Savage Love

Baby Soft



"There are things a mother has a right not to know." Bless you, Dan---your mother (and father) raised you right.


I'm wondering about how much of an asshole the mom is, if she's making fun of somebody for having a birth defect.


“I told him to check his privilege...”. Oh to be do young and Polly Anna...


@2 slomopomo: I was wondering about that, too. DDLG's mom sounds like she's still in middle school.


You got involved in a Daddy Dom / little girl relationship when you were 18 and he was "middle-aged", so he was what, 40? 60? A 30+ year age difference will squick a lot of people out regardless, then add that you were a teenager, THEN add that it's specifically age play where you only have to squint a little to get the dynamic. It's more obviously fantasy when the little is older than the caregiver or when they're decades past childhood.


BABE: If you felt inauthentic without AB/DL present or talked about during the course of one single date, then you have to be up front about it, or within three dates, max. Don't trot out this kink later. People with their own kinks will be more likely than vanilla folks to be open to yours, especially if you're open to theirs too, so drop your fishing line in the kinky lake.

If you're NOT open to vanilla or other kinks, dating sites are your best bet and you definitely need to advertise as AB/DL.


Mom sounds like more of an asshole than Boyfriend, and that's coming from someone who thinks that classism is more problematic and pervasive than ableism (which IS real and serious and pervasive, and also frequently overdetermined IMO, though making fun of someone for the mere fact of having a disability qualifies per my limited definition). Long-distance pseudo-incestuous power-play relationship with a large age gap is weird (and squicky) as hell to many people; what determines whether someone is an asshole is how one OVERTLY REACTS to something so queer to one.

Our narrator may not be entirely reliable - youthful inexperience + besotted isn't the best combo for reliable bullshit detectors - so it may be that Mom's totally correct in her assessment, but if everything in the letter is accurate and includes the relevant information, then Mom's the asshole, while BF is a well-meaning person who internalized some classist attitudes but is demonstrably working on deprogramming himself to ameliorate them.


“There are two kinds of people at any big kink event (BDSM party, furry convention, piss splashdown): the people who were always kinky, i.e., people who've been aware of their kinks since puberty (and masturbating about them since puberty), and the people who fell in love with those people.”

Similar statement could be made about the people at an Episcopal church service.


I agree with Ankylosaurus @6 that BABE should be dating kinky people, looking for someone open-minded, with their own uncommon kinks, as well as chemistry & general life compatibility.


More than most kinks, DD/lg is guaranteed to generate a deeply emotional and negative response, even among kinky people, which is rather strange in a community where it is considered normal for people inflict pain on or degrade their partners. A significant aspect of that reaction is a lack of understanding about the relationship itself and why people are attracted to this dynamic. DD/lg is not about incest or about fulfilling a need for under-aged partners, rather it is a D/s relationships which focuses heavily on the dominant partner caring for, and creating a safe and nurturing environment for the submissive partner. Daddies tend to be older because it take a long time for men to develop the maturity to care for a partner in that way. It is hard to be a stabilizing and grounding force in someone's life if you don't have your own life well-ordered. Littles need that structure, and look for dominant partners who can provide order to their lives, but don't want to experience power exchange entirely outside a more openly loving and romantic relationship. Littles tend to be very dynamic and social, which are attractive qualities to more serious-minded dominants. Littles also tend to be very effusive in their affections, which daddies appreciate, but many dominant men, who prefer a more standard D/s dynamic or an M/s relationship, do not.

Getting into your first D/s relationship can be hard, as BABE's letter demonstrates. You have to accept the kinky side of yourself, and get over your fear of expressing your needs or desires to someone else. DDLG's shows that exiting that first relationship can be hard as well. Finding a partner is hard enough without added the dimension of complementary kinks, and having found someone who accepts her little side and offers her the relationship dynamic she wants, she is struggling with the reality that her partner may not check other boxes that are important to her. There are many attributes on which DDLG may need to compromise, but a partner who is generally a good and respectful person is not one of them.

Lastly, DDLG and her mother should stop treating each other like they are friends. More specifically, that means that DDLG should stop sharing information about her kinks with her mom.


BABE should get on Fetlife and look for connections/partners there.
There are also professionals. While looking for a partner, presuming he has the means, BABE could pay a sex worker to indulge his kink. If he is open to vanilla sex, a longer-term option might be an open relationship where he could get his kink needs met occasionally by a sex worker. Women who don't mind their partners getting kink needs met by others might outnumber women who are willing to indulge this kink themselves.

DDLG: Stop telling your mother everything. Get some friends your own age. You're 22, isn't it time for you to start thinking about moving out? I agree your mother's ableism is problematic. Ditch the mom, then perhaps you can be more objective about the Dom.


Anything with "diaper" in the name of the kink is so very disgusting to me. Having a first date with someone who was desperate for this sounds gross and unpleasant. Think this needs to be in your dating profile, and don't seek converts.


@ You sound disgusting, desperate, gross and unpleasant. See how that works?


Before BABE starts dating, he needs to sit down and decide what he wants in a partner and the relationship he's looking for. Does he want to engage in his kink all the time, or would he be happy for it to be indulged once a month? Is he happy to have a vanilla sex life or is this something he cannot do? Does he want a monogamous relationship where his partner indulges in his kink with him or would he be happy pursuing sexual partners outside of the relationship should his partner not want to engage? Until BABE has established his own boundaries, he will feel the pressure of disclosing far more.


DDLG should definitely get some kinky friends her own age to talk about this stuff with. Sounds like she's already on Fetlife--and there's a really active community of littles on Fet! Join some platonic groups, start chatting up other littles, and you'll have friends who can help you gauge whether your current Daddy (and any future partners) are up to par. Your mom only needs the vanilla stuff.


Use of the word "conversion" reveals that the guest expert is, in the Brodiean sense of the word, an intruder; she wants at root (like Miss Mackay) to thrust her kink into her partners. Mr Savage (like Miss Brodie) thinks he takes the approach of an educator and that his system leads out an appreciation that is already there.


Yeah, I'm with the "get on fetlife and put it in your profile" crowd for LW1. It's a perfectly harmless kink between consenting adults so it's not morally wrong but it does trigger visceral disgust in most people because "babies are not for fucking" and "poop icky" are some pretty basic instincts most people have.

Dan's always had a bit of an honesty/consent problem ("cheat to save your relationship" and "hide dealbreakers until the other person's invested in the relationship") for these things, so his answer isn't surprising. Personally though, I think this is right up there in the Married Poly category of "things you 100% disclose before the first date."

So. Get on a kinky site and put it in the profile. You'll get fewer first dates, but all your dates will be people you could reasonably get off with.


