a lot of men perputate it because there is an obession for women to remain forever young in our culture since we deem women as being less valuable with age. This is very much reflected in alot of media geared to both men and women.

 

I do think there is something wrong with making women the visual object there to appease male sexuality. Sexuality should always be mutual and and exchange of communication. Not a one sided experience where one side is the object to titilate and the other is the receiver of pleasure. But that's just how I see it. I think a lot of women and men get wrapped up in the woman being the ones that need to titilate and excite and the men are the ones that are allowed to sit back and enjoy the show. When it should actually be an mutual exchange of pleasure. And this is the part that gets me. Which is not always dependent on the dressing up but certainly can be systematic of it. Since so many "sexy outfits" are geared to young girls and women. And this starts very early because we have all seen how young the "sexy costume" ideas go toward young girls while young boys are not put up to the same pressure

 

I don't think it's wrong to be visually turned on by your partner. this is am over simplification of what I am trying to get out (even if I am not perfectly doing it.) I don't think that because pop science tells us men are more visual that means that women need to be showcased certain ways to appease that either. Which is actually what often happens. I actually think that line of thinking is unhealthy in it's onesidedness. Just because men are visuall turned on doesn't mean women need to be the visual objects. However, the conversation should be more along the lines of since men are sometimes visually turned on, women's beauty should be celebrated. However, women's beauty is rarely celebrated in healthy ways. Dressing up in a school girl outfit is not really a celebration of a woman's beauty or sexiness. It's a celebration of the fantasy to bang school girls.

 

I take pleasure out of a male acting in a masculine way.

 

Fantastic but so what? Did I say women should not act feminine? Is the only way to act feminine to dress up in porno-costumes? Is that feminine to begin with?

 

 

Do you see them around complaining that it pisses them off that they can't have more tenderness and be less masculine?

 

Actually yes, there are website dedicated to men talking about issues they face in the modern world and stereotypes they are suppose to fit into. These websites are very interesting sometimes!

 

Men and women do have, historically and biologically, a place in bed and in sexuality. I don't have any problem with that whatsoever.

 

What "place" do we have in bed? Are we unable to break out of our "places"? Are we conformed to our "places?" Should men and women have "places" in bed to begin with? Because something was historically true does it mean that it should be true now? How much about biology do we really understand? Usually I find that people love to talk about "biology". But only when it fits into what they already believe to be true. Biology is actually a lot more complicated and complext that people actually have a good understanding of. Which is why a lot of "pop science" biology gets thrown around as "truth".

 

I just find it hypocritical to criticize what turns someone on, and bash a whole gender for being visual creatures which is not even a conscious choice - it's probably based on their hormones, history and evolution.

 

A) I don't believe it's hypocritical at all to criticize what may turn someone else on. It's popular today to say, "well if that turns that person on, then I accept it too!" But I don't really agree with that line of thought. If I don't understand why something turns someone on, I will say exactly that. There is nothing "hyopocritical" about it. If I don't agree with something someone is doing, I will be hoenst about that. There is nothing "hypocritical" about it. That is the nature of the world we live in from sex right to politics. It isn't "hypocritical" to talk about why you may or may not agree with President Obama. It is not "hypocritical" to talk about why you may or may not agree with certain sex practices.

 

B)I never bashed an entire gender for being visual creatures. I just simply said that men being visual creatues does not mean that women get to become justified sex objects. Just as I don't believe that because women prize good providers that can finacially suppor them, that it justifies a woman using a man for his money. While we may all have certain natural inclinations, this does not justify treating the other gender in ways that satisfy ourselves and our own natures without considering the repercussions of what those action imply for the other person.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

But … maybe one in 20 women here, anyway, concurs with your "truth" about sexuality. The rest of us are NOT aligned with your "truth." It has nothing to do with "most women," regardless of what you believe. Do the rest of us a favor and stop being a spokeswoman for "most women." I'm sure there are others like you, but there are also a whole bunch of us who love sex, love men, and love male sexuality. We'd dress up, and like it!!! Imagine! Just because you hate (fear) all that stuff, please refrain from hurling your neurosis over the rest of us wimmins!

 

I speak for what I believe in. Just as you do. Which is why you specifically made the case to say "1 in 20 women" "concurs" with my "truth" right? It's amazing that it's okay for you to say this but you are so offended by me saying the same thing, just on the other side of the coin.

 

I love men too and love male sexuality. I don't think loving men needs that men are perfect of that I need to talk about men as if they are or that all things in male sexuality are perfect and should be accepted for me to love men.

 

I also love women and respecting the feminine. I probably more easily see how women are disrespected based on my own experiences growing up. Which is why I am sensitive to it. This doesn't mean I am neurotic or wrong. It means my experiences lead me to see things while your experiences may have lead you to see other things. Why must you try to shame me for it all the time? Why are you so bothered by what I say?

