|
|
 Up |
  |
Author: Beauty's ReleaseBeauty's Release Date: Aug 13, 2006 17:08
Hey, I am wondering if any slaves out there have been accused of having
an insatiable hunger for exposure? Incidentally I found this
interesting drawing:
http://ccgi.swage.plus.com/savage_cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id...
which also angered me. I do not like how exposed she is. I find this
offensive. What do you all think this about this drawing?
To me, this is the fantasy of a dominant male, through and f*cking
through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
not? Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
Beauty's Release
|
| |
| 121 Comments |
|
|
Author: Fnordy!Fnordy! Date: Aug 13, 2006 17:56
Beauty's Release wrote:
> through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
> not?
It is not. Copulating is any kind of fucking. Bestial sex is a human
doing it with a nonhuman animal.
The human in the drawing is doing neither. All she is doing is posing.
alone. She is neither copulating nor being bestial.
Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
> doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
Does that mean that dogs who crave and hunger for this position are
men? Is it possible for two bios to have any kind of "doing it" without
being carnal? And why, and how would they?
Fnordy, not carnal(as in, made of live meat) but wishing he(or
whatvere) was. I am sure my friend Fnerdy can understand.
|
| |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: Fnordy!Fnordy! Date: Aug 13, 2006 17:59
Beauty's Release wrote:
> through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
> not?
It is not. Copulating is any kind of fucking. Bestial sex is a human
doing it with a nonhuman animal.
The human in the drawing is doing neither. All she is doing is posing.
alone. She is neither copulating nor being bestial.
Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
> doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
Does that mean that dogs who crave and hunger for this position are
men? Is it possible for two bios to have any kind of "doing it" without
being carnal? And why, and how would they?
Fnordy, not carnal(as in, made of live meat) but wishing he(or
whatvere) was. I am sure my friend Fnerdy can understand.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TroiaTroia Date: Aug 13, 2006 18:15
Beauty's Release wrote:
> Hey, I am wondering if any slaves out there have been accused of having
> an insatiable hunger for exposure? Incidentally I found this
> interesting drawing:
> http://ccgi.swage.plus.com/savage_cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id...
> which also angered me. I do not like how exposed she is. I find this
> offensive. What do you all think this about this drawing?
> To me, this is the fantasy of a dominant male, through and f*cking
> through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
> not? Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
> doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
> Beauty's Release
>
Just a teeny tiny bit judgmental today, eh?
If you don't like how exposed she is, why did you go looking for it? Do
you have a kink for looking at things you don't like?
|
| Show full article (1.96Kb) |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: Philip_the_FoolePhilip_the_Foole Date: Aug 13, 2006 19:00
Troia wrote:
> Beauty's Release wrote:
>
>> Hey, I am wondering if any slaves out there have been accused of having
>> an insatiable hunger for exposure? Incidentally I found this
>> interesting drawing:
>> http://ccgi...
|
| Show full article (2.61Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Truly_CloofulTruly_Clooful Date: Aug 13, 2006 19:06
Beauty's Release wrote:
> Hey, I am wondering if any slaves out there have been accused of having
> an insatiable hunger for exposure? Incidentally I found this
> interesting drawing:
> http://ccgi.swage.plus.com/savage_cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id...
> which also angered me. I do not like how exposed she is. I find this
> offensive. What do you all think this about this drawing?
> To me, this is the fantasy of a dominant male, through and f*cking
> through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
> not? Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
> doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
> Beauty's Release
"but, doctor, you're the one showing me all the dirty pictures!"
|
| |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: TroiaTroia Date: Aug 13, 2006 19:26
Philip_the_Foole wrote:
...
> I get the feeling, Troia, that you are offering swimming lessons to
> someone who is determined to hold on to an anchor.
>
> Your Humble Jester,
>
> Philip the Foole
..
Um, is that in your archive?
Should be (IMHO).
-- Troia
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TroiaTroia Date: Aug 13, 2006 19:27
Truly_Clooful wrote:
> Beauty's Release wrote:
>> Hey, I am wondering if any slaves out there have been accused of having
>> an insatiable hunger for exposure? Incidentally I found this
>> interesting drawing:
>> http://ccgi.swage.plus.com/savage_cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id...
>> which also angered me. I do not like how exposed she is. I find this
>> offensive. What do you all think this about this drawing?
>> To me, this is the fantasy of a dominant male, through and f*cking
>> through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
>> not? Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
>> doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
>> Beauty's Release >
> "but, doctor, you're the one showing me all the dirty pictures...
|
| Show full article (0.88Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: David WeinshenkerDavid Weinshenker Date: Aug 13, 2006 19:40
"Fnordy!" wrote:
>
> Beauty's Release wrote:
>> Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of
>> a doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
Well, it means they like to have sex "doggie style", but that isn't
the same as actually having sex with dogs (which would be an act of
"bestiality"), and it doesn't make them dogs... Species change isn't
that easy!
> Does that mean that dogs who crave and hunger for this position are
> men? Is it possible for two bios to have any kind of "doing it" without
> being carnal? And why, and how would they?
But do dogs ever do it people-style?
> Fnordy, not carnal(as in, made of live meat) but wishing he(or
> whatvere) was. I am sure my friend Fnerdy can understand.
When plushies want variety, do they do it bio-style?
-dave w
|
| |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Norton ZengerNorton Zenger Date: Aug 13, 2006 19:50
Beauty's Release come on down:
>Hey, I am wondering if any slaves out there have been accused of having
>an insatiable hunger for exposure? Incidentally I found this
>interesting drawing:
> http://ccgi.swage.plus.com/savage_cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id...
>which also angered me. I do not like how exposed she is. I find this
>offensive. What do you all think this about this drawing?
>To me, this is the fantasy of a dominant male, through and f*cking
>through. I think this is called copulating or bestial sexuality is it
>not? Doing it from behind is most certainly carnal beyond a shadow of a
>doubt. Men who crave and hunger for this position are DOGS.
>Beauty's Release
Woof woof.
P.S.- minor nitpick: "insatiable"
P.P.S.- I am not a furry.
--
I'LL PUNCH A DONKEY IN THE STREETS OF GALWAY!
I'LL PUNCH A DONKEY IN THE STREETS OF GALWAY!
I'LL PUNCH A DONKEY IN THE STREETS OF GALWAY!
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