My tip for BABE is to broaden your outlook a bit. It is understandable that, having come to accept there is nothing wrong with a bit of diaper play, you want every sexual experience, actual and potential, to be all adult baby all the time. This will not endear you to anyone (unless there any women who are turned on by having to mother their partners, which I was always told was a major turn off). Your ability to sustain a long term relationship with a woman just as freaky as you will be greatly enhanced if you can have fun not just as an AB, but as a masochist, or a sub, or whatever. A Domme is more likely to enjoy playing with you, and indulging your adult babyhood if you can turn the underlying motivation into a few different skills.


@12 Right on - why can’t BABE do Schiesser play like normal, decent folk?


My gut says that dating without up front disclosure is a far less efficient approach to date someone once or twice and then reveal the fetish than it is to put the fetish in a profile and only date people who are cool with it from the get-go.

I mean, let's assume you are wildly successful at online dating (just generally) and manage to keep it really cheap (just coffee) and you get a new date every week, so 52 new dates a year. What are the odds that even one of those 52 people are going to like you enough that they are going to get on board with a diaper fetish that they did not have before the date? I'd say pretty close to zero.

Unless Dan means literally dating someone for several weeks while hiding the fetish from them and then waiting until they start to fall in love with you and then revealing it to them and hoping that - because they care so much about you- they will respond not with resentment that you hid it but with a willingness to explore a kink they don't have? OK so even in that case, my guess would be, let's say you manage to find someone who really starts to fall for you about twice a year (which would again be wildly successful)- what are the chances that, over a five year period, one these 10 random people who have only just started to really care for you and have nothing tying their lives to yours are going to not only accept your diaper fetish but learn to embrace it long term? Again, I'd say probably around zero.

So I don't think there is anything at all unethical about diaper play and I see no ethical reason that you'd need to disclose before dating or even before sex (but definitely before it becomes a serious relationship), I just think it's not efficient. It's not practical and seems like the path to lead towards the most rejection.

Make an online profit in kink communities asking specifically for what you want. You will get fewer responses than you would to a wider and less specific profile, but the people who do respond will be far more likely to be compatible with you.

Looks like the stats disagree with me- that's the point of reference all the partners right? But I wonder how many of those partner "converts" are instead people who were ALREADY in serious relationships with the person with the fetish before they knew about it? That seems like an entirely different scenario.


"So Lo isn't telling BABE to do anything that people with other kinks aren't advised to do all the time: date, establish trust, and then lay your kink cards on the table."

I feel like Dan got sort of caught up in the ethics of it. There is absolutely nothing unethical about doing this with diaper play just like any other kink. Just to be clear. If you want to take this approach, you should not feel that you are doing anything wrong or pulling one over on anyone.

It just seems impractical. As the LW knows, a adult baby / diaper fetish is not like other fetishes- it is more taboo and it is more likely to turn people off. That's just true- hence his fears and observations. It's the combo of two things that are going to be major obstacles for people- bathroom stuff (since most of us think of diapers as poop and pee) and baby stuff (which is the opposite of sexual for most people).

On the flip side, the wiki page indicates that while it's extremely rare in the general population, when you look just among people who have fetishes, it's a relatively common one. Moreover, I'd assume people with other fetishes would be more willing to indulge yours if you indulge theirs.

So yet again, I just disagree with the advice that the best approach is to generally date, establish trust, then reveal- not because it's unethical but because it seems like the less efficient approach. Seems like the right thing to do is look within fetish groups.

The LW is concerned about the disproportionate number of women already into this, but A) this is even more true in the general dating world, and B) there are more women likely to be openminded about giving it a try in fetish communities, and C) being up front will eliminate the chance that you put yourself into a situation in which you start to develop feelings for someone who later rejects you specifically BECAUSE of your fetish.


DDLG should probably take a deep breath and chill. Just because this guy may not be your A#1 choice for a life partner does not mean you can't enjoy yourself today. You are still very young and this thing may well not last, but you don't have to make that call today. You are not getting engaged, just getting to know someone. When one is long distance we do not get the constant nonverbal cues that our brain uses to evaluate people, so everything they say becomes examined for any possible flaw. When in real life you would probably forget half that stuff. Daddies are a position that requires a lot of trust and social intelligence, it's ok to hold him to a high bar, but also probably a good idea to chill out and ignore mom.


The whole "turn" and convert mentality sets off alarms to me. Sounds like those trans activists who keep saying lesbians need to get past not wanting sex with someone who still has a penis or that gay men are just too afraid to try vaginas.


The alarm bells are a bit silly. Vanilla people learn to enjoy their partners' kinks all the time - it's fun to get someone super turned on, even if you use unorthodox methods to do it. And already-kinky people learn to appreciate new kinks all the time, too. As a friend of mine once pointed out, it's not really that far a reach to put a diaper on someone anyway. You get to take their pants off and play with their genitals, what's not to like?

I have a few bits of advice for BABE (speaking as someone with the same fetish who's been very happily married to a formerly-vanilla woman for almost 30 years) .

First, select your dating pool for open-mindedness. If they're deeply sex-negative or homophobic, they're probably going to be squicked by any variation from the cultural norm, and such people are not for you. A person who's playful and comfortable with sexual variety can often be identified pretty easily without getting into the powdery details.

Second, when things with a partner get serious enough for you to disclose your kink, be happy about it. She will pick up on your feelings. This might be hard for you, since you've been dealing with shame for your whole life - I know from experience what it's like . You might need to work on yourself for a while before you can do this. But your fetish is, and should be presented as, a fun wild secret hot thing about you that you're offering to let her in on. If you're "confessing" to your partner that you have a terrible freakish perversion, like it was incurable diaper cancer or something, it's much more likely that she'll respond negatively.


M? Enfant - You appear to agree with Mr Savage on the same line, but I think it depends at least a little on the nature of the kink. There are some kinks I would decline to try, but the question being presented in the suggested manner would not cause my LMB moment. But if someone had ever attempted such a positive spin on something like, "When we have sex, you get to be called all kinds of anti-gay slurs and be totally degraded (or to take the opposite role and do the degrading); isn't that the hottest thing you could ever imagine?" not only would that have killed any attraction to him but I'd likely have warned others in my circle that he might not be the most desirable close acquaintance, whereas a gentler unveiling would have elicited no more harsh a response than a case of a less problematic kink.


You can 100% cum on a girl's face the first time you fuck, all you gotta do is ask. I'd hold off on the diapers for like 2 months tho.

@7 Of course classism is more important. Look at the 2016 election, the product of ~30+ years of coastal urban denigration of rural and blue collar people.

@10 I assume Daddies tend to be older because what 19 year old girl wants a Daddy who's also in her english class? The daddy has to be at a stage of life beyond the little girl. I'm sure (I know) that there are women of all ages interested in DD/LG play, but do any of them have significantly younger partners? Any 40 yo little girls who play with their 25 year old Daddy? Probably not.


DDLG should reassure her mother that she is acting autonomously, even if in an exploratory way, and has always an eye on her own wellbeing and future. She is happy in her relationship and her choices, believes that she and her partner are essentially acting respectfully and well--and that's all that her mother needs to be concerned with.


