quote:

Know anything about prison sex? The penetrator is the "male," and the penetrated is the "bitch." The bitch is often forced to dress like a woman, wear make-up, etc. To most outsiders, the two are equally involved in a homosexual relationship, but within the prison world, only the penetrated partner loses any gender status.

A really excellent point Lordandmaster ... sissy sooo wishes he had said that, Oscar! But if You don't mind sissy asking, Sir, where exactly did YOU learn all about the recondite arts of incarceration in-arse-serration ? You posted with such knowledge and authority on this topic, Sir, that it sent shivers down sissy's spine and just got him to thinking a little ...

quote:

It's because most human societies associate masculinity with strength and dominance, and femininity with weakness and submission. That's not true across the board, of course, but it still should not be very surprising that a great number of male subs want to be forced to endure some form of gender humiliation.

That observation is right on the money, too, Lordandmaster! Let sissy add his own two scents worth to that thought (that's Shalimar and Channel N°5 for those of you that are gift conscious <giggles>) ...

When one crossdresses in public, one is somewhat limited to the locations that one can safely go. You can slip into your favorite frilly frock and mince on over to the local redneck bar - but you might never return! Or you could go for a stroll in the nearest shopping mall on a Saturday afternoon and drop in at the Chuck E. Cheese franchise - and get yourself arrested for corrupting minors! So most of us TVs usually end up hanging out in TG-friendly bars and restaurants, most of which are gay owned or, at least, are fundamentally targeted at a gay clientele. So this sissy has spent more than a fair share of his time hanging out in gay bars and venues in the DuPont Circle area of Washington D.C. Before going to any bar for the first time (unless sissy ended up at that bar for the first time as part of a crowd - where there is safety in numbers) sissy would first case any joint he intended to visit as lola dressed as his normal drab self. So sissy has quite a bit of experience in having patronized the same gay venue dressed both as his drab male self and his drag lola self. This has given him some unique perspectives on the kind of mix of GLBTQ folk and their hetero/vanilla admirers that frequent such locations.

The particular experience that is pertinent here is the following. lola Has been hit on by all kinds of gentlemen and rough trade in these venues. A guy in a dress in a gay bar or restaurant - or, in lola's particular case, usually a drag revue bar because they are sooo much more fun - is automatically presumed to be gay. Well duh! But this isn't true, because many of the other crossdressed clientele in such locations are also hetero / bisexual TV/TG/TS gals too. People do not seem to realize that a large portion of the "gay drag queens" that are reported as participating in the Stonewall riots in New York in 1969 were actually "hetero / bi TVs" such as lola that were using the Stonewall bar as their own safe-haven. The distinction between "hetero TV" and "gay DQ" is a subtlety that would have been totally lost on the1969 television (damn ... can't abbreviate that term in a post such as this one without causing confusion amongst the readers! ) and newspaper audience to which these events were reported. In fact, it is a subtlety that is lost on many of the homophobes and transphobes on this message board.

Now most gay men are gay because they prefer to be with a masculine partner ... they are attracted to a masculine man in the same way that a woman is (as has been discussed elsewhere on this thread). Only a small proportion of gay men are attracted to TVs / drag queens as potential long term sexual partners. The male strip bar - where male strippers (who are NOT necessarily gay, BTW, but they all have great male bods) parade on stage or along the top of the bar as female strippers do in the comparable vanilla nudie bars - probably gets ten times the traffic as the drag revue bar gets in those gay establishments that host both kinds of entertainment. That is because 90% or more of gay guys (hmm, another statistic on this thread made up off of the top of lola's wig - but it's about that %) prefer guys and their male bodies to guys pretending to be gals. But gay guys are still guys after all, and like hetero guys, they are somewhat ruled by the smaller of their two heads, so if they are feeling horny and want a quick fix (i.e., a one night stand) then they might much more readily hit on the drag queens and CDs that are available. But the ideal partner that a truly homosexual male dreams about is NOT a drag queen ... it is another perfect male partner (perfect for them in their own terms), just as a heterosexual woman similarly dreams of her "Prince Charming" male partner.

