|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"Unpopular WAM opinions"
Love you, too
WAMOptimist93 said: Mine is that I vastly prefer unscripted scenes to scripted scenes; I say that because scripted scenes seem to be more popular here. Don't get me wrong, scripted scenes can be well-thought out and fun...but I love when someone is either just ad-libbing or just getting covered in mess without all the extra fluff. I LOVE scenes where it's just like someone placed a camera in the room but there's otherwise no difference, or if someone is naturally playing to the audience (Brattyshortcakes does this extremely well). I don't need an elaborate script or anything. If I can see the wammer in the video is having a blast, that's usually enough for me.
If this isn't a prime example of riding the same brain wave-I duna what is!!!! Thanks for the shoutout as well!!!
Unpopular opinion: WAM isn't porn (or doesn't have to be).
I get that it's a fetish, but I'm not here for the stuff that's like "Someone gets fucked while also getting pied." I'm Ace tho...nudity is fine cause it's just a body for me, but I'd rather see Piezone clobber a hot model with pies in a rigged game show than see anything sexually explicit. Even having a model groan a certain way after getting pied/slimed/whatever is just too much sometimes.
But I get I'm prob in a minority there, even putting Asexuality aside, and I'm happy to just support my thing and letting everyone else go their own way, so keep on keeping on y'all!
I get that it's a fetish, but I'm not here for the stuff that's like "Someone gets fucked while also getting pied." I'm Ace tho...nudity is fine cause it's just a body for me, but I'd rather see Piezone clobber a hot model with pies in a rigged game show than see anything sexually explicit. Even having a model groan a certain way after getting pied/slimed/whatever is just too much sometimes.
But I get I'm prob in a minority there, even putting Asexuality aside, and I'm happy to just support my thing and letting everyone else go their own way, so keep on keeping on y'all!
DungeonMasterOne said:
Agreed. And many "sexy fancy dress" costumes are made of materials that don't really show wetness very well, and dont even drape nicely when dry. Right from the start I always gave my models a veto over anything they hated, outfit wise, and now I often let them chose from the collection themselves.
LOL re fire hose!
And know exactly what you mean, tiny panties that get completely overwhelmed at first pour.
Whenever we do underwear filling, the girls are either in swimsuits, or full cut high waist spandex panties, which can actually accept a reasonable amount of gloop before they start to leak badly, and produce the kind of feelings @Justine mentions in her reply.
That's fair enough. The first time I ever became aware of a "feelings" reaction to someone getting messy was a comedy skit from the late 70s where one character has their trousers filled with various messy foodstuffs, and as I was watching it I became aware of a reaction, and that I really wanted someone to do the same thing to me.
Arrghhh! You have blasphemed before the Kesley! Take him away and slime him!
Actually agreed, I always thought "gunge" was just a generic term for "stuff you mess people up with", the division into gunge, slime, etc seems to have come much later.
Agreed, though would hope that's not an unpopular view.
(fx: Makes notes to only shoot in Premier Inns in future)
Blasphemy!
Interesting take. To me mud is very much WAM because it's very wet and very messy, but then I'm not into the humilation / what people might think, thing.
Agreed. Messy swimsuit filling is valid, as is wearing swimsuits (especially more clothes-like ones) in the mud. But wetlook should involve clothing not intended for getting wet in.
I'd also suggest that naked in the water is not wetlook, it's just swimming, though I can understand why its allowed in the wetlook forum. But to me nude isn't wetlook.
Agree completely. And would go further, anything meat-based (as most petfood is) isn't wam. And that's not for any preachy reason - I'm a meat eater - but a combination of "if something sentient died so we can have it, it should not be wasted" and "the whole idea of wamming with dead flesh is just gross and horrible."
I can see the validity of the argument, but the absolute showstopper is that if it was allowed, the billing providers would nuke the entire site from orbit. So it's never going to happen.
How about B&Q 400W halogen floodlamps? My objective is to be able to see all the detail, especially seep-through and leak-through, from clothes filling, and in general as clothes are messed up, and that needs plenty of light. Guess will have to switch to LEDs eventually but I did buy enough spare bulbs to keep the current lamps going for years to come, plus the heat they generate is a welcome extra in the dungeon. When we do switch to LEDs we'll need to add a third 2kW heater to make up the difference.
See those a lot in selfie / close-up videos, never actually used one. But know the circular reflection you see in someone's eyes when they use one. What's the issue with them for WAM scenes?
Agree with pretty much all of those. And yes, our experience is that while nude/sexy scenes do sell (we have a couple of people who actively like being nude/topless, and getting sexy with each other), they don't sell massively more than our mainline fully clothed scenes do.
No no, all WAM should start with the participants in wellies. Much better for filling, or keeping their feet clean until they come off and then the clean bare feet get messed up.
Because to some of us, it's the pinnacle of sexy. I honestly find a girl in high waist jeans and a crop top, or skin tight running pants and top, much more aluring to look at than the same girl in a formal outfit. TBH I'd always thought my view was the unpopular one, but perhaps not?
Interesting in the context of this thread though, for years people have said in various places they want to see more formal (esp in wetlook), and yet the wetlook producer content available is something like 90% jeans. Is that because almost all wetlook producers seem to expect models to provide their own clothes? I only realised they did that a decade or so back, I've always provided everything our people wear so just assumed other producers did too. Or is it that in reality jeans out-sell everything else because of how good denim looks wet?