@14. Lesbisaurus. I think BABE should have partnered AB/DL-themed sex as soon as possible--as much for the sake of his self-acceptance as anything else. 'Do you want monogamy?'--it's not a question to be posed and answered in the abstract. 'What are you willing to concede in negotiating boundaries with someone who offers mindblowing AB/DL sex?' That's more like it.

@17. Traffic. You're depriving currently-vanilla women the chance of a relationship with a sweet guy (as he sounds) and an opening to a potentially fascinating, exciting world of specialist kink.

@24. Enfant. Ah, the voice of reason and self-love!

Of course 'establish trust, then lay your kink cards on the table' is the right way of proceeding. This isn't about kink. It's what someone should do if they want a serious romantic relationship but have to reveal they are recovering alcoholics or spent time in prison.


Sporty you are spot on about the coastal urban sneering and the obvious (to everyone but them) results, but this was not a matter of class. Significantly more people who made under 50K a year voted for Hilary than Trump. In all other income groups, it was split roughly in half between them.

The narrative that Trump won over the working class was created by those same coastal urbanites to give them yet another reason not to scrutinize their own role and class interests.

The red-blue split is rural and urban, and it is also highly racial and somewhat generational. But it is not a matter of class except that working class people are the only group MORE like to have voted against Trump.

(dead horse I know but it bears shouting from the roof tops if we aren't to repeat the same mistake)


On the issue of conversion, I would have assumed that anyone open-minded and adventurous enough to even want to explore the more perverted aspects of sex was already somewhere a little beyond vanilla, strawberry or pistachio, perhaps. The trick, therefore, would be to find someone who has already at least imagined the possibilities of sex-as-power, and was willing to go where it lead, rather than convincing someone who just wanted cosy, lovey-covey sex that they’d have a great time dominating and controlling their adult baby.


BTW even if you control for race, you will not find that trend. The majority of white people voted for Trump in every class- the working class white people as well as the rich white people. And for white men specifically, education doesn't matter all that much either.

You will find that the only narratives that hold water are about race, generation, and rural/urban split. Urban talking heads and op-ed writers just keep going on about the "white working class" because they find it more comforting to mythologize about white blue collar people in the 'flyover' states than it is to take a long hard look at the white people in their own country clubs and boards of directors, etc.


EmmaLiz @20-21: Agree re ethics vs efficiency/efficacy. Enfant @24 also makes a good point about revealing this as something fun that they could both enjoy (and that he would be willing to provide considerable rewards for her indulging). I think BABE should take a two-pronged approach of listing this kink on kinky websites/apps and dating presumed-vanilla people, disclosing once he has a sense that he would like to see more of this person but before either of them gets invested. Perhaps he could hold off longer if he is dating poly people, since "get kink need met elsewhere" is by definition an option with them. Again it all depends on whether this is a kink or a fetish -- something he enjoys alongside a sexual diet that also includes vanilla and other types of kinky sex, or something he can't get aroused without.

Sporty @28: Asking to come on a woman's face the first time you have sex sounds like an excellent recipe for that to also be the last time you have sex.

Your other point is interesting: what do little girls do as they age? Presumably they don't outgrow this kink, so it's logical to expect that some day they will need to find someone willing to roleplay being older. Shouldn't be too hard as they are already roleplaying being significantly younger than their actual age.


DDLG, leave your mother out of your sex life.
You can have a close connection with her and still maintain your sexual/ etc independence. You don’t have to divulge intimate details anymore, so close that door straight away. If she asks or makes snide comments, tell her you are an adult woman and need to learn things on your own now.


@34. Bi. As I understand it, AB/DP is a kink characterised by a marked gender asymmetry between the numbers of male ABs (many) and kink-seeking-out female partners (few). With a different split, as in the kink of cishet monogamous marriage (drumroll), I'd more readily say, 'fish in an appropriate pool'.


What about those kinksters who only discovered their kink last week, they go to kink get togethers as well.
Conversion is an unpleasant choice of words.
BABE, is a serious kinksters with an out there kink. I suggest he disclose early on, because no amount of affection would interest me in this kink.
It’s surprising he doesn’t know about fetlife, and that he could have been finding like minded people for years.


Ms Fan - That's interesting; perhaps the pool just becomes too restricted.

M?? Harriet @36 - Maybe that's another part of the Straight/Gay divide or a point of Gay Privilege, similar to how we need fewer people at the orgy for more possible pairings. (Ms Cute may join me in recalling Mr Weston's ball held at the Crown Inn, and how Mrs Weston contrived to keep the numbers even for the dancing - until the last two are Mr Elton and Miss Smith.)


DDLG ~ A) It’s not a “relationship” if you’ve never met in person, it’s a fantasy. B) You obviously crave attention and approval from parental figures. Work on being happy with who you ARE, you don’t need someone else to validate your existence, mommy or online daddy. ‘Course, that’s easy to say. In reality, who you are is someone who craves adult supervision. The question is, are you OK with that or do you want it to change? If you like that aspect of yourself, then go with it, let mommy’s opinions rule your life and let fantasy online guys disparage you. If you DON’T like it, get your ass into counseling.


@24 Great post!


Daddy, I googled about this when this letter was posted, and I found that while most don't actually use their diapers, some do. It's more common to pee in it than to shit, and they call the shit "messing", so if you want to know more about it, that's the term to search. I found stuff like reddit threads about how to poop in your diapers at night without waking up (so it's more like a baby) for example, recipes for laxatives, tips how to clean up afterwards, how to do it discreetly in public, etc. Humans are fascinating.

Regardless of the fact that the person is not really a baby, regardless of the fact that the person is not really pooping their pants- diapers make most of us think of poop and babies, two very unsexy things - it's the imagery and associations that would be hard for most people.


Most ABDLs do wet their diapers. Relatively few dirty them - something like one out of eight, if I recall correctly, according to a poll I saw on an ABDL website. Even among those who do, many will only do it occasionally. Ageplay parties usually have a strict rule against it. (I will refrain from discussing my own preferences here.) Also, not everyone with a diaper kink wants to act like a baby in other respects; for some the diaper itself is enough.

The thing a lot of people people don't get about this kink is that it isn't about babies or poop per se, it's about helplessness and vulnerability and self-control and power. To act like a baby or child, to give up control even to the level of basic bodily functions that were among the first things you learned to control in the first place - especially when someone's "making" you do it - is a massive reduction in status. It's the reduction that's the hot part. But taking away someone's adult status can only be fun if they had adult status to begin with.

The diapers and other paraphernalia - even the dirty diapers if you happen to go that far with it - are just a signifier of status and identity. If you look past the signifier to what's being signified, you might understand it better. As an analogy, leashes might be something you associate with dogs, but putting a leash on someone in a BDSM scene wouldn't imply that you want to have sex with dogs.


