|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"Last week, I started a thread asking."
Love you, too
if anyone had considered trying to get in touch with [admin - names and references to the stars of children's television programmes deleted, these are not appropriate subjects for an adult fetish website] in some way to ask if they'd be willing to do "updates" of their work, decades later.
I wound up deleting the thread, because it was being taken the wrong way, and I figured it best to not pour any more fuel on a fire of confusion than was likely already there....until something recently crossed my mind...
I remember that someone at [redacted] had asked [redacted] if she'd do it again, and she "nicely" said no, by saying "I would, but I don't want to ruin this outfit". Yes, I realize [redacted] is a little bit of a difference, but the reason I bring this up is simple....
As the saying goes, you never know til you ask.
As creeped out as some people would be to be asked....they might be just as creeped out to being younger models who need work, too.
Some will take it weird, others won't. If they say no, move on.
I'm not saying such a project is required, just throwing the suggestion out there. Or even to have someone not directly associated with our community put it out there.
I wound up deleting the thread, because it was being taken the wrong way, and I figured it best to not pour any more fuel on a fire of confusion than was likely already there....until something recently crossed my mind...
I remember that someone at [redacted] had asked [redacted] if she'd do it again, and she "nicely" said no, by saying "I would, but I don't want to ruin this outfit". Yes, I realize [redacted] is a little bit of a difference, but the reason I bring this up is simple....
As the saying goes, you never know til you ask.
As creeped out as some people would be to be asked....they might be just as creeped out to being younger models who need work, too.
Some will take it weird, others won't. If they say no, move on.
I'm not saying such a project is required, just throwing the suggestion out there. Or even to have someone not directly associated with our community put it out there.
9/18/22, 11:20am: [Admin] Name of person who was gunged on TV as a *child* redacted. Such references are completely unacceptable. Apologies to the forum for not redacting these sooner, I was unaware of the reference.
This is a horrifically bad idea on every possible level.
People who featured in innocent childrens television programmes will most definitely be creeped out by fetishists asking them to reprise their work for masturbatory purposes. Any woman who appears on TV already gets a tide of inappropriate messages on social media channels, adding to that level of creepiness is not in anyone's interests and in fact we should be doing all we can to prevent the problem getting any worse, not adding to it.
People who featured in innocent childrens television programmes will most definitely be creeped out by fetishists asking them to reprise their work for masturbatory purposes. Any woman who appears on TV already gets a tide of inappropriate messages on social media channels, adding to that level of creepiness is not in anyone's interests and in fact we should be doing all we can to prevent the problem getting any worse, not adding to it.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
This is just asking for multiple runningrebels, which is NOT a good idea
You know, there is another side to it. So someone representing this forum of men contacts say, [redacted], and asks her to get slimed again. And it is clear in the communication it is for a fetish website. It is assumed that her reaction should be "What a bunch of pervs! Whacking off to a kid's tv show!"
Ok..... that said.... I have to put myself in her shoes. Let's say I did a TV show as a kid where I ......oh I dunno...... was tied up for a whole episode. And now, 40 years later, a rep for a forum of female bondage enthusiasts asks me to recreate that so they could whack off to it. I might be flattered that they'd want to see that! Hell, I might brag about it to my friends!
That said, I am aware the creepy part means that these women "enjoyed" watching that old episode of me as a kid.
My question is..... now I am a grown adult and would be doing it willingly knowing what it means. Is that such a terrible thing?
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
Ok..... that said.... I have to put myself in her shoes. Let's say I did a TV show as a kid where I ......oh I dunno...... was tied up for a whole episode. And now, 40 years later, a rep for a forum of female bondage enthusiasts asks me to recreate that so they could whack off to it. I might be flattered that they'd want to see that! Hell, I might brag about it to my friends!
That said, I am aware the creepy part means that these women "enjoyed" watching that old episode of me as a kid.
My question is..... now I am a grown adult and would be doing it willingly knowing what it means. Is that such a terrible thing?
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
9/18/22, 11:22am: [Admin] Naming an individual who was gunged on TV as a *child* is never acceptable here.
The whole idea is just weird and inappropriate. I'll admit my fetish was a result of kids shows when I was growing up but there is no way in hell I would ask that. This community already has a bad rep thanks to perverts bombarding women on social media who get messy in a slapstick way. This is bad PR and we don't need it.
Bozo1 said: You know, there is another side to it. So someone representing this forum of men contacts say, [redacted], and asks her to get slimed again. And it is clear in the communication it is for a fetish website. It is assumed that her reaction should be "What a bunch of pervs! Whacking off to a kid's tv show!"
Ok..... that said.... I have to put myself in her shoes. Let's say I did a TV show as a kid where I ......oh I dunno...... was tied up for a whole episode. And now, 40 years later, a rep for a forum of female bondage enthusiasts asks me to recreate that so they could whack off to it. I might be flattered that they'd want to see that! Hell, I might brag about it to my friends!