 

I believe I have made a lot of valid points and I actually believe I probably made a lot of valid points you yourself would agree with. However, because of your personal dislike of me, you've made it your personal mission to put me down instead of being kind or level headed in your debate.

[Lonely Ronin]

Huh? So there is something wrong with clarifying that I am not saying someone is a pedohphile but at the same time saying I still think it's jacked-up? What is wrong with thinking it's jacked up to want women to dress up as "school girls"? I'm seriously not allowed to have that view point without it having to mean I am calling someone a pedophile?

 

 

I didn't say you called someone a pedophile. I said when you post it's always a negative comment followed by a neutral or positive one, or visa versa. I think the best way to word it, is your posting style comes of as super passive aggressive, and higher than thou, and honestly I don't think you even realize it.

 

 

Whatever your "ideas" are on neutral, positive or negative statements, doesn't mean that's how everyone else sees it Ronin.

 

We will just have to agree to disagree, then because when I read people's responses to your post's. it appears it's more your tone they have a problem with than your stance.

 

 

And by the way, who ever said that a group of posters on a message board was the whole world? You?

Don't mince words, you know exactly what I mean.

 

Despite your personal experience, it is not as common for men to dress up as "school boys" as it is the reverse. Can we at least be honest with ourselves about that much.

 

why does it matter who dresses up more, as long as the individuals involved are OK with it?

[edgygirl]

I do think certain fantasies like the school girl thing are jacked-up. And I do think a lot of men perputate it because there is an obession for women to remain forever young in our culture since we deem women as being less valuable with age. This is very much reflected in alot of media geared to both men and women.

 

Okay we got it. You go round and round but you seem to have a specific problem with the school girl fantasy which is the main example you use.

 

If my partner wanted to fantasize about that cheerleader who didn't look at him when his hormones were raging at age 14, so what? That's-perfectly-fine-with-me! And with many many women. And it's fun for the women too. It would probably be fun playing the younger me who didn't have sex while in school doing things I didn't do back then. It can be a turn on. For both. And in the specific case, it's usually about nostalgia, like someone posted, not pedofilia. Let the man get it out of his system or perhaps just have fun with it (and perhaps the woman too). What is the big problem with that???

 

If you don't want your possible young daughter caught on all this, educate her and protect her. You can't control what other people want and you shouldn't judge.

 

Are you also against granny porn sites? There are plenty of those around, google it

[Lonely Ronin]

Which is why you specifically made the case to say "1 in 20 women" "concurs" with my "truth" right? It's amazing that it's okay for you to say this but you are so offended by me saying the same thing, just on the other side of the coin.

 

If you re-read what she said, you will she see she said maybe, that implies uncertainty, and she said here, meaning LS and thus a smaller subset than all women. It makes a big difference.....

[Disenchantedly Yours]

I didn't say you called someone a pedophile. I said when you post it's always a negative comment followed by a neutral or positive one, or visa versa. I think the best way to word it, is your posting style comes of as super passive aggressive, and higher than thou, and honestly I don't think you even realize it.

 

I didn't say you said I was calling someone a pedophile! I was just trying to be clear because in past conversations, that can be a touchy subject!

 

Sometiems I think things are negative! That is honestly how I feel. If I have a negative comment followed by a neutral or positive one, I am sure they all apply to my general message.

 

I don't even know how my posting style comes off as "super passive agreesive" when I am usually the one being put down and belittled and made fun of. So your statement above is actually very baffling.

 

We will just have to agree to disagree, then because when I read people's responses to your post's. it appears it's more your tone they have a problem with than your stance.

 

Acutally, I think it's a mob mentality that started a while ago and never left with a few select posters. I have had really good conversations with other posters that were able to discuss the same subjects with me with ease. Where they weren't offended by what I had to say and didn't feel like I was offending them and I felt the same way even though they disagreed with my point of view.

 

 

Don't mince words, you know exactly what I mean.

 

It's not my intention to mince words. I obviously don't really understand what you mean. Where you literally talking about the entire world?

 

why does it matter who dresses up more, as long as the individuals involved are OK with it?

 

Usually it's the woman that has to dress up more and be the visual eye candy and the object that is used to titiluate.It comes from the position that she must do the work and he gets to sit back and enjoy the show. I think this is a limited way to look at sexuality and I think it's kind of unfair. Can't you see that?

 

There is a lot of pressure on women and their looks and what they have to do to be sexy. Instead of just letting women be themselves. And these ideas get sold to women very early. Which is why you can see 12 year olds in "sexy" costumes for girls in ways you can't see being sold to 12 year old boys.

 

I am sure most guys are okay with it if the woman is the one dressing up more. On a social level, I don't think it's very fair. On a personal level, what happens between individual couples is their business. I've never argued that. I've simply pointed out the implications of this to me, regarding how men and women view their "roles" in sex. The idea that men are to sit back and enjoy and women are to titilate and excite and do all the work is the message I get when women are the ones that are dressing up more. Because frankly, it is more work to dress up and be the object to titiltate then it is to be the one that is sitting back and enjoying the show.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Okay we got it. You go round and round but you seem to have a specific problem with the school girl fantasy which is the main example you use.