Thanks for that explanation Enfant@44. I can see how it is about vulnerability and helplessness, I don’t see how it signifies status and identity. The latter two are adult concepts, imposed on a behaviour we associate with babies and older people who have no control. It is a regressive kink, in behaviour, if not in understanding.


I think your analogy is a difficult one too, Enfant.
This kink includes body elimination for some, if not most. This involves waste matter. Not comparable to leash wearing.
Not sure why you pick these guests who sometimes sound a little too pushy with their take, Dan. Nobody wants to be converted to anything, hasn’t that got thru yet? Sure, as with Enfant above, finding love and keeping fetish is the ultimate goal, and good luck to the LW in finding what Enfant has found.
Not thru coercion, or wait till the emotional hooks are in. This is not a mainstream kink, and to ensure nobody’s time is wasted, it needs to be disclosed near the beginning of any connection.


LavaGirl, by identity I meant self-image and role in the relationship. I don't know how I could explain this to someone who doesn't share it, but "being a person who wears diapers" has an intense metaphorical resonance to me. It means something about who and what I am, though it's very difficult to put into words. Regardless, the bottom line is I feel more truly myself when I'm wearing them. More comfortable in my skin, less phony. (And while it's admittedly a bit awkward and embarrassing, I'm not unhappy about it. A vanilla person once told me, "I would KILL to have something that made me feel that way.")

As for the thing about bodily waste, you're right, but I think not everyone puts the same weight of importance on that. I mean, anal sex includes santorum. For some people, that concept is icky enough to take anal sex off the table; for others it isn't. If you hang around with dogs or cats or babies, sometimes there will be poop to clean up, and it isn't pleasant, but people do often consider those relationships worthwhile anyway - and with adult babies, it's a LOT more optional, I assure you.

The business about "converting" isn't about coercion or manipulation, it's about a person who isn't already into this kink - but for whom it isn't off the table - learning to appreciate it. It might not be a thing you could do, but there are people who can and do.


Hm. I don't know the answer to that.

What I can say about my own psychological background is that when I was very young, I put a stupid amount of pressure on myself to act older, and I was always trying to present myself as more sophisticated and mature than I really was. Polysyllabic vocabulary, learned to play chess at age three, idolized Mr. Spock, used to practice his eyebrow-lift in the mirror. When older kids told jokes I didn't understand, I would memorize them so I could tell them too, without ever bothering to find out what was funny about them - the appearance of sophistication was the goal for me, all by itself. I can only speculate, but I think maybe the obsession with infancy cropped up as an emotional backlash against that - a desire to find and express my real self in the exact polar opposite of sophistication.

I mean, people love babies, love them unconditionally, but they don't really respect them, you know? Nobody's like, "hey, let's ask the baby about this, I want to hear HIS opinion." And babies are completely fine with that. They just go right back to licking sand or whatever.

I think maybe for me, infancy is a deeply-ingrained metaphor for just being myself and giving zero fucks. And, when I developed sexuality later, that turned out to also be sexy. But I was yearning for it long before sex entered the picture - before I even started kindergarten.

Many years ago I was seeing a therapist, who assigned me daily affirmations to recite to myself in a mirror to encourage a greater sense of self-worth. I could barely bring myself do it. I felt like a goddamn Stuart-Smalley idiot, looking in the mirror and saying those things. But I tried anyway, every day, cringe though I might. And then one day I did the affirmations while I was wearing a diaper... and it was completely fine. Not only did I not feel embarrassed about them, I believed them. So I guess that's what it means for me.


DDLG, your mom makes fun of disabled people? She sounds like a muuuuch bigger asshole than your Daddy. Also, listen to Dan and stop telling her about your sex life.


@31 I'd argue that urban vs rural is a class difference. The urban working class is predominately black, latino, and southeast asian, the rural working class is mostly latino and white. But rural latinos tend to be VERY conservative and highly religious and end up split due to immigration issues, basic racism coming from the right; but also strongly support agri protectionism that republicans offer.

@34 Well, so far I'm batting 1.000 on getting a second appearance. I mean I suppose if you're like "uhhhh take this you dumb slut!" or whatever right out of the grossest porno you can imagine you might not get another opportunity, but I personally think it's hot and sexy and not intrinsically degrading (not any more so than someone putting their penis INSIDE OF YOU in terms of power plays - how much more vulnerable could you get??), and I'd like to think that sexy-positive feeling comes through when I ask. If they say no, c'est la vie. Almost all of us like SOMETHING sexually that their partner might not.


Sporty, the rural latinos in Texas vote Dem. The entire valley is blue. The latinos who vote Republican are usually wealthier, suburbanites, etc. I don't know what national trends for Latinos look like because I can't find much data that separates them from whites (since latino is an ethinicity and not a race), but in Texas you are dead wrong.

Black people do not vote Republican regardless- up and down the class line, rural or urban, they do not vote Republican- nearly at all lately. Asians are the same- about 20% vote Republican regardless of anything else. I don't know what you mean by SE Asians specifically as opposed to Asians in general- I've never seen any national data that separates Asians like that.

The only variable is white people- and class does not significantly affect how they vote (it's split about 50/50 the whole way, up and down)- if you control for region and age, the class distinction disappears. Keep in mind also that rural does not mean poor. It means you live outside a major urban area. Rich white people in the country clubs are just as likely to have voted for Trump as poor white people in small towns. Old rich white people are just as likely to have voted for Trump as old poor white people. The idea that working class white people are responsible for Trump is just not true. (Well the white part is). It's a liberal myth- an urban media narrative. This way liberals can continue to sneer at the flyover states and not look in their own suburbs and corporate boards. And it gives lazy op-ed writers an easy narrative- fly to some red state and report on the natives- etc. Easier than looking into Dem failures in red states.


Also the racial makeup of the urban working class depends on where you live. There are several cities where it is predominantly white- including in Seattle and Portland.


Enfant, yes, some who are fine with this fetish, and that’s great for those who have it.
My beef is with Dan and his guest and their talking of converting people. That talk spooks me.


Daddy, there's a lot of mythologizing around the election, but the good thing is that loads of research has been done on it. Several universities and then the biggies like Pew, plus most the media outlets. So you have to compare a lot since they have different methodologies, but the results are roughly the same from all of them so that seems pretty reliable to me.

As for who voted and who didn't, that is very easy to find out and the most objective data there is because it does not involve any anonymity nor selfreports. You can literally look at the facts of who is eligible, who is registered, who voted, who stayed home. The answer is that nearly HALF the adult population did not vote- about 10% because they were not eligible, the rest because they are disaffected.

Regarding turn out, this is the mythologizing that I'm talking about- that Trump turned out the white working class in huge numbers. There are a few things untrue about this.