Sooo, anyways, lola would hang out with his DQ and TV friends in the drag revue bar, rather than the male strip bar, if there was a choice. The profile of the males that would frequent the drag revue bar in preference to the other one, and that would hit on lola or the other DQs / TVs he was with, were as follows: (1) they were gay and horny and in search of a quick fix as described above; (2) they were gay but they were still struggling with coming to terms with their own homosexuality, so they preferred their partners feminized because it meant that they were a little less queer themselves (a kind of "plausible denial" scenario! <giggles>); (3) they were truly bisexual and bedded both males and females, so a DQ / TV fired on all cylinders for them ... they were attracted to the blend of both the masculine and the feminine traits that a guy in drag gives out (whether he be DQ, TV, TG or TS); (4) they were heterosexual but couldn't get a date (so a guy in a dress was the next best thing); (5) they were heterosexual but their heterosexuality was a fetish - this one needs a much longer explanation.

The type (5) heterosexual male is someone that loves everything that is feminine about a woman ... her clothes, her perfume, her mannerisms, etc. So much so that he is fixated on the appurtenances and accoutrements of the very feminine woman rather than the woman herself. He is a potential candidate for being a fetishistic TV himself except the idea has not yet occurred to him or he is too damned scared to go there himself. Since TVs and DQs tend to wear clothes that are much more overtly feminine that those that the average modern woman is normally willing to wear (ever since all women burnt their bras back in the sixties ), such a fetishistic male will frequently be more turned on by the DQ / TV and their over-the-top feminine appearance than by an attractive but more conservatively attired real woman standing beside them.

When a guy started hitting on sissy he would always ask him what he was and why he was so infatuated with lola. In virtually all cases sissy wasn't actually interested in his suitor, but when you are crossdressed and in your "girlie" headspace, being pursued by a man only adds to your femme feelings (and it's also the ultimate compliment to your crossdressing). Not only that, lola is pretty fiesty, fun-loving and playful and he really enjoys sexually-oriented innuendo (sissy just loves those Italian butt plugs! ), banter and flirtation. It's all harmless fun, isn't it? Besides, as every woman probably knows, if you don't flirt with your suitor your only other choice is to leave the bar and go elsewhere - which in certain unfortunate cases is indeed the preferable option!

Now guys did NOT identify to lola that they were in categories (1) through (5) ... they merely identified as being hetero, bi or gay ... mostly depending on what they thought lola wanted to hear. So finally lola reaches the crux of this post! Most of the South American suitors (we'll call them Hispanics for simplicity here, but that may be too narrow a classification) claimed that they were heterosexual. Even after lola asked them if they realized that he was a "guy in a dress" (lola did not for one moment think that they were fooled otherwise, but he had to hear that from their own mouths) they still insisted that they were heterosexual, and were even offended when lola suggested that since they wanted to take lola off to the back of their car or to some motel room to schtupp her in the worst way possible, they might actually be gay.

This happened too many times (well not THAT many times, geez, don't get the wrong idea here for chrissakes, what sissy meant was that it happened more than once or twice! ) for it to be a coincidence. What sissy eventually realized was that in South American Spanish / Portuguese / Hispanic culture, a guy is ONLY gay if he is penetrated. If you are the penetrating male then you are a stud and heterosexual ... no matter what you are sticking your Goddam dick in! In this cultural background, to be a penetrator of others (presumably of humans, but this may even carry over to sheep, however sissy's survey of the gay scene concluded before he could get that far in his investigations ) made you a heterosexual male! That observation is completely validated by Lordandmaster's posted opinion - or perhaps it's vice versa.

quote:

The great cuckolding wave is related to this, too. The male is supposed to be able to impose his exclusive right of access to his female partner; if he's less than fully male, he doesn't have the power to keep her exclusively for himself.