 

You went around and around too which is why I reiterated what I was trying to express. I do understand that sometime I can over state things. I am aware of my flaws! I am acutally pretty honest about them. But you also went around and around. I don't really mind that you did this though. I just kept responding by trying to make my point is all.

 

 

If my partner wanted to fantasize about that cheerleader who didn't look at him when his hormones were raging at age 14, so what? That's-perfectly-fine-with-me!

 

I think there is something messed-up about how much press time the school girl fantasy gets. I ask you in return, so what if I believe that?

 

 

Let the man get it out of his system or perhaps just have fun with it (and perhaps the woman too). What is the big problem with that???

 

I already explained why I saw some problems with this above. You accused me of going "round and round" yet you are doing the same thing here by asking me the same questions over and over again. What is the problem with me seeing problems in certain things? Why is that so troublesome to you?

 

If you don't want your possible young daughter caught on all this, educate her and protect her. You can't control what other people want and you shouldn't judge.

 

I never said I could control what other people want. This is again, a different discussion from commenting on things one may see issue with. Also, you've made judgements about me, you realize that right? You made judgements about my own sexuality. And I am sure you've made other judgements about me, some you have vocalized and some you haven't.

 

People like to lecture others not to judge even sometimes as they are judging. The truth is, we all make judgements. Some good and some bad.

 

Are you also against granny porn sites? There are plenty of those around, google it

 

Sub catagories of porn do not over-ride what the majority of porn is still compromised of.

 

If you are okay with your man looking at younger versions of women as you both age, that's your right. But I personally think there is something messed up in how women are depicted and formanted sexually in our culture.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

If you re-read what she said, you will she see she said maybe, that implies uncertainty, and she said here, meaning LS and thus a smaller subset than all women. It makes a big difference.....

 

I am aware of what she said Ronin. Please don't act like her post was neutral when it was brimming with hostility. By the way, all this anger and personal shots made aren't because Mme said "maybe" and I didn't. Lets also not think that Mme really meant "maybe" when it's more likely that she really believes I am the lark among women around here. Just because someone says "maybe" doesn't mean they really mean it. And from past conversations with Mme, I am not inclined to believe what she really meant was "maybe".

 

By the way, I am very aware that she said *here*, on LS.

[Lonely Ronin]

I don't even know how my posting style comes off as "super passive agreesive" when I am usually the one being put down and belittled and made fun of. So your statement above is actually very baffling.

 

I mean they are putting you down/belittling you because your tone comes off as higher than thou / passive aggressive. In my experiences, most people do not react well to what they perceive as passive aggressiveness.

 

 

Acutally, I think it's a mob mentality that started a while ago and never left with a few select posters. I have had really good conversations with other posters that were able to discuss the same subjects with me with ease. Where they weren't offended by what I had to say and didn't feel like I was offending them and I felt the same way even though they disagreed with my point of view.

Would you not agree that you are in the minority on LS when it comes to certain topics? Can you see how coupling that with how you are perceived could lead to the responses you are getting?

[newmoon]

i (female) like playing dress up in everyday life so it's no problem to do it in bed either. but, my partner doesn't care for it. for me, it helps me to loosen up a lot if i'm a different 'character,' but he doesn't care for it and is conservative in bed. i still wear tons of different lingerie for him but that's it. so, i'm with a guy who might be in the minority - he says a lot of the stuff (like schoolgirl/older man or cheerleader) goes against his principles and beliefs and he just cannot get into that. it is nice to not dress in anything other than lingerie - it takes the pressure off and i can be more confident that he is enjoying me for me. who knows what is going on in his head, but i don't need to dress the part.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I'm watching "The Real Housewives of Miami" wearing a Catholic schoolgirl outfit right this minute, and my husband is dressed as a priest. Hawt!

[Els]

But … maybe one in 20 women here, anyway, concurs with your "truth" about sexuality. The rest of us are NOT aligned with your "truth." It has nothing to do with "most women," regardless of what you believe. Do the rest of us a favor and stop being a spokeswoman for "most women." I'm sure there are others like you, but there are also a whole bunch of us who love sex, love men, and love male sexuality. We'd dress up, and like it!!! Imagine! Just because you hate (fear) all that stuff, please refrain from hurling your neurosis over the rest of us wimmins!

 

I think 1 in 20 pretty much nails it, yep.

[aussietigerwolf]

Oh damn i just came across sexy assasins creed girl! http://globalgeeknews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Sexy-Female-Assassins-Creed-Cosplay.jpg

 

now that I'd wear for a guy

[aussietigerwolf]

fun, you could where some warrior princess stuff too.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Dm7MjGjBsZg/TJIOT4VBZmI/AAAAAAAAA2M/zHbbKPkk7g8/s1600/varia.jpg

this actually.... but I just need the guy now