1) Overall Turnout- The overall voter turn out was about the same in 2016 (almost 56% of eligible voters) as in 2012 (55% of eligible voters). In 2008 (Obama and McCain), the overall turnout was 58%. So it's just not true that excitement over Trump (or the desire to reject him) was anything near what it was for Obama's first run.

2) Republican Vote- of that, Trump got 46% of the vote. In 2012, Romney got 47%. In 2008, McCain got 46%. Therefore, Republican voting habits are pretty static. They come out consistently in the same numbers. It is completely false that Trump turned people out moreso than any other Rep candidate. If you look at whole numbers, it appears that more people voted for Trump, but the voting population ALSO increased. If you look at percentages, it is exactly the same.

3) Democratic Vote- of that Hilary got 48%. In 2012 and 2008, Obama got 51% and 53% accordingly. Therefore, you can conclude that Democrats do not lose votes to Republicans. Their numbers vary for three reasons: A) the disaffected- if you increase the overall turnout, Democrats pick up the vote. B) third parties- people who might vote Dem are more willing to vote third party if they don't like the candidate. C) voter disenfranchisement- people who face various obstacles to voting typically vote Dem when they can.

OK so I keep going on about this because this is why the Dem strategy of going after swing voters or moderate Reps is total bullshit. It has never worked and it will never work. Republicans are consistent. Dems do not get votes from them. They are not the demographic the Dems should cater to at all.

So yes, Hilary failed to motivate her natural base. But Trump did not motivate his any more so than did Romney or McCain. He won because the Democrats failed- not because he did anything unique or special.

Regarding income, this also really matters. First off, it is true that a majority of poor whites voted for Trump. But a majority of whites voted for Trump in just about every category. A majority of middle income whites also voted for Trump. A majority of rich whites also voted for Trump, etc. There is nothing special nor unique about poor whites or the white working class. In fact, the median white Trump voter earns in the 55-100 range (and lives in a rural area where this goes a longer way).

On top of that, poor and working class people generally vote less than wealthier people. More wealthy whites voted for Trump than poor/working class whites.

And then if you control for other factors (like age) the class discrepancy basically disappears. More older white people voted for Trump than younger white people. More older people vote in general than younger people. Older people usually have more money than younger people.

Then add the urban/rural split to this and the class stuff becomes entirely correlation. Same with education btw but that's a different topic.

So I'm not saying that the white working class didn't mostly support Trump- they did. But they were not more likely to support him than were wealthy white people. This idea that he has rallied the white working class is entirely mythology. It's a media narrative.


@48. Dadddy. Well, women's clothes are 'unmanly' for transvestites, AMAB genderqueer people and transwomen. This is the point. We're shunning, we're repulsed by, that role, its psychic requirements, its baggage. We feel more ourselves presenting as women. It’s who we are, a projection of who we are, even as the idea of being more ourselves AS women complicates that of identity just as something given.

Thank you to Enfant for his (?) enlightening accounts of this fetish.


Dadddy @41: I think most non AB/DL enthusiasts would assume the AB/DL kinkster would want to use their diapers for their intended purpose. BABE/others, if this is not the case, please be very clear about this! Many more people would be OK with indulging this kink if they knew no bodily excretions would be involved.

Dadddy @42: If she says yes, that's a pretty good sign that you two are compatible. Most won't be down for that sort of thing. So if you don't mind scaring off (and grossing out) the majority of women, go ahead and ask.

Enfant @44: Sounds like BABE should be armed with some useful links whenever he "comes out" about his kink.

Sporty @51: I guess your general vibe puts off the women who wouldn't want cum on their face, particularly on a first date, long before you get them into bed. Just as mine most likely deters any man who'd ask. How convenient! :)


@58 you'll change your mind


Sportlandia, that reads like a flirt. Oh my.
Dan, I wanted to say last week, think that’s when it was up, re your best relationship advice. Which was to cup the balls. I think that’s perfect advice, because the balls are the most fragile, and precariously placed, part of human anatomy.
For those not into cupping balls, it’s an act of shared vulnerability.


Perhaps not a useful flirt I’ll add, given the woman Fan is. Still it’s fun to watch the play.
Which reminds me, I haven’t checked who won the tennis. I saw a little of it. Dust in Nadal’s eyes, and he looked so smart. As always.


Since Griz scored first post this week, I will congratulate the Lucky @69 Award winner in advance. Congrats and may a golden shower of good news flow your way soon to the coveted winner. :)


Mizz Liz may be delighted to hear that, in the stream discussions I hear, about the last acceptable bit of bullying is to bash the coastal states - rather indiscriminately, too.


Ms Lava - There has been a considerable Laver presence this year; he even happened to arrive at the same time as and take an impromptu photograph with your Ashleigh, who, I think, goes to #2 if she wins tomorrow. I recall seeing both finalists in the junior draws of majors.

Apparently, Roger didn't do anything particularly wrong; Rafael just gave the sort of performance one might expect from someone whose record at the tournament in question was 91-2.


Re diapers and waste -- I bet an ABDL might be able to build a happy life with a partner who would put diapers on him (pronoun for convenience) and gently tease him, but not remove the used diapers.


HaHaHaHa, talent for shooting a load in the face.
‘It takes talent to do that well.’ R&H, Carousel.
I’m with Fan, so that’s two of us.
Where do you meet your partners MrD? Like this is not standard procedure. I hope. Rude as fuck to even ask a woman on a first date.
‘ Hey sweetie, you wanna cop a face load, eh, ‘
No thank you sir!


Mr Venn. Roger and Serena are champions of the highest class. Rafa is a freak. Nobody before has been like Nadal. I loved watching the guys in the 70’s. McEnroe with his tantrums and Borg with his cool.


Must you hunter.


@69 Hearty congrats to LavaGirl for nailing the Lucky @69 Award! Savor your coveted riches. Here's hoping you are surrounded by delightful decadence soon.
@70: Pissed that you didn't get a golden shower (pun intended)? Maybe next week.:)


@72 LavaGirl: Agreed and seconded.


IME it's pretty common for a guy to ask where you would like him to cum (assuming he's in a position to not be cumming in a condom in the first place. I'm not a fan of someone deliberately cumming in my face. As I've stated before, it's fine that blow jobs get messy and if my face is doing there anyway doing whatever I might be doing, some cum to the face is normal and fine. But to be all deliberate about it, especially if it requires me to sit there and pretend to be excited to wait for a load to drip on my face, uh big no. But I'll split the difference and say that in my experience, what seems most common was to ask where he can/should cum rather than to ask for a particular thing- this again assuming it's not already obvious based on position. I have no doubt mileage varies and I also don't think anyone is lying. I think it's true that people tend to flirt and then hook up with certain attitudes and people adapt accordingly. I was far more likely to be so clear about what I want than to be in a position to have a guy suggest such a thing in the first place, so who knows how theydve acted with other women, etc. So my guess is that both BDF and Sporty are correct- but neither should generalize- we are the variable accounting for the differences in our experiences.