Well yes, Lordandmaster, sissy made that point in his own OP on this thread. Cuckoldry as a kinky turnon is driven by the same deep subconscious fear of emasculation / "being a failure as a man" that a desire for chastity play, sissy play and CBT play are also driven by. The trampling kink is probably also derived from this fear but it is not specifically focused on the existence / size / function / use of the male gonads in the same fashion as those other kinks that sissy previously addressed. The trampling fetish kinky male desires that he be thought a complete failure as a human being rather than as just a virile man ... such a big failure, in fact, that all he is worthy of is for other people to walk all over him. These kinksters self-identify as rugs and carpets just as TVs self-identify as sissies.

Also note that many guys into trampling want the Domme to walk all over their cocks with their spiked heels ... which is just another form of CBT and adds the desire to be perceived a "failed male" to the desire to be perceived as a "failed human"! That really isn't necessary as the concept "failed male" is subordinate to "failed human" ... but logic doesn't apply to how the subconscious works. It is similar to the gay connotations for the sissy ... "failure to perform with women" (because you prefer men) is subordinate to "failure as a male" and is really quite superfluous. Thus there are a lot of males into "sissy play" that find the idea of being sodomized (or any other kind of anal intrusion, such as butt plugs), or of having to suck the cocks of other males, to be total anathema, and consequently these are hard limits for them.

There is another kink out there that is somewhat uncommon and so sissy reckons that's why he has never seen it addressed by the BDSM interests taxonomy on the CollarMe web site, and so sissy isn't sure exactly what it is called. The sub male wants the Domme to squash bugs with Her heels in front of his face. He lies on the floor and the Domme squashes the bugs up close in front of him. This kink, like some forms of breath play, might be more Asian or Middle-Eastern in its origins. IsHO, this is clearly the trampling kink but with the sub male mentally projecting himself into the bug's situation. Does anyone else reading this know any more about this kink and have anything to add ... like WTF such a kink is called? Projectionism, perhaps ?

sissy maid lola




To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams

_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

quote:

She revealed she likes to sissify male subs as well as females.

You are indeed the person that introduced the concept of a Domme sissifying female subs as well as male subs to this sub-thread that Mistress Jasmyn felt a need to address in Her own post. sissy Didn't say that the idea is a core belief of your own - you, too, may feel the concept to be totally oxymoronic - he ONLY stated that the concept of the "sissification of women" (as discussed in this sub-thread) was introduced in YOUR post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola

Let sissy add his own two scents worth to that thought (that's Shalimar and Channel N°5 for those of you that are gift conscious <giggles>) ...

Channel #5 is my favorite too...They have the best weather lady I have ever seen :)

snipping some stuff here...

There is another kink out there that is somewhat uncommon and so sissy reckons that's why he has never seen it addressed by the BDSM interests taxonomy on the CollarMe web site, and so sissy isn't sure exactly what it is called. The sub male wants the Domme to squash bugs with Her heels in front of his face. He lies on the floor and the Domme squashes the bugs up close in front of him. This kink, like some forms of breath play, might be more Asian or Middle-Eastern in its origins. IsHO, this is clearly the trampling kink but with the sub male mentally projecting himself into the bug's situation. Does anyone else reading this know any more about this kink and have anything to add ... like WTF such a kink is called? Projectionism, perhaps ?

you know, lola, I have never heard anyone else mention this before, but I once spoke to a gentleman who had this kink. It was accompanied by another one, in which he imagined that he was very very tiny, or the woman was very very tall (His favorite movie was "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman). In the final moments of this fantasy, she would ingest him. I think it all falls under the designation of "squashability"

Domme: Let's talk about your likes and dislikes.
sub: I hate bondage, gags and cooking. I like femininization. But I really thrive on squashability :)
Best
Smythe







_____________________________

Do not consider painful what is good for you.
Euripides

(in reply to sissymaidlola)

quote:

Well, damn!, sissy is right! Sis, you're supposed to interpret what I MEAN and not what I SAY.

Yes, you are absolutely right that the words are written, but I left a couple out which changed the meaning and set off a digression which I hadn't intended. What I had wished to say was that she (the domme) likes to sissify males and dominate females as well.

