Pearl Necklace

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

As in blowing a wad all over somebody

― dave q, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Do chicks hate this as much as guys enjoy doing it?

― dave q, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I can never do the clasp up. Tell me - is there a trick or do you need naturally bendy jism.

― Pete, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

apparently pearls are all the rage this season. o you meant grody porn, well thats not.

― anthony, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Can't wait to see what answers you get to this one, Dave.

― Mark C, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Madonna likes it on her raspberries, apparently.

Helps them grow or summat.

― Trevor, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hi Trevor
as in Raspberries = knockers or
Raspberries=raspberries?

― Will, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hello Will.

I understand that my above statement could be perceived by some as somewhat ambiguous. For legal reasons I intend to keep it that way.

― Trevor, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

but why do blokes allegedly enjoy doing this? is it just cause they like making a mess?

― katie, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Au contraire, it's to keep the sheets clean. It's a basic matter of pragmatism and good manners.

― Trevor, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Target practice. Especially if your lover is at the other end of the room.

― Will, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

it's a byproduct of the inter-mammary frottage.

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

BUT SERIOUSLY *glower*

― katie, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

sorry alan, crossed posts. yes the inter-mammary thing, but i've heard about blokes for whom the sight of their chick all covered in lurvejuice is a turn on in itself. i just wondered why that was appealing!

― katie, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

people get off on the weirdest things. what's with being turned on by pissing? beggar's belief. (ps. nice to see the bra thread kept going yesterday while i was away.)

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Does any guy here actually have the luxury of discussing how they like their oral sex?

― Ronan, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It might be learned behaviour from porn, since almost all pornos appear to feature these 'cumshots' quite heavily - whether to symbolise the male actor's domination of the female (i.e. he visibly gets pleasure, she doesn't) or as an authenticity move (look! proof that he was really aroused!) I don't know - probably a bit of both.

But not all men watch porn much so this might not, um, stand up.

― Tom, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If you think of sex as having a forbidden or transgressive element, i.e. it involves the revelation of things which are normally covered up, and the sharing of private aspects of the self, then it's not surprising that this equation gets reversed and other private bodily functions get associated with sex, i.e. some people get turned on by pissing.

― Tom, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ronan: had. past tense, yes. why not. it's no luxury, it's a mutual pleasure.

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Oh well in that case what am I waiting for.

― Ronan, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It's because the moment of orgasm is about as intimate as can be, and therefore the ejaculate is an intensely sexual "thing" (can't think of a better word) which the man wants to share with his partner. This might sound like some excuse, but thinking about it, ejaculation is a key part of sexual play, and if it's removed from the mutual act (unlike every other aspect, which is tactile by its nature, with the exception of voyeurism), a real sense of disappointment and distance occurs.

I always like my girlfriend to see when I come, even if it's not all over her, and that gives an even stronger sense of the sharing angle, I think.

― Mark C, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeah, what Mark said. That really hit the spot. No seriously, I am impressed.

― Trevor, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

but *ahem* ilikemyboyfwiendtoejaculateinsideme there i have said it, i now run away! i don't think that just cos you don't *see* it, that it's any less intimate.

― katie, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

He's good at this relationship stuff is old Mark, kind of a Dr Ruth for the noughties, oh! but to hear him talk in real life. Your ears would drop off with the filth of it all ;)

Hiya Mark, enjoying your last day?

― chris, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I will offer up the "attempt at birth control" hypothesis, if only to dismiss it as complete stupidity. (Someone I knew supposedly practiced "safe sex" this way - well, by leaving the premisis before dessert, that is; I don't really want to know what he did with the dessert.)

I never thought of Mark C's point, though. That's an interesting thought.

― David Raposa, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

But I think I'm more on Katie's side - just because it's unseen doesn't mean it's not "there". I'm guessing women can feel the moment pass, PLUS I would think that ejaculating inside a woman is a more intimate act, since you're leaving a part of yourself inside of She Whom You Love Most Dearly, and that's pretty damn intimate, if you asked me.

Then, again, as Tom noted, pornos & my subconscious Catholic needs to keep boudoir doings on the DL might pervert my views.

― David Raposa, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm tempted to say that Mark's post was on the moneyshot, but that would be inappropriate and vulgar.

― Trevor, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Of course Katie's post is bang OTM, but I was assuming we're principally talking about when a chap is being stimulated outside the vaginal (sorry Anthony) area. Or between Alan's girlfriend's tits*

*applies only, to the best of my knowledge, to Alan

― Mark C, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think I'd rather not see it aswell. what with this and my giving out about thongs yesterday I'm really keeping up the catholic principles.

― Ronan, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

arrrr. we are talking about WANKING! so now we are into it (as it were) i really want to know from anthony (or any other homosexual male on the board, i'm looking at you sean) - DO MEN GET PEARL NECKLACES AS WELL? (with or without breast frottage, hem hem)????

we Must Know.

― katie, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Always thought that porn's popularity stems from the fact that it shows you things that you're unlikely ever to experience in yr actual day-to-day sexlife - including giving or receiving pearl necklaces!

― Andrew L, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I bet they do. They can give each other matching jewellery.

― Mark C, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Twinsets!

― Trevor, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You're unlikely to have two shaven teens in crotchelss bodystockings treat your coker like a squirty lollipop, true, but I would still hope that I could expect a bit of oral action from time to time. Unless you're into the really sick stuff, like love, mutual respect, that sort of thing.

― Mark C, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Cocker, sorry.

― Mark C, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

3x replies and none of the addressees have answered the question yet! (from what i understand dave some wimmin foax really really lurve it. judging from these tapes i've got.)

― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

between Alan's girlfriend's tits

:-( stop talking about non-existent things! grrr.