Sporty @59: You may like getting jizz on your face but that doesn't mean everyone does.

Dadddy @67: Oh, I just make stuff up, do I? No, dude, I don't. Google is your friend too:
Most women do not like cumshots to the face. Now you know.
I spoke with one ex on this subject, who was unable to come in a vagina (like the subject of yesterday's SLLOTD). He said out of dozens of women, he had only met one who enjoyed cum on the face, and she was into being humiliated. But I couldn't possibly know anything about the topic, hmm. Again, your demeanor is attracting a certain type of woman. It's no surprise that you meet more women into facials and I meet more men into being pegged than are represented in the general population. EmmaLiz is correct, you shouldn't take YOUR experience as typical either. We've got three out of three women here who've said no thanks. Any more straight/bi women want to chime in?

Lava @69: Rude indeed, and congrats on the lucky number.


Cum on the face can be fun (1 more data point), but warn me so I can close my eyes. And try to stay off the eyes anyway -- it burns. If you're aiming, cheeks, nose & chin are better.


Erica @77: You're an out masochist, thanks for supporting my point.


Ms Lava - It appears to have been a horrible day for the French tennis association. They boxed themselves into a corner by selling the men's semifinals as separate tickets. After Wednesday's washout pushed the women's semifinals from Thursday to Friday, those matches were moved off Chatrier and, strangely (one would have expected they'd have followed each other on Lenglen), played concurrently. This put Konta-Vondrousova onto the new Court Simonne-Mathieu, and had Konta, the eventual loser, complaining about sexism.

But there was worse to follow. The whole day had high winds, a condition which has always been disastrous for Djokovic. The second semifinal split sets, with Thiem a break up in the third set, when a shower caused a rain delay at about 6:30 pm. The shower was brief, but play was suspended for the day at that point, requiring a huge refund to ticket holders for the second semifinal (who did not get to see one completed match), and giving Djokovic a major reprieve. To make it worse, there was no further rainfall, so that they lost about an hour and a half of play.

That reminded me of the preferential treatment Djokovic received in 2012 at the US Open, when he and Ferrer were the second semi-final. That was another day of high wind. In the Murray-Berdych semifinal, Murray was penalized when his hat blew off, but eventually won the match. Ferrer won the first set and had a big lead in the second when the match was suspended due to an impending thunderstorm approaching. The committee had known the storm was coming, and could have put Djokovic-Ferrer on Armstrong to avoid its being the fifth year in a row the men's final had to be moved from Sunday to Monday. In a similar situation in 2008 with bad weather approaching, at first they hoped Federer would win his semi quickly so that Murray-Nadal could follow on Ashe and finish, but then, as bad weather approached, rushed the other match onto Armstrong, too late to finish, but in a way sufficient to disturb Nadal enough for him to drop two sets and not be able to recover the next day. Djokovic has also had some highly fortuitous optional closings of the roof on Centre Court and Rod Laver Arena (as has Ms Williams, S on RLA).

Meanwhile, the women's final is due on court in under two hours. Thiem lost his advantage when he was broken at 4-2, but broke again to win the third set 7-5. Djokovic has just gotten a break in the fourth set. The fifth set has no tie-break. If that goes long, the WTA will be furious. (Two more breaks, and Djokovic will serve at 3-2.)

I remember comments during the Wawrinka-Tsitsipas match that Federer, who'd already won his match quickly and would play the winner, was greatly enjoying their going to a grueling fifth set. Yesterday evening, I saw comments suggesting that Nadal would be similarly happy for the other finalist to have had a doubly disrupted schedule (the men's bottom half was not inconvenienced at all, playing quarters Tuesday and the semi Friday on schedule, but the top half had Wednesday's quarters pushed to Thursday besides having to finish the semi today), but I don't think Nadal enjoys that sort of luck the way Federer does.


I like come on my face. But only from guys who spell it 'come.'


@60 it's trash talk. Get out of AU sometime!

My experience is after a woman gets off, they're in to everything. Daddy has it right: women don't want facials, until they've gotten off and you haven't and you say you wanna. Maybe because most peeps are used to men-cum-first sex they're not having sex with post orgasmic women.

My other experience is that women are highly self-censorious - but once they g off the filter goes away, and you learn women are just as dirty and perverted as men. The number of men and women who like a facial is probably pretty similar. In that other thread everyone's like "dudes LOOOVE squirt they wanna bottle or and drink it" and over here everyone's like naaah women don't like cum. C'mon y'all get real with yourselves!


Sporty @81: Not liking cum ON OUR FACES is not the same thing as not liking cum. EricaP @77 gives a clue: if you're coming on our face, we have to close our eyes. If you're gonna come so you can see it, we want to see it too. By aiming it at our faces you're depriving us of that pleasure.

Sure, people who've just come are blissed out enough to let anything slide, pun intended. That doesn't mean they enjoy it or that it's ethical to spring that on someone who's in a vulnerable state. I could probably ask you to lend me $500 immediately post orgasm and you'd say yes. Hmm, maybe I should try that.

And don't flatter yourself. Most sex is she-comes-first sex. Even those lamentable "orgasm gap" figures report that two thirds of women have come by the time you do. "I'm such a great fuck, of course I can get away with this." C'mon, get real with yourself! Did you read the link I posted? The number of men vs women who like facials is very different. Even if you're talking about the number of men vs women who like to receive them -- gay men are far more into this than het women, probably because they have the option of experiencing this act the other way round.

Anyway, why would we be lying about this? What ulterior motive could there possibly be for discouraging men from doing something we like? Makes no sense.


@Bi @82: "Most sex is she-comes-first sex"? Really? I find that surprising.

It's not always clear at what point generalizations are fine--certainly they are often useful overall, and it's fair to make them a lot of them time--and at what point they start to grate. But in the case of this thread I'm slightly irked. On the board so far we have three women who don't like come on their face and two who do. Hardly an unbiased sample, of course, but still, I'm not sure that's clear-cut enough to make statements asserting that asking someone, post-orgasm, if they want this is somehow unethical.

I'll go a bit farther and say your attitude about this verging on slut-shaming--at the men who enjoy it, and by extension, the women they are sleeping with. Usually I am fine with your tone so I only mention this because it seems off to me. I assume it's because the other side consists of a couple male posters you generally disagree with, but note that Erica and I are also on that side, so this is not just "guys being clueless" or something. It's just a different preference, albeit possibly a rarer one than your own.

The link you posted, by the way, was information from a survey question asking on which spot people "most want" their partner to come. For women, face seemed to be about 12%, which isn't huge but certainly isn't vanishingly small; we're talking one in eight or nine. And it gives no information about women who might most enjoy it on their breasts, for example, but also are fine with facials. That would presumably up the numbers somewhat.