Sorry, folks. My intention wasn't to mislead you.

Translation: My bad, sissy. I can't write worth a shit otherwise I would be better able to say what I mean and mean what I say.

quote:

Bad sub! Correcting doms and all! (laughing)

sissy Is NOT at all a bad sub, Petruchio. Read his tag line. sissy Is NOT submissive to you, nor owned by you ... sissy is a free agent on these boards. If your pet dog bit a burglar climbing through your bedroom window and scared him off, you would say "good dog" and reward him. If the same dog bit you, you would say "bad dog" and kick him out the door. If sissy WAS actually your sub and corrected you in public then you would be perfectly entitled to say "bad sub, sissy" and release him. If sissy was currently owned by a Domme and he did what he just did to expose your nonsense and pretentiousness She would most probably say "good sub, sissy" and sissy would now be enjoying an extra bowl of fruit loops as his well deserved reward. Do you see how all of this works, Petruchio ? There is a little more to being dominant that capitalizing your name and posturing on a message board.

Note to other readers: No actual dogs were kicked or humiliated in the writing of this post. Just Petruchio !!

sissy maid lola




To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams

_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to Petruchio)

quote:

Translation: My bad, sissy. I can't write worth a shit otherwise I would be better able to say what I mean and mean what I say.
{snip}
Note to other readers: No actual dogs were kicked or humiliated in the writing of this post. Just Petruchio !!

quote:

sissy Is NOT at all a bad sub, Petruchio. Read his tag line. sissy Is NOT submissive to you, nor owned by you ...
{snip}
She would most probably say "good sub, sissy" and sissy would now be enjoying an extra bowl of fruit loops as his well deserved reward. Do you see how all of this works, Petruchio ? There is a little more to being dominant that capitalizing your name and posturing on a message board.

quote:

In defense your honour ;)

sissy's Honor, Ma'am ??? Despite all of sissy's frilly dresses, ruffles, ribbons and bows, he is at heart a little whore and a slut and he HATH NO HONOR, Ma'am! So there's not really that much to defend in the end ... <giggles>

quote:

If you consider 'sissification' and how it differs from say forced feminsation dress me like a slut kind of stuff, to me, sissifying someone is a touch more innocent (if that makes sense). Sticking them in pretty frilly bonnets with bows and frou frou dresses and mary janes and such as opposed to suspenders and stockings.

Ahh, good old infantilism, Ma'am. When sissy was discussing sissy play, cuckoldry, chastity play, and CBT in his OP, he knew in the back of his mind that there was another kink that he was overlooking that was also related to the basic male fear of emasculation. He thought it might have been trampling - and it is, indeed, kind of peripherally related - and so sissy addressed that in his last post on "Prison Sex." But the kink he really was searching for is infantilism. Another way that a man can be stripped of his masculine virility is to be reduced back before puberty when he had no definable sexual potency.

Although we can distinguish between boys and girls long before they reach puberty (and thus they have unique gender identity), children are sexual innocents, and until they reach puberty they really have no sexual orientation (although Freud would disagree quite vehemently with that - little boys, according to the Oedipus complex, are in love with their mothers from a very early age). Perhaps what sissy meant to say there was that pre-pubescent children are physically incapable of doing anything about their sexual orientation, rather than that they don't have any. They have no sexual potency. Even that statement needs further qualification, because clearly an 8 year old boy, say, who is destined to be a Dom in adulthood, will probably be quite bossy and mean; while an 8 year old girl, say, destined to be a submissive female in adulthood, might be quite withdrawn, meek and subservient. So in saying that these children have "no sexual potency" we are assuming that BDSM (= power transfer) has nothing whatsoever to do with sex - which, of course, is nonsense!