That said, I am aware the creepy part means that these women "enjoyed" watching that old episode of me as a kid.
My question is..... now I am a grown adult and would be doing it willingly knowing what it means. Is that such a terrible thing?
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
Ok..... that said.... I have to put myself in her shoes. Let's say I did a TV show as a kid where I ......oh I dunno...... was tied up for a whole episode. And now, 40 years later, a rep for a forum of female bondage enthusiasts asks me to recreate that so they could whack off to it. I might be flattered that they'd want to see that! Hell, I might brag about it to my friends!
That said, I am aware the creepy part means that these women "enjoyed" watching that old episode of me as a kid.
My question is..... now I am a grown adult and would be doing it willingly knowing what it means. Is that such a terrible thing?
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
I appreciate your at least understanding where I'm coming from.
How many videos are there already of gals dressing up with "show related" shirts, and up against a link set, and saying the magic words?
The main actress of "YC" was already a legal adult when she did most of it, anyway.
Sure tons of people will be creeped out; others are creeped out by bondage, and other shit they consider weird.
A few of them *might* be ok with it. Plenty won't as well. Again, that's all fine.
9/17/22, 3:30pm: [admin] quotes rearranged, please reply below quotes, not above, that way if someone else then quotes the quote, everything reads in the correct order making it easier to follow the thread.
I think the best way to describe my feelings about this is to take a quote from one of my favorite characters Cereal Killer from the movie Hackers. "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man, I put away childish things." When I was a kid I liked seeing people get wet or slimed or messy in their clothes. It was one of those things that you aren't supposed to do. Then when I went through puberty it took on a whole new meaning. Now that I am an adult I see that my view of the same activities has changed. Do I get the same feelings as an adult watching those activities as when I was a kid, no. Would I want to see the people I saw as a kid aged and doing those same activities, no. It would not have the same effect. Because in my mind, I would have the images of them as they were when I saw them as a kid and it would ruin the experience. Just like I cannot watch Nickelodeon shows knowing what I now know about the cycle of abuse that was going on.
How do you think someone reacts to finding out this nonsexual performance you gave as a kid has been sexualized by a group of people? If you want a clue, look at Carrie Fisher's reactions during a comedy central roast when people talked about jerking off to her picture.
I am really wondering if something happened that caused some damage during puberty that would cause something like this to seem normal. This is not one of those nostalgia things where Michael Keaton puts on the Batman suit for the Batgirl movie. I think people with some of these opinions should seek out professional help.
How do you think someone reacts to finding out this nonsexual performance you gave as a kid has been sexualized by a group of people? If you want a clue, look at Carrie Fisher's reactions during a comedy central roast when people talked about jerking off to her picture.
I am really wondering if something happened that caused some damage during puberty that would cause something like this to seem normal. This is not one of those nostalgia things where Michael Keaton puts on the Batman suit for the Batgirl movie. I think people with some of these opinions should seek out professional help.
Can We just leave poor [redacted] alone to live her life and let this idea go? These people have moved on. If you found one of them had an onlyfans or something like Maitland Ward that would be different but if they want to be left alone, leave them alone. They didn't make enough money on that show to deal with creepy fetishists.
9/18/22, 11:25am: [Admin] We know this was just in response to earlier posts, but removing the name from all posts regardless.
Bozo1 said
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
Please don't drag me into this discussion.
dalamar666 said: I think the best way to describe my feelings about this is to take a quote from one of my favorite characters Cereal Killer from the movie Hackers. "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man, I put away childish things."
Actually a quote from the Bible, 1st Corinthians, but, you know... Also Hackers.
bizopp713 said: Can We just leave poor [redacted] alone to live her life and let this idea go? These people have moved on. If you found one of them had an onlyfans or something like Maitland Ward that would be different but if they want to be left alone, leave them alone. They didn't make enough money on that show to deal with creepy fetishists.
Seriously!
Can we stop trying to rationalize legit stalker behavior?
In no world is it acceptable to contact old kids shows actors and ask them about making fetish content, no matter what!
Don't try to imagine some weird scenario where you might try to justify it. It's just not ok.
Being stalked sucks. I had/have a stalker and it ruined my life for a couple years and I'm just some random dude.
This is a horrible idea on so many levels, please do not ask these women to recreate old sketches they were in as *children* for wank material. It doesn't matter if they say no, just broaching the question is morally and socially wrong.
For fucks sake people
For fucks sake people
J Wam said: This is a horrible idea on so many levels, please do not ask these women to recreate old sketches they were in as *children* for wank material. It doesn't matter if they say no, just broaching the question is morally and socially wrong.
For fucks sake people
For fucks sake people
Absolutely, nailed it.