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Your girlfriend or her tits?

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

both! now wouldn't it be odd if said girlfriend was non-existent, but not the tits.

Could we talk about something else now.

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Katie, since you asked me directly, the answer of course is yes. I don't really like shooting it in or close to a guys's face, though... it's weird but I feel like I'm being disrespectful or something. I know that's nonsense, and I'd do it if I were asked, I just normally don't do it. Anywhere else is fine. I usually end up coming inside someone, but I agree that it's fun and intimate to let someone watch it happen, too. Any other questions? :-)

― Sean, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

heh, heh - no other questions! just thought we'd extend the debate a little beyond the hetero sphere, y'know? :)

― katie, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

DOES it condition yer hair or would you be better off with VO5 Hot Oil?

― Sarah, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I don't think most girls wuv it. It would be more one of those things where if you aren't in the mood or don't feel good and he's in another mindset, at least you can just lie there and think of pretty things and pretend you are somewhere else.

― Evangeline, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Some girls can't swallow and don't like spitting anymore so if its aimed by said female it greatly reduces the chances of getting something in the eye. Its the only thing I can think of that explains it.

I dont understand the whole pornstyle pullout aim and fire routine.

― Mr Noodles, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

>>I don't think most girls wuv it. It would be more one of those things where if you aren't in the mood or don't feel good and he's in another mindset, at least you can just lie there and think of pretty things and pretend you are somewhere else. <<

man, thats such a sad state of affairs, where he's shooting his load on her and thinking, "oh wow, this is so special", and she's thinking "so what shall i have for dinner?"

― di, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

as in Raspberries = knockers or Raspberries=raspberries?

Since Madge is married to a proper Cockney geezer I guess it's rhyming slang rasperry ripples= nipples. Why doesn't that surprise me.

― Billy Dods, Wednesday, 19 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

'she's thinking "so what shall i have for dinner?'

I would think that question has already been solved!

― dave q, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

mmmm, spunk a l'orange!

― katie, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yack. This phorum has gone down to the gutter (and so on....) I have never gakked all over a womyn's face, and nor do I ever intend to. I just don't see thee appeal, I mean it's disrespecktful, plus it pheels much nicer inside, right? "Pearl Necklace", I mean really...

― Norman Phay, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think the all phrase was ROCK BOTTOM!

― james, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

oh i just thought you meant coming on someones tits.

manseed tastes gross and has a terrible consistency and i never swallow. so there.

― di, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ackchewerley, "necklace" does kind of imply the neck/cleavage area surely? The forum has plenty lower to go. My shoXoR of the evening was finding that the people who produce (ew ew ew) "Sex Cheques" also produce "Christian Cheques", the one promising an all-night shag the other promising forgiveness. INDULGENCES CLASSIC OR DUD!!! They are stocked right next to each other in Borders too.

― Tom, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeeesss...I suppose it does imply neck/cleavage, tho' I imagine yr aim would be somewhat poor, er, at that particular moment in time. Ov course, w/o someone claiming "rock bottom" from time to time, how would we indulge in righteous outrage, or whatever. Actually, thee unacceptable/ass thread was yackier than this. Still, not my thang, I'm afraid.

― Norman Phay, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

where is this unacceptable ass thread?

― electric sound of jim, Thursday, 20 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Did anyone else read that eyebrow-raising article in yesterday's Mirror encouraging women to regularly practice oral sex as it's scientifically proven to reduce the risk of developing life- threatening conditions during pregnancy?

Under the circumstances, the administering of a pearl necklace is grossly irresponsible. It's a waste of much needed medicine.

― Trevor, Friday, 21 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

a few points in response to the above:

cum looks beautiful on peoples bodies unless its my cum.
people who do things they don't get off on to please their partner are sad and pathetic.
people who pretend to get off on it when they're not are worse.
cumming on someones face or breasts does not have to be disrespectful or demeaning. It can be an expression of undying love.
cumming inside vaginas can lead to breeding.
pornography is boring.
cum tastes nice. i always swallow.
only men with cleavages can receive pearl necklaces.

― stupid boy, Sunday, 23 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I was going to respond with some serious (well, vaguely serious) stuff about this in connection to gay sex, but now I feel the need for physical distance between my post and the last one - not because it's offensive, but, well, anything I say will be a step down.

― Tim, Sunday, 23 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Di, regarding spitting or swallowing - surely swallowing is the best way to et the stuff out of the way as quickly as possible? It doesn't even need to touch your tongue/taste buds, whereas if you spit you're effectively swilling it around your mouth. A certain person I have spoken to about this agrees with me, so it's not just Mark and is dubious logic again.

(p.s. I mentioned my argument from above to my better half, and even she thought it made some kind of sense! Bonus :-))

― Mark C, Monday, 24 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

get the stuff out of the way, grumble grumble...

― Mark C, Monday, 24 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I would have had to agree with you before you corrected your typo, Mark. It seems to me that swallowing is the ONLY way to et the stuff out of the way.

― Dan Perry, Monday, 24 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

DAN! You stole my joke!

― Tim, Monday, 24 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

AT LAST I HAVE STOLEN SOMEONE ELSE'S JOKE! And it's Christmas, too; thanks, Tim! You're the best!

― Dan Perry, Tuesday, 25 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

>>>Di, regarding spitting or swallowing - surely swallowing is the best way to et the stuff out of the way as quickly as possible? It doesn't even need to touch your tongue/taste buds, whereas if you spit you're effectively swilling it around your mouth. <<<

i don't let men come in my mouth, so i can't answer your question.

― di, Wednesday, 26 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

in high school spitting it out was kind of what you did if you were grossed out and swallowing was kind of crazy and decadent but now it almost seems the other way round.

― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 27 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.