IsHO, what You have addressed in Your post, Ma'am, is the difference between infantilism play, sissification play, and feminization play. They are really three separate kinks, but the terms have all got so abused, misused and watered down on the internet that today they are almost all synonymous. The linking word across all three kinks that has caused this to happen is "sissy"! Google on the term "sissy" and You will find sites identified as "sissy" sites that are really "adult baby" sites, but the term "sissy" is applied in this instance because the adult baby (AB) costumes being featured / promoted there are all full of ribbons and bows, and overly frilly and ruffled.

You will also find sites that are just straightforward drag queen (DQ) or TV/TG/TS sites, where the term "sissy" has simply been used as a synonym for "crossdresser" when it really connotes a lot more (and most of it negative imagery). TV, TG and TS folk that crossdress for gender dysphoric reasons really need to learn to distance themselves from the much more pejorative term "sissy" ... self-identifying as such and then complaining about society's negative view of them is the equivalent of a gay guy self-identifying as a "faggot" and then complaining about society's negative view of him. DQs and female impersonators (FIs) who primarily crossdress to achieve the image of a woman in order to entertain an audience, or have some other kind of fun, should also distance themselves from this term.

The three kinks mentioned above are indeed related and frequently show up in the same pervert, but usually only one of then is dominant and the interest in the other two is because of what they have in common with it. Someone that is into infantilism play as a male AB - and thus likes wearing large size frou frou baby outfits - might also possibly identify with some of the frillier young girl dresses available for sissies (i.e., he'll also show an interest in this aspect of sissification play). And if he gets off on being dressed as a female AB then his kinky interests might then migrate over to straightforward crossdressing at his actual age (i.e., he'll show more of an interest in feminization play).

For sissy's own part in all of this, he started off crossdressing at home (mostly for the tactile qualities of the clothes), and then he became more interested in putting it all together and doing a complete transformation (at which point this male's alter ego "lola" was born); and then he became obsessed with finding out how well lola passed and behaved in public. But this was all within the realms of what would normally be called the feminization kink (only sissy was self-feminizing instead of a Domme doing it). In parallel, sissy was also exploring BDSM (he initially didn't associate these two proclivities as being driven by the same basic urge) and once he understood that he was crossdressing to make himself appear more submissive, and that there was some self-humiliation involved in all of it, things started to fall into place, and sissy's interests shifted over more to sissification play (because there is much more humiliation involved in this particular focus on crossdressing). This sissy's only interest in infantilism would be in the area of frilly young girl party dresses ... but that is simply because they make him look a much bigger sissy, and the age factor is marginal. When he crossdresses in public, sissy pretty much dresses his age to from ten to fifteen years younger. But that is still not infantilism. That's just getting away with whatever your makeup and wig allow you to get away with.

quote:

Sissifying someone, to me anyway, is removing sexuality, a return to innocence. A position of weakness...humility, humbling and humiliating.

sissy Does not quite agree with that, Ma'am. As probably can be discerned from the foregoing, sissy would associate the return to innocence dynamic more with infantilism, while the humiliation dynamic belongs more with sissification. However, they both lead to a position of weakness and vulnerability since neither children nor sissies hold any power in our society. What is kind of crucial to help making the distinction here is what one envisions as a typical sissy when one encounters the term. If the image of, say, a boy of 14 in a pink fluffy dress pops immediately into Your mind, then a large element of infantilism already exists in Your own definition of a sissy. That would also make sense, BTW, since the "fear of being a sissy" that goes into our subconscious (and lies dormant there until we shine a light on it later in life as part of using it to stimulate our own particular kink) is something developed only during our childhood years, and it would resemble our worst fear at the time of looking like a sissy ourselves. However, if the term "sissy" immediately conjures up an image in Your mind of a 50 year old man in a pink frilly dress, then You may more readily appreciate the distinction that sissy is trying to draw between infantilism and sissification play.