Ciods @83: I certainly don't want to shame you if that's your thing. Yes, of course I'm being more defensive about this because it was Sporty who brought it up as a perfectly okay first-date thing to ask for. That doesn't seem very respectful to me. Of course mileage varies, and if you've had a discussion about sex preferences before actually having sex then you have a better idea of what the other person might like. But it IS a minority preference and as such should be held back until you know the person a bit better, IMO.

The link I posted also has a further data link at the bottom. Sure, lots of women whose "favourite" cum spot isn't their face might be perfectly okay with it. But the further data link (, pardon the pun, blows Sporty's theory that facials are equally popular with men and with women. I agree the data focuses on "favourite place" rather than "acceptable/enjoyable place," which is unfortunate. My point is that it's a minority preference for women, and just as I wouldn't bring out a strap-on on a first date (unless they had requested that), I don't think men should spring this on unsuspecting post-orgasmic women.

As for "most sex is she-comes-first sex," 63 percent of women are having an orgasm every time they have sex, and IME close to 100 percent of men stop having sex after they've come, so the logical conclusion is that the women are usually coming first. I think the "make sure she comes first" message has got through to most men, which is a good thing.


To be clear, I have no problem with people doing whatever they want to do. I only have a problem with Sporty's rounding the percentage of women who will be happy to receive a facial up to 100%, when in truth it is considerably lower, and with making this a first-date/first-fuck activity, presumably with no prior discussion of same. That no one has balked thus far would seem to be down to his attitude filtering out those who would.


@Bi @84: Thanks for your clarification, I retract my irk at your tone. And now that I'm less irked, I'll agree that first-date (or first time in bed, say) does seem slightly optimistic, even to me.

About the women-come-first: my surprise is because it's more often the other way 'round, for me; maybe I have partners who are unusually adept at continuing to be sexually active/interested after they orgasm?


@81, Sportlandia. We have trash talkers here too, we call them bogans . Don’t have to leave the country to find men like you, sweetie.
Thanks for that Mr Venn. Yes it seems at the AUS Open, that Federer was always playing at night. He’s a particular favourite here.
Thanks Grizelda and Fan.


If you men are so keen to come on faces, why don’t you play the ‘how far can I shoot game’, and cream your own faces. Let’s see how you like sticky sperm all over your faces.
It’s like when some men pester women, to get anal. Please mate, you go first.


BiDanFan @84 "63 percent of women are having an orgasm every time they have sex, and IME close to 100 percent of men stop having sex after they've come."

I mostly orgasm with a vibrator, after my partner has come and the PIV is over. I don't think 63% of women have an orgasm during intercourse. I also don't think men "stop having sex after they've come," if you broaden the concept of sex to include fondling & dirty talk to support the woman getting off.

"Sporty who brought it up as a perfectly okay first-date thing to ask for. That doesn't seem very respectful to me"

I think it is actually preferable to alert people to one's kinks early on -- especially if you prefer to build your sex life around said kinks. The flip side is that one has to be able to take no for an answer, of course.


Is it a kink Erica, that’s hard to believe. Sometimes men like to try it on, no kink involved.
Sure for those who are into it as part of their sexual experiences, for me it would be an offensive request and I’d be guessing the man had issues with women.
No man has ever asked to come on my face, though I have used come occasionally as a moisturiser.


@Bi @84: I just looked further at that link and I'm even more intrigued by the differences in the percentages of men vs. women who want the guy to come in the girl's mouth. Apparently there's a 4:1 ratio on that (and 38% women say that's their least favorite place), versus only 3.3:1 for facials! Not sure I would have guessed that. Would you? And would you consider that rude to ask for on a first date? I think, were I guessing, fewer women would consider that a rude request...despite apparently there being a higher chance that the guy wants that when the girl doesn't. Odd.

I was also interested (and slightly bummed) by how the statistics on how much women find external ejaculation a turn-on shift as the relationship progresses. Men's numbers (percent who find it a turn-on) seem to decrease a bit over time, but the women's numbers decrease a lot more. I don't even really have a decent conjecture about why. Is this one of those things where women do, in fact, want novelty more than men, and so things that they were into at first begin to pall over time? Or is it the more depressing thought that they fake interest early on to intrigue men? (Although, would they fake it on a survey?) Or what? What am I missing here?


Is this a move which has become mainstream via porn. We all know how well those porn makers love women and think of their pleasure.
You got what you want Mr D.. oh.. talking about your sad old cock again. You are so obvious.
And no it’s not what we call masturbation in Australia, kick your brain in.


There you go Mr Venn. Ash Barty, an Australian Woman, winning the French Open.


Indeed, Ms Lava - the first since 1973, too, a longer gap than since the last French player. And one can't do much better than receive the trophy from Ms Evert. I suppose tomorrow it will be Mr Laver, for the 50th anniversary of the last male Grand Slam. (When Ms Graf makes a similar presentation in 2038, I wonder if there will have been any more calendar Slams.)

It was nice to see that Ms Safina has returned for Legends events. Too bad they don't do mixed; I remember how thrilled she was to play Hopman Cup with her brother. Of all the players who deserved a kinder coach, she ranks right at the top.

Also grand to see Sr Kuerten in attendance, and still drawing the compliments that recalled to mind my #2 ranked McEnRant of all time, which occurred during the final the second time he won, when his opponent was clearly vanquished and he was playing out the last few games in full flight. But for Mr McEnroe, Something Was Very Wrong. Guga had cut his hair, and gotten rid of his curls, which went so perfectly with his personality and life on the beach. His close-cropped hair style just didn't suit him AT ALL.


Who's up for a Hunsky? Lava?

Griz met the lovely actress / author, Meg Tilly tonight at Fairhaven's Village Books promoting her latest novels--what a treat! Such a vivacious, personable lady full of humor and wonderful stories (she had a good one to share about Jack Nicholson). I can't wait to read one of her latest signed books, Solace Island. WOW--meeting Chloe from The Big Chill in the flesh! I'm going to have to see her Oscar-nominated role in Agnes of God and most recent film with Brad Pitt, War Machine (2017). I'm intrigued that she played Brad's wife. Lucky Meg.


@97 Den and everyone please forgive me for veering off topic in this thread. I'm still in awe. Meg Tilly is so cool.


And this week's lucky Hunsky winner IS (see what I'm doing here?)........


EricaP @90: I suppose I am picturing the typical order of things as a man getting a woman off prior to PIV, since indeed most women don't come during. You're correct, though, that many men would be willing to cuddle their partners after coming so that the partner can get off too. Guess there really is less a "typical order of things" than I presume there to be!

I agree it seems a stretch to call it a kink, but sure, if the only way a guy can get off is on a face then disclose and negotiate that early.