And I appologise for being slow to remove the former child gunge star's name from the thread, I was unaware of the refernce and on first reading the post in question assumed the event mentioned was a fetish event like Aquantics, I gather in fact it was a Kids TV one. Person's name and event name have now been redacted. The thread has also been flagged to MM to take the final decision on whether to delete or not, any of us mods could do it but I know sometimes MM prefers when the community replies to stuff to set someone straight, which also provides a subsequent reference for future newbies, rather than just nuking the entire thing from orbit, though that is always an option.
Bozo1 said: My official position is that contacting people to recreate scenes from childhood would be creepy.
The point I made earlier was a "devil's advocate" kinda thing.
The point I made earlier was a "devil's advocate" kinda thing.
The problem with that is that most of us guys can count the times we've been sexually harassed in our entire lives on the fingers of one, or at most both, hands. For most adult women, the total number of times they've been harassed *this week* will be way higher than that. So there's a massive difference between someone male, who might find it just amusing or flattering, and someone female, to whom it's just yet more of the never-ending tide of male abuse, misoginy, and creepiness, she has to navigate on a daily basis.
Plus any attempt to contact someone who got gunged on TV as a *kid*, for adult fetish purposes, really is beyond all possible boundaries and so far into creep territory you need a radio-telescope to follow it.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
DungeonMasterOne said:
The problem with that is that most of us guys can count the times we've been sexually harassed in our entire lives on the fingers of one, or at most both, hands. For most adult women, the total number of times they've been harassed *this week* will be way higher than that. So there's a massive difference between someone male, who might find it just amusing or flattering, and someone female, to whom it's just yet more of the never-ending tide of male abuse, misogyny, and creepiness, she has to navigate on a daily basis.
The problem with that is that most of us guys can count the times we've been sexually harassed in our entire lives on the fingers of one, or at most both, hands. For most adult women, the total number of times they've been harassed *this week* will be way higher than that. So there's a massive difference between someone male, who might find it just amusing or flattering, and someone female, to whom it's just yet more of the never-ending tide of male abuse, misogyny, and creepiness, she has to navigate on a daily basis.
As someone who's seen women's inboxes and phone messages before, I can confirm, it's an entirely different existence.
He's more potato now than man. Twisted and evil.
KingRandor said: The main actress of "YC" was already a legal adult when she did most of it, anyway.
That's irellevant, all discussion of programmes made for children is forbidden here, because using children's content for adult fetish purposes, once you're no longer a kid yourself, is creepy and totally inappropriate.
Yes, back in the day, when we ourselves were kids, it was how many of us discovered our fetish. That was different, we were kids watching programming made for kids. It's entirely possible that some of the next generation of wammers will discover their kink in the same way. That's also fine, but us adults should leave it for the kids to enjoy, and not contaminate it.
We have an imperial fuckton of adult material, made by adults for adults with full consent and understanding of what's going on and that it's for masturbatory purposes. That should be enough. Trying to drag kids TV back into it when we're all well past the age when that programming is appropriate for us, is just fundamentally wrong, and trying to contact the people who featured in kids TV for fetish purposes is just extremely creepy, don't do it.
UMD's take on it is in the ToS but the basics are:
Nothing featuring or including anyone under 18, ever. Not even if just in the background. If under-18s appear on screen at all, that content is forbidden, banned, verboten. This also applies to things like naming child stars of gunge programmes, hence the redactions upthread.
Nothing that was originally specifically made for a child audience. So Saturday morning TV, daytime evening "after school" shows, etc. If they were made specifically for kids, no go.
Family-oriented content (like 101 Dalmations or Cruella, which contrary to popular opinion were *not* made specifically for kids - Cruella was a 12a certificate, same as several Bond movies) is fine as long as there are no kids in it, or at least none in the scene the gunge occurs in, if linking to short clips.
Adult content is fine as long as copyrights are respected. Most producers don't mind other people sharing their promo images as long as watermarks and site branding is left intact. Note though only verified accounts can upload nudity or explicit material.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
I hope this thread is left up for reference purposes. I know that we don't normally do a sticky thread kind of thing. What about making a section with commonly discussed themes and moving the threads there. Things like what happened to model X, respectful communication, discussions about the credit card fiasco, why are ID's required etc. Make the posts so they can no longer be replied to and toss them all in the same section of the forum.
Bozo1 said: You know, there is another side to it. So someone representing this forum of men contacts say, [redacted], and asks her to get slimed again. And it is clear in the communication it is for a fetish website. It is assumed that her reaction should be "What a bunch of pervs! Whacking off to a kid's tv show!"
Ok..... that said.... I have to put myself in her shoes. Let's say I did a TV show as a kid where I ......oh I dunno...... was tied up for a whole episode. And now, 40 years later, a rep for a forum of female bondage enthusiasts asks me to recreate that so they could whack off to it. I might be flattered that they'd want to see that! Hell, I might brag about it to my friends!