One final point that sissy would like to make here, Ma'am, is that "humility" and "humiliation" / "humbling" are not all the same thing at all. Being "humbled" or "humiliated" (i.e., the transitive verb) is NOT at all the same thing as being "humble" (the noun). That is, "humility" and "humiliation" are NOT the same thing at all! "Humility" is the opposite of the deadly sin of pride. Truly great people such as Christ, Mother Teresa and Gandhi are "humble" ... and it is self-imposed ... they are not "humbled" or "humiliated" by anyone. They cannot be "humiliated" because they have no pride or vanity to be destroyed or degraded in the first place. Remember the expression, "pride cometh before the fall." Without pride there can be no fall ... without vanity there can be no "humiliation." "Humble" is where one chooses to be because one has no pride or vanity; "humbled" or "humiliated" is where others can force you to be because you did have pride or vanity and it is now destroyed by them. One can also "humble" or "humiliate" oneself ... but that is still not quite the same as having "humility" (being "humble") in the first place! Many people do not understand that distinction.

sissy maid lola




To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams


_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to Jasmyn)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petruchio

Sheesh, sissy! I graciously acknowledged you were correct. I'm disappointed in such a mean (in the classical sense) response. You want blood? Is this some kind of male PMS? Do you randomly take on someone whom you succeed in correcting as a kind of project?

quote:

ORIGINAL: veronicaofML

One thing I will never be accused of is being too girly-girl.
========

i dunno. that pic with that...all too female look...hand under the chin thing going on?
i dunno.
looks pretty girlie to me.
but then i love that--look...so enticing..
like when i see a gal standing there, with her hands together, infront of her...elbows relaxed at her hips, ...
SO girlie...
not like ya had one of those,...hands on the hips and glaring down,...daring someone..
but? hell even THAT is enticing..
it is very fifficult for ANY female NOT to look too girlie..
the female body posisitons...is just plain..enticing..
standing sitting...walking..
just something about the way a woman moves...period..
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

just makes me melt like butter.
don't EVEN start me on high heels in an empty hallway...clicking..

i am sorry.

i do not know how a woman can NOT look ..girlie.

gawd i still love that glasses and a long hair.......
yummmmmmmmmm

think i need a COLD shower.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
veronica my dear...you are busted!!! [/font] [/color] [/size]

quote:

ORIGINAL: veronicaofML

veronica my dear...you are busted!!!
=======

busted for what? for being 99% vanilla and speaking like a man and not a boy?

what ARE you talkin about?

quote:

Channel #5 is my favorite too...They have the best weather lady I have ever seen :)

OMG .... sissy made a booboo! He was so damned concerned about getting the little "°" thingy in the "N°5" right that he completely overlooked the extra "n" in "chanel" ... and a friggin' spell checker isn't much good for spotting that one, is it! In fact, Ma'am, it was the phucking spell checker that got rid of the little "°" thingy in the first place. It removed it at least three times before sissy finally topped it into submission ... lola's such an alpha sissy! Funny that You should mention it though, Ma'am, but sissy has always fancied himself as being a pretty damn good TV whether lady ... cos when he is out in public en femme people always seem to look at him with their head on one side, most likely wondering whether he's a TV or a lady!

quote:

you know, lola, I have never heard anyone else mention this before, but I once spoke to a gentleman who had this kink. It was accompanied by another one, in which he imagined that he was very very tiny, or the woman was very very tall (His favorite movie was "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman). In the final moments of this fantasy, she would ingest him. I think it all falls under the designation of "squashability"

You know, Ms Smythe, sissy gets the impression he is having his leg pulled here. Why don't You pull sissy's little rosebud instead, Ma'am ... it has bells dangling from it! How can it be a "squashability" kink if she doesn't even squash him ... but ingests him instead? That's why sissy thinks You made Your whole post in jest, Ma'am - not just the 50 Foot Woman!