Ciods @92: That was the most surprising data point for me too! I felt sure that while a small percentage of women would say face was their favourite place to receive a cum shot, many more would say it was their least favourite, and I was indeed surprised to see "in the mouth" was less popular. I would rather swallow it too, no goo to risk getting in my eye or have to clean out of my hair afterwards, and most men's doesn't taste THAT bad. Also, ejaculation into the mouth generally requires the participation of the cum-ee in a way that a facial does not. I would consider "will you give me a blowjob" less rude than "may I come on your face." Perhaps because 26% of the people in that poll consider a facial degrading. No corresponding data on how many people consider blowjobs degrading, but I bet it's fewer -- and you have the option of spitting if you don't like the taste.

As for why being come upon becomes less popular into a relationship, that seemed strange as well. Perhaps because external ejaculations can often require participation (see Friday's SLLOTD) by someone who is not getting physical pleasure out of the act, whereas PIV is pleasant even if it doesn't lead to orgasm, and requires less effort. Perhaps NRE makes everything about a new partner seem that much sexier. Or perhaps reproductive instincts (for those who have them) kick in and she subconsciously wants the cum inside where it can do its job?

Lava @94: It sure is, and the survey even says so. People who watch porn like facials far more than people who don't. No surprise at all there.


Thanks for the setup, Griz, and congrats on meeting one of your heroes!


Dadddy/Sporty: Yeah, ok, I'll allow that by the time you get to the end of a first session of sex you may have a good idea of whether the particular woman would be down for this sort of thing. And y'all did say ask, so I'm guessing you'd graciously take no as an answer. (I personally would counter-offer my tits, if such a request were made.) Perhaps it's because I've been socialised female that my instinct is that it's rude to ask, particularly in the moment, for something there's a very good chance they may find distasteful -- I know that we often say yes to things we don't really want to do, because of said socialisation, and it seems that post-orgasmic agreeability compounds that. I can picture women saying yes and then feeling disgusted with both of you. But perhaps I am indeed thinking of this as something porn has encouraged men to pressure unwilling women to do.

Interesting how our experiences differ. I for one find it completely alien that anyone would shame a man for being unable to come, so long as he was sanguine about it, yet I believe Sporty's accounts of this happening to him frequently. Is there a correlation, I wonder. Sporty just magically finds the cum fetishists? :)


@Hunter: A girl's gotta have standards.


Regarding the facial, though I do think there's a degradation aspect that I'm not into, that's not the thing that is least appealing about it to me. It's having to be all deliberate about it- like you have to get into a position in which it's possible (gravity and all) than I'm supposed to sit there, ostensibly holding still with my mouth open and staring up at a dick until the jizz appears? And then apparently pretend that's exciting? I just don't have the attention span for that, I like to do things with my mouth/hands- even though some guys need to do it themselves at the end, I'd still rather have my mouth doing something else rather than just hanging open or smiling while I stare at their dicks- the logistics of at the last minute getting to the position where my face is available all down below, and then when the facial happens, like I'm supposed to clap with joy like a child looking at fireworks or something. It's just boring and feels stupid and unnatural, IMO. Which is totally different if I just happen to be down there with balls in my mouth or something when the jizz appears and then gets on my face for whatever reason, etc. So it's not that I'm squeamish about it, but yes also I'm surprised about the least favorite place being the mouth as it's definitely the most convenient, and no cleanup afterwards.


@Emma: Although I understand that many people find the idea degrading--and that, for some, that can be part of the turn-on--for me, it's slightly like when women say doggy-style is degrading. Okay, I mean, if that's how you feel; degradation is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. And I'm sure it can be done in a way that feels degrading! Given your description, I think I would agree more that what you're picturing sounds something between degrading and boring. But who says you can't do anything with your mouth and hands? In my experience it's pretty interactive--a combination of hand-job, blow-job, and the guy masturbating (during which I'm likely to be interacting with the parts of his shaft/balls that he's not touching himself: licking, touching, light or hard pressure/tugging, depending on the guy). I even enjoy just breathing hard on him in this process, knowing he feels my breath. And then, yay! A happy ending, with me right there in the midst of it.

I saw in the stats from the link Bi posted that I am apparently in the smallest-percentage group for females who like it: married, and I don't watch porn (although I'm not against it, it just does nothing for me). Apparently that puts me in the 5%. But maybe that's also why, to me, facials are fun and frolicsome, and not semi-hostile? Because I'm not trying to replicate something from porn?

@Hunter: English is rife with homonyms. There's no need for cutesy alternate spellings. I like my sex dirty and my writing clean.


That’s so sweet MrD. Don’t you think ciods. So so sweet. A line offa your profile eh, Mr D?
I hate seeing ejaculate written as cum. Totally with Dan on this one.


Mr Venn, an Aussie in women’s and men’s French Open finals. Pretty cool. One winner and one loser. Hail the Supremo Fafa Nadal.
Ash Barty is also an indigenous woman, who viewed Evonne Goolagong as her idol. Now homophobe Margaret Court is no longer the last Australian to win the FO.


Rafa, sorry mate.


Congrats Fan, enjoy your good fortune.
Nadal is not my mate, of course, he is though a man of distinction.
He has these body rituals he plays, before every hit of the ball. Pulls his briefs down in the back, that’s the first one. Then another couple of actions round his face. He wears great colour combo clothes and is disciplined and very humble.
Mr Venn, Rafa has no children. The other elite men and now Serena, do. He stays so focused on his craft.


@98: Apologies to Dan for my misspelling. I was still starstruck while typing, and can't blame my typo on alcohol.
@100 & @101 BiDanFan: Major congrats on scoring the Lucky Hunsky! Savor your coveted riches proudly.


Ms Lava - And Ms Barty could join her idol in winning the French-Wimbledon double to get started. She should have quite an excellent chance. It reminds me of Bud Collins' correct prediction that grass would be Ms Graf's best surface, because there her backhand slice became a weapon.

As for today's final, the artistry of the first set was dazzling, both for the combination of offence and defence from both players and for the work on their shots. Hard courts are a poor substitute for clay and grass. For Hr Thiem to win here one year would be as satisfying as, for different reasons, Ms Novotna's win at Wimbledon. As for Sr Nadal, his ability to impose himself every time the match looked as if it would become interesting really shone through. That impeccable start to the third set (very similar to the final in Rome) was classic.

One thing that jumped out when they were showing the career statistics of the Big Three was that of the three only Sr Nadal has won more than half the majors in which he's reached the semifinals. Ms Williams, S has also done so.


Hunter: Come is a verb, cum is a noun. But I would not kick an otherwise appealing partner out of bed for getting it wrong.

EmmaLiz @107: You've summed up my thoughts about it pretty accurately. I suppose one could masturbate while awaiting the cum shot, but there's also the issue of having one's eyes open so one can see when it starts to happen and thus risking the unpleasantness of jizz in the eye. So you're supposed to just lie there, eyes wide shut, awaiting a warm damp surprise. Nothing appealing about that.

Dadddy @109: So if she hadn't been the one to offer, that would ruin the appeal for you?

Lava @110: Sorry, but Dan is with me in spelling cum as a noun.