That said, I am aware the creepy part means that these women "enjoyed" watching that old episode of me as a kid.
My question is..... now I am a grown adult and would be doing it willingly knowing what it means. Is that such a terrible thing?
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
Ok..... that said.... I have to put myself in her shoes. Let's say I did a TV show as a kid where I ......oh I dunno...... was tied up for a whole episode. And now, 40 years later, a rep for a forum of female bondage enthusiasts asks me to recreate that so they could whack off to it. I might be flattered that they'd want to see that! Hell, I might brag about it to my friends!
That said, I am aware the creepy part means that these women "enjoyed" watching that old episode of me as a kid.
My question is..... now I am a grown adult and would be doing it willingly knowing what it means. Is that such a terrible thing?
Besides, Rich has all kinds of scenes that are of ADULT WOMEN recreating scenes from the electric company. So what? Those are great scenes and I don't see people saying they are illicit in some way. If Rich or whoever asked Lisa Ruddy to film for him instead of one of regular girls.... so what? She might be flattered.
No, no, no, no, no. The whole 'might be flattered' thing is an absolutely classic example of trying to normalise or legitimise sexual harrassment. Let women be ffs. If they wanted to be involved in adult or fetish work, they'd put it out there themselves.
9/18/22, 4:18pm: [Admin] Quotes corrected. Please reply below quoted text, not above, so that the thread reads in the correct order, top to bottom. Thanks!
I just want to add something to this discussion that I feel is important and haven't seen mentioned yet;
What this really boils down to is treating these former actresses as potential sex objects rather than treating them as people. That's fine in fantasies, but usually harmful in reality.
And especially harmful when the person that's being objectified isn't a sex worker or model (i.e, a willing participant in the business of turning fantasies into realities), because it feels like a complete ambush to them. Asking these former actresses to get slimed again for our perverse pleasure is more akin to someone cat-calling your mom at her place of employment than it is to asking a fetish model to get slimed.
These actresses never agreed to participate in fetish work and didn't have the intention of ever being involved with one. We chose to sexualize them, (although I use the word "chose" very lightly, because really, none of us really have any choice in what turns us on, especially that early on in our sexual development :halo
and there's nothing wrong with us sexualizing them getting slimed, because it's not participatory for the subject. It's our fantasy. They don't have to be involved. Asking for their involvement however IS participatory, and even just doing that can be emotionally damaging to the subject.
I very much believe that @KingRandor was coming from a good place here (albeit a misguided one), because in my experience, he's not a creep or a stalker or anything close to the likes of some of the wam terrorists we've all come to know and dread over the years.
And the mistake here, is one that I've seen a lot of non-creeps (and even some of my good friends) make on here, and outside of wam, which is allowing our perv brain to overtake whatever rational empathy we usually would have, due to the pursuit of fantasy.
For instance;
If you ask and they say no, it's no sweat off your back. They're just a potential slime subject to you as part of your sexual fantasy. They decline, you move on. No harm, no foul, because you were kind and respectful and not harmful or creepy about how you interacted with them. Right?
Wrong. What you're failing to see is, just asking them is in fact harmful and creepy. You're asking them to participate in a sex act. No matter how innocent the actual content is, and no matter how nice and respectful you are about it, you are asking them to do something so that you can cum.
It is no different than asking them for a blowjob. And there are super nice and respectful ways to ask for a beej too, but we can all agree, it would be major off-putting to have someone from the internet randomly seek us out and ask us for one because of something we did 30+ years ago, right?
Again, I know @KingRandor meant well here, and I'm not trying to call him out with this post, and I really respect that he brought this idea up for discussion rather than just doing it, because he clearly had reservations himself and was right to follow his intuition on that.
Also, in general, I think this is a really good teachable moment for all of us because it's extremely important to recognize that it isn't the fetish that makes reaching out to a civilian (i.e, non-wammer, non-sex worker, non-model) potentially creepy and harmful. It's the non-consensual sexualization of another person and then requesting their participation in said sexualization.
It's totally fine to sexualize anyone or anything in the safe confines of our own mind. That's what makes fantasies so great. But turning fantasies into realities requires willful participation, and with a fetish like wam that's inherently non-sexual (to most), we need to exercise extra care and judgement with regards to the feelings of others when it comes to outreach.
And FWIW, I have done the creepy detective work over the years to find EVERY single ycdtotv actress I ever wanted to slime, and, I also have contacted exactly NONE of them, because that's where the line of participation is crossed in terms of me turning one of my fantasies into a reality. I'm certainly not proud in hindsight of the creepy behavior of looking them all up, but I'm human like everyone else and my perv brain can often cloud my judgement. I am however proud of the fact that I've never once even considered actually following through with contacting them, because as soon as my sexual gratification could possibly effect someone else in a negative way, the heart and the brain take the reigns back.