But sissy is sooo glad that You, too, enjoy cheesy movies, Ma'am. If Attack of the 50 Foot Woman is the movie that sissy is thinking of then IsHO it was made purely as a tax write-off. The director of that movie makes Edward D. Wood Jr. look like Steven Spielberg. That movie did as much to bolster general respect for the sci-fi flick genre as Ed Wood's Glen or Glenda did to garner the public's respect for transvestitism as a fashion statement for men ... even today sissy still feels extremely self-conscious wearing angora sweaters! The movie that sissy remembers had more continuity problems than Petruchio's posts on this thread. In the scene in the movie where the butler and the sheriff enter the alien spacecraft of the giant 50 Foot Woman, all the passageways and interiors are designed for human-sized crew! And there is another scene where a guy is throwing all his wife's clothes into a suitcase in a hurry and then forces the top shut with clothes sticking out over the sides, but in the next frame he is carrying a perfectly neatly closed suitcase. And you can also see the strings holding up the spacecraft whenever it lands. <snorts> sissy Can watch movies like that one for hours. He will probably never tire of watching the giant woman go from transparent in the long shots to solid in the close-ups. ROTFLsAO.

Sometimes sissy feels that reading the posts on these boards is a lot like watching a cheesy movie, too. He feels like he is Joel or Tom Servo on Mystery Science Theater 3000 ... maybe CollarMe could arrange it so that there is a little "sml" silhouette in the bottom right hand corner of every post!

Respectfrilly Yours,

sissy maid lola




To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams


_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to Smythe)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola

quote:

you know, lola, I have never heard anyone else mention this before, but I once spoke to a gentleman who had this kink. It was accompanied by another one, in which he imagined that he was very very tiny, or the woman was very very tall (His favorite movie was "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman). In the final moments of this fantasy, she would ingest him. I think it all falls under the designation of "squashability"

You know, Ms Smythe, sissy gets the impression he is having his leg pulled here. Why don't You pull sissy's little rosebud instead, Ma'am ... it has bells dangling from it! How can it be a "squashability" kink if she doesn't even squash him ... but ingests him instead? That's why sissy thinks You made Your whole post in jest, Ma'am - not just the 50 Foot Woman!

We have gone FAR afield from the original post, so I will keep this brief, but then I always do! I was not pulling your leg, chain or rosebud. The male in question had the squashability kink. tiny male, huge female kink. Scoop you up, toy with you and eat you kink. If you don't like the term squashability we can call it the TmHF kink.



But sissy is sooo glad that You, too, enjoy cheesy movies, Ma'am. If Attack of the 50 Foot Woman is the movie that sissy is thinking of then IsHO it was made purely as a tax write-off. The director of that movie makes Edward D. Wood Jr. look like Steven Spielberg.

Respectfrilly Yours,

sissy maid lola

quote:

ORIGINAL: veronicaofML

i just sit here and give it 3 or 4 min and its gone...
i CANNOT keep an erection....by myself...

quote:

ORIGINAL: veronicaofML

One thing I will never be accused of is being too girly-girl.
========

i dunno. that pic with that...all too female look...hand under the chin thing going on?
i dunno.
looks pretty girlie to me.
but then i love that--look...so enticing..
like when i see a gal standing there, with her hands together, infront of her...elbows relaxed at her hips, ...
SO girlie...
not like ya had one of those,...hands on the hips and glaring down,...daring someone..
but? hell even THAT is enticing..
it is very fifficult for ANY female NOT to look too girlie..
the female body posisitons...is just plain..enticing..
standing sitting...walking..
just something about the way a woman moves...period..
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

just makes me melt like butter.
don't EVEN start me on high heels in an empty hallway...clicking..

i am sorry.

i do not know how a woman can NOT look ..girlie.

gawd i still love that glasses and a long hair.......
yummmmmmmmmm

think i need a COLD shower.

quote:

Lola's hit me upside the head for my lack of thorough editing skills.

Oh come on, cloudboy, the "imasculate" thing was just a set up for sissy's "spelling bee" punch line. Don't you start going all wussy and oversensitive on sissy, too, hon ... cos sissy is running out of people to josh with.

quote:

Its a tough world, IMO, for such a perfectionist sub, but perfectionisism is not such a bad thing, and it can help us all raise our own standards.

Hey, who are you calling a perfectionist? ... ouch, that punch was was way below sissy's garter belt! You don't know how much that hurt sissy's feelings ...

sissy maid lola




To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams


_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to cloudboy)