I think most of us have good hearts and good brains, that can usually overpower our pp's and puss-puss's, but sometimes we don't recognize how we may potentially hurt other people because of a lack of understanding or perspective, so I really think this is a very valuable discussion and I second @dalamar666's request that this post remain up, as well as thank @KingRandor for making the OP and being open and respectful about it all.
What this really boils down to is treating these former actresses as potential sex objects rather than treating them as people. That's fine in fantasies, but usually harmful in reality.
And especially harmful when the person that's being objectified isn't a sex worker or model (i.e, a willing participant in the business of turning fantasies into realities), because it feels like a complete ambush to them. Asking these former actresses to get slimed again for our perverse pleasure is more akin to someone cat-calling your mom at her place of employment than it is to asking a fetish model to get slimed.
These actresses never agreed to participate in fetish work and didn't have the intention of ever being involved with one. We chose to sexualize them, (although I use the word "chose" very lightly, because really, none of us really have any choice in what turns us on, especially that early on in our sexual development :halo
and there's nothing wrong with us sexualizing them getting slimed, because it's not participatory for the subject. It's our fantasy. They don't have to be involved. Asking for their involvement however IS participatory, and even just doing that can be emotionally damaging to the subject.I very much believe that @KingRandor was coming from a good place here (albeit a misguided one), because in my experience, he's not a creep or a stalker or anything close to the likes of some of the wam terrorists we've all come to know and dread over the years.
And the mistake here, is one that I've seen a lot of non-creeps (and even some of my good friends) make on here, and outside of wam, which is allowing our perv brain to overtake whatever rational empathy we usually would have, due to the pursuit of fantasy.
For instance;
KingRandor said: As the saying goes, you never know til you ask. Some will take it weird, others won't. If they say no, move on.
If you ask and they say no, it's no sweat off your back. They're just a potential slime subject to you as part of your sexual fantasy. They decline, you move on. No harm, no foul, because you were kind and respectful and not harmful or creepy about how you interacted with them. Right?
Wrong. What you're failing to see is, just asking them is in fact harmful and creepy. You're asking them to participate in a sex act. No matter how innocent the actual content is, and no matter how nice and respectful you are about it, you are asking them to do something so that you can cum.
It is no different than asking them for a blowjob. And there are super nice and respectful ways to ask for a beej too, but we can all agree, it would be major off-putting to have someone from the internet randomly seek us out and ask us for one because of something we did 30+ years ago, right?
Again, I know @KingRandor meant well here, and I'm not trying to call him out with this post, and I really respect that he brought this idea up for discussion rather than just doing it, because he clearly had reservations himself and was right to follow his intuition on that.
Also, in general, I think this is a really good teachable moment for all of us because it's extremely important to recognize that it isn't the fetish that makes reaching out to a civilian (i.e, non-wammer, non-sex worker, non-model) potentially creepy and harmful. It's the non-consensual sexualization of another person and then requesting their participation in said sexualization.
It's totally fine to sexualize anyone or anything in the safe confines of our own mind. That's what makes fantasies so great. But turning fantasies into realities requires willful participation, and with a fetish like wam that's inherently non-sexual (to most), we need to exercise extra care and judgement with regards to the feelings of others when it comes to outreach.
And FWIW, I have done the creepy detective work over the years to find EVERY single ycdtotv actress I ever wanted to slime, and, I also have contacted exactly NONE of them, because that's where the line of participation is crossed in terms of me turning one of my fantasies into a reality. I'm certainly not proud in hindsight of the creepy behavior of looking them all up, but I'm human like everyone else and my perv brain can often cloud my judgement. I am however proud of the fact that I've never once even considered actually following through with contacting them, because as soon as my sexual gratification could possibly effect someone else in a negative way, the heart and the brain take the reigns back.
I think most of us have good hearts and good brains, that can usually overpower our pp's and puss-puss's, but sometimes we don't recognize how we may potentially hurt other people because of a lack of understanding or perspective, so I really think this is a very valuable discussion and I second @dalamar666's request that this post remain up, as well as thank @KingRandor for making the OP and being open and respectful about it all.
Kelsey said it beautifully. Granted, I'd have added a few dick jokes and Katy Perry lyrics with absolutely no context, but she done good.
Oh Janet! You look so funny!!!
dalamar666 said: I hope this thread is left up for reference purposes. I know that we don't normally do a sticky thread kind of thing. What about making a section with commonly discussed themes and moving the threads there. Things like what happened to model X, respectful communication, discussions about the credit card fiasco, why are ID's required etc. Make the posts so they can no longer be replied to and toss them all in the same section of the forum.
I respectfully disagree, only in this manner: I don't think any of the positions advocating (or playing "devils advocate") for this type of behavior deserve any credence on this site. I would definitely be in favor of certain stickied topics explicitly stating the position of the site on this matter. I would absolutely be in favor of the preservation of numerous comments on this post, because they are well stated and eloquent, especially those of DungeonMasterOne and Kelsey, but I strongly feel there's no reason to preserve in any capacity the advocacy for harrassment.
Caution said:
I respectfully disagree, only in this manner: I don't think any of the positions advocating (or playing "devils advocate") for this type of behavior deserve any credence on this site. I would definitely be in favor of certain stickied topics explicitly stating the position of the site on this matter. I would absolutely be in favor of the preservation of numerous comments on this post, because they are well stated and eloquent, especially those of DungeonMasterOne and Kelsey, but I strongly feel there's no reason to preserve in any capacity the advocacy for harrassment.
dalamar666 said: I hope this thread is left up for reference purposes. I know that we don't normally do a sticky thread kind of thing. What about making a section with commonly discussed themes and moving the threads there. Things like what happened to model X, respectful communication, discussions about the credit card fiasco, why are ID's required etc. Make the posts so they can no longer be replied to and toss them all in the same section of the forum.
I respectfully disagree, only in this manner: I don't think any of the positions advocating (or playing "devils advocate") for this type of behavior deserve any credence on this site. I would definitely be in favor of certain stickied topics explicitly stating the position of the site on this matter. I would absolutely be in favor of the preservation of numerous comments on this post, because they are well stated and eloquent, especially those of DungeonMasterOne and Kelsey, but I strongly feel there's no reason to preserve in any capacity the advocacy for harrassment.
As much as I disagree with contacting them (non-fetish people) for fetishistic purpose, and yes it is a bad idea....
You and your moralizing censorship SJW nonsense is worse and needs to F*** off. This is not Facebook, or Twitter, or Youtube where they're censoring stuff like the CCP regime (aka China). I came here to jerk off in a politics and moral free zone. Your moralizing thought police post on what people can or cannot say is not welcomed here. I'm not interested in your echo chamber, and I would like to hear the other side regardless of how awful it is.
You and your moralizing censorship SJW nonsense is worse and needs to F*** off. This is not Facebook, or Twitter, or Youtube where they're censoring stuff like the CCP regime (aka China). I came here to jerk off in a politics and moral free zone. Your moralizing thought police post on what people can or cannot say is not welcomed here. I'm not interested in your echo chamber, and I would like to hear the other side regardless of how awful it is.
Really dude? In what way is this an appropriate response to what this thread is about or to Caution's response?
Also I guess not allowing posts that encourage harassment somehow equals thought police or something?!
I think the entire thread should stand for all to read.
When someone has a bad idea we shouldn't silence them, we should have the debate and prove their idea is wrong in a transparent manner..
When we teach history, let's say WW2, we still teach about all the horrors and the persecution that happened and why it was done. We don't shy away from it, instead we study it and learn about all the damage it caused and so on. If our lessons on WW2 were reduced to simply "Nazi's bad, don't be a Nazi" then we wouldn't really learn much.
Also, I am categorically NOT comparing OP to a nazi
When someone has a bad idea we shouldn't silence them, we should have the debate and prove their idea is wrong in a transparent manner..
When we teach history, let's say WW2, we still teach about all the horrors and the persecution that happened and why it was done. We don't shy away from it, instead we study it and learn about all the damage it caused and so on. If our lessons on WW2 were reduced to simply "Nazi's bad, don't be a Nazi" then we wouldn't really learn much.
Also, I am categorically NOT comparing OP to a nazi
Leave it up, take it down, but let's call a spade a spade here. The OP is still getting turned on by messy material from 30 years ago and is asking for his kink to continue. I can just imagine the poor girl who was in the shampoo commercial THREE DECADES AGO. Hi there, now middle aged mom. You did something as an elementary school student that really gave me a boner and I would like to relive said boner. Is this creepy?
Dude. You need to stop.
Dude. You need to stop.
KelseyRose said: I just want to add something to this discussion that I feel is important and haven't seen mentioned yet;
What this really boils down to is treating these former actresses as potential sex objects rather than treating them as people. That's fine in fantasies, but usually harmful in reality.
And especially harmful when the person that's being objectified isn't a sex worker or model (i.e, a willing participant in the business of turning fantasies into realities), because it feels like a complete ambush to them. Asking these former actresses to get slimed again for our perverse pleasure is more akin to someone cat-calling your mom at her place of employment than it is to asking a fetish model to get slimed.
These actresses never agreed to participate in fetish work and didn't have the intention of ever being involved with one. We chose to sexualize them, (although I use the word "chose" very lightly, because really, none of us really have any choice in what turns us on, especially that early on in our sexual development :halo and there's nothing wrong with us sexualizing them getting slimed, because it's not participatory for the subject. It's our fantasy. They don't have to be involved. Asking for their involvement however IS participatory, and even just doing that can be emotionally damaging to the subject.
I very much believe that @KingRandor was coming from a good place here (albeit a misguided one), because in my experience, he's not a creep or a stalker or anything close to the likes of some of the wam terrorists we've all come to know and dread over the years.
And the mistake here, is one that I've seen a lot of non-creeps (and even some of my good friends) make on here, and outside of wam, which is allowing our perv brain to overtake whatever rational empathy we usually would have, due to the pursuit of fantasy.
For instance;
If you ask and they say no, it's no sweat off your back. They're just a potential slime subject to you as part of your sexual fantasy. They decline, you move on. No harm, no foul, because you were kind and respectful and not harmful or creepy about how you interacted with them. Right?
Wrong. What you're failing to see is, just asking them is in fact harmful and creepy. You're asking them to participate in a sex act. No matter how innocent the actual content is, and no matter how nice and respectful you are about it, you are asking them to do something so that you can cum.
It is no different than asking them for a blowjob. And there are super nice and respectful ways to ask for a beej too, but we can all agree, it would be major off-putting to have someone from the internet randomly seek us out and ask us for one because of something we did 30+ years ago, right?
Again, I know @KingRandor meant well here, and I'm not trying to call him out with this post, and I really respect that he brought this idea up for discussion rather than just doing it, because he clearly had reservations himself and was right to follow his intuition on that.
Also, in general, I think this is a really good teachable moment for all of us because it's extremely important to recognize that it isn't the fetish that makes reaching out to a civilian (i.e, non-wammer, non-sex worker, non-model) potentially creepy and harmful. It's the non-consensual sexualization of another person and then requesting their participation in said sexualization.
It's totally fine to sexualize anyone or anything in the safe confines of our own mind. That's what makes fantasies so great. But turning fantasies into realities requires willful participation, and with a fetish like wam that's inherently non-sexual (to most), we need to exercise extra care and judgement with regards to the feelings of others when it comes to outreach.
And FWIW, I have done the creepy detective work over the years to find EVERY single ycdtotv actress I ever wanted to slime, and, I also have contacted exactly NONE of them, because that's where the line of participation is crossed in terms of me turning one of my fantasies into a reality. I'm certainly not proud in hindsight of the creepy behavior of looking them all up, but I'm human like everyone else and my perv brain can often cloud my judgement. I am however proud of the fact that I've never once even considered actually following through with contacting them, because as soon as my sexual gratification could possibly effect someone else in a negative way, the heart and the brain take the reigns back.
I think most of us have good hearts and good brains, that can usually overpower our pp's and puss-puss's, but sometimes we don't recognize how we may potentially hurt other people because of a lack of understanding or perspective, so I really think this is a very valuable discussion and I second @dalamar666's request that this post remain up, as well as thank @KingRandor for making the OP and being open and respectful about it all.
What this really boils down to is treating these former actresses as potential sex objects rather than treating them as people. That's fine in fantasies, but usually harmful in reality.
And especially harmful when the person that's being objectified isn't a sex worker or model (i.e, a willing participant in the business of turning fantasies into realities), because it feels like a complete ambush to them. Asking these former actresses to get slimed again for our perverse pleasure is more akin to someone cat-calling your mom at her place of employment than it is to asking a fetish model to get slimed.
These actresses never agreed to participate in fetish work and didn't have the intention of ever being involved with one. We chose to sexualize them, (although I use the word "chose" very lightly, because really, none of us really have any choice in what turns us on, especially that early on in our sexual development :halo
and there's nothing wrong with us sexualizing them getting slimed, because it's not participatory for the subject. It's our fantasy. They don't have to be involved. Asking for their involvement however IS participatory, and even just doing that can be emotionally damaging to the subject.I very much believe that @KingRandor was coming from a good place here (albeit a misguided one), because in my experience, he's not a creep or a stalker or anything close to the likes of some of the wam terrorists we've all come to know and dread over the years.
And the mistake here, is one that I've seen a lot of non-creeps (and even some of my good friends) make on here, and outside of wam, which is allowing our perv brain to overtake whatever rational empathy we usually would have, due to the pursuit of fantasy.
For instance;
KingRandor said: As the saying goes, you never know til you ask. Some will take it weird, others won't. If they say no, move on.
If you ask and they say no, it's no sweat off your back. They're just a potential slime subject to you as part of your sexual fantasy. They decline, you move on. No harm, no foul, because you were kind and respectful and not harmful or creepy about how you interacted with them. Right?
Wrong. What you're failing to see is, just asking them is in fact harmful and creepy. You're asking them to participate in a sex act. No matter how innocent the actual content is, and no matter how nice and respectful you are about it, you are asking them to do something so that you can cum.
It is no different than asking them for a blowjob. And there are super nice and respectful ways to ask for a beej too, but we can all agree, it would be major off-putting to have someone from the internet randomly seek us out and ask us for one because of something we did 30+ years ago, right?
Again, I know @KingRandor meant well here, and I'm not trying to call him out with this post, and I really respect that he brought this idea up for discussion rather than just doing it, because he clearly had reservations himself and was right to follow his intuition on that.
Also, in general, I think this is a really good teachable moment for all of us because it's extremely important to recognize that it isn't the fetish that makes reaching out to a civilian (i.e, non-wammer, non-sex worker, non-model) potentially creepy and harmful. It's the non-consensual sexualization of another person and then requesting their participation in said sexualization.
It's totally fine to sexualize anyone or anything in the safe confines of our own mind. That's what makes fantasies so great. But turning fantasies into realities requires willful participation, and with a fetish like wam that's inherently non-sexual (to most), we need to exercise extra care and judgement with regards to the feelings of others when it comes to outreach.
And FWIW, I have done the creepy detective work over the years to find EVERY single ycdtotv actress I ever wanted to slime, and, I also have contacted exactly NONE of them, because that's where the line of participation is crossed in terms of me turning one of my fantasies into a reality. I'm certainly not proud in hindsight of the creepy behavior of looking them all up, but I'm human like everyone else and my perv brain can often cloud my judgement. I am however proud of the fact that I've never once even considered actually following through with contacting them, because as soon as my sexual gratification could possibly effect someone else in a negative way, the heart and the brain take the reigns back.
I think most of us have good hearts and good brains, that can usually overpower our pp's and puss-puss's, but sometimes we don't recognize how we may potentially hurt other people because of a lack of understanding or perspective, so I really think this is a very valuable discussion and I second @dalamar666's request that this post remain up, as well as thank @KingRandor for making the OP and being open and respectful about it all.
This gives me so much to ponder about on my own behavior. Part of the appeal of wam to me is not being dehumanized. But the way you write this all out really gets me wondering how I engage with other wammers but also being of fan of something in the past doesn't mean the person involved may want to be involved in the present. Here's an interesting example
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/love-sex/ex-porn-star-lisa-ann-27980468.amp
Paint with play and surrender
Others have said it already, we can't advocate for people to go out and contact former child stars to perform adult material based on their kid show characters. We need to learn to leave these actors and their specific scenes behind, confined only to our childhoods.
Perfectly stated. We should only refer to that stuff when pondering what got us here and the underlying nature of our fetish. Anything else implies that we are fantasizing about those kids. We need to be really decisive on this because our fetish is especially tied to triggers from adolescence, and that just reads differently to people who are not in our community.
I'll leave this post up for debate because the OP isn't the only one who thought this was a good idea, and so far I think having these responses makes it worth leaving up. I do like dalamar666's idea of a sort of hall of fame forum; For now all we have is the ability to make some threads permanent, but I'll think about it. Thanks for redacting, DM1.
dalamar666 said: When I was a kid I liked seeing people get wet or slimed or messy in their clothes. It was one of those things that you aren't supposed to do. Then when I went through puberty it took on a whole new meaning. Now that I am an adult I see that my view of the same activities has changed. Do I get the same feelings as an adult watching those activities as when I was a kid, no. Would I want to see the people I saw as a kid aged and doing those same activities, no. It would not have the same effect. Because in my mind, I would have the images of them as they were when I saw them as a kid and it would ruin the experience.
Perfectly stated. We should only refer to that stuff when pondering what got us here and the underlying nature of our fetish. Anything else implies that we are fantasizing about those kids. We need to be really decisive on this because our fetish is especially tied to triggers from adolescence, and that just reads differently to people who are not in our community.
I'll leave this post up for debate because the OP isn't the only one who thought this was a good idea, and so far I think having these responses makes it worth leaving up. I do like dalamar666's idea of a sort of hall of fame forum; For now all we have is the ability to make some threads permanent, but I'll think about it. Thanks for redacting, DM1.
Stay messy, my friends
I also think this is one of our better discussions too. We're not actively dumping on someone for a bad idea, but exploring why some may think it's totally innocuous while others have different backgrounds and past experiences that may show us otherwise.
He's more potato now than man. Twisted and evil.
I just want to add, I think Kesley's response which you can read at the link below is one the the greatest posts on this overall subject I've ever read, anywhere. She totally nails the problem, and everyone should read what she has to say.
https://umd.net/forums/last-week-i-started-a-thread-asking#postid_902690
https://umd.net/forums/last-week-i-started-a-thread-asking#postid_902690
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
And you guys leave Joyce De Witt alone as well!
Oh Janet! You look so funny!!!