Absolutely, seconded.
In fact male producer voice on the soundtrack at all is a total no-no. I think I've mentioned before when a certain former producer utterly ruined the scene he was shooting by abruptly barking a telling-off at the model, on camera, for doing something "wrong", which means it can't even be watched on silent as you can see her very negative facial reaction as he starts berating her.
TheSpecialist said:
-A lot of "sexy" costumes just look weird and ugly. Even if WAM videos are for the male gaze, I think a lot of producers would do well to outsource wardrobe opinions to those more familiar with the female form.
-A lot of "sexy" costumes just look weird and ugly. Even if WAM videos are for the male gaze, I think a lot of producers would do well to outsource wardrobe opinions to those more familiar with the female form.
Agreed. And many "sexy fancy dress" costumes are made of materials that don't really show wetness very well, and dont even drape nicely when dry. Right from the start I always gave my models a veto over anything they hated, outfit wise, and now I often let them chose from the collection themselves.
TheSpecialist said
anty filling...kinda pointless. I love clothes filling, but most panty filling beats are like trying to fill a shot glass with a fire hose.
anty filling...kinda pointless. I love clothes filling, but most panty filling beats are like trying to fill a shot glass with a fire hose.LOL re fire hose!
And know exactly what you mean, tiny panties that get completely overwhelmed at first pour.Whenever we do underwear filling, the girls are either in swimsuits, or full cut high waist spandex panties, which can actually accept a reasonable amount of gloop before they start to leak badly, and produce the kind of feelings @Justine mentions in her reply.
xman10 said:
I think it comes down to which mainstream content got you into this. For example, if you like those kinds of "how dare you?" comeuppance scenarios, you probably started off with movie/TV comedy content. Those of us who like more genuine (seeming), less scripted content come from game shows.
DungeonMasterOne said: But pieing someone in the face, but otherwise leaving them un-messed, as sometimes happens in mainstream clips, I just don't see the appeal. I gather I'm something of an outlier in this.
I think it comes down to which mainstream content got you into this. For example, if you like those kinds of "how dare you?" comeuppance scenarios, you probably started off with movie/TV comedy content. Those of us who like more genuine (seeming), less scripted content come from game shows.
That's fair enough. The first time I ever became aware of a "feelings" reaction to someone getting messy was a comedy skit from the late 70s where one character has their trousers filled with various messy foodstuffs, and as I was watching it I became aware of a reaction, and that I really wanted someone to do the same thing to me.
OscillatorSlop said: There is no formal definition of "gunge" vs "slime." They're not terms of art and it's not that important. Americans saying "gunge" is weird. If you need to be precise, just say what the slime is made of (i.e. cellulose or oatmeal, etc)
Arrghhh! You have blasphemed before the Kesley! Take him away and slime him!
Actually agreed, I always thought "gunge" was just a generic term for "stuff you mess people up with", the division into gunge, slime, etc seems to have come much later.
Pasta said: My hates:
When you see an obviously uncomfortable model because her boyfriend/husband is pushing her into being filmed.
When you see an obviously uncomfortable model because her boyfriend/husband is pushing her into being filmed.
Agreed, though would hope that's not an unpopular view.
Pasta said: Travelodge videos.
(fx: Makes notes to only shoot in Premier Inns in future)
dalamar666 said: Mud is not WAM.
Blasphemy!
Interesting take. To me mud is very much WAM because it's very wet and very messy, but then I'm not into the humilation / what people might think, thing.
BarryMcCockiner2 said: - bathing suits and bikinis being worn for wetlook is stupid. Messy is better, but someone getting dunked in a bikini or going swimming in a bikini is literally just using it for the intended purpose.
Agreed. Messy swimsuit filling is valid, as is wearing swimsuits (especially more clothes-like ones) in the mud. But wetlook should involve clothing not intended for getting wet in.
I'd also suggest that naked in the water is not wetlook, it's just swimming, though I can understand why its allowed in the wetlook forum. But to me nude isn't wetlook.
pieandslimeonly said: Dog food isn't wam
Agree completely. And would go further, anything meat-based (as most petfood is) isn't wam. And that's not for any preachy reason - I'm a meat eater - but a combination of "if something sentient died so we can have it, it should not be wasted" and "the whole idea of wamming with dead flesh is just gross and horrible."
LifeIsGoo said: This thread isn't about opinions, it's about unpopular opinions.
Peeplay should be included on this site because:
Peeplay should be included on this site because:
I can see the validity of the argument, but the absolute showstopper is that if it was allowed, the billing providers would nuke the entire site from orbit. So it's never going to happen.
Nostalgic Erotica Prod said: Oh boy, you asked for it.
- not everything needs to be shot with Home Depot LED jobsite lamps. The market is literally over saturated with brands making equipment for us on the cheap.
- not everything needs to be shot with Home Depot LED jobsite lamps. The market is literally over saturated with brands making equipment for us on the cheap.
How about B&Q 400W halogen floodlamps?
My objective is to be able to see all the detail, especially seep-through and leak-through, from clothes filling, and in general as clothes are messed up, and that needs plenty of light. Guess will have to switch to LEDs eventually but I did buy enough spare bulbs to keep the current lamps going for years to come, plus the heat they generate is a welcome extra in the dungeon. When we do switch to LEDs we'll need to add a third 2kW heater to make up the difference.Nostalgic Erotica Prod said: While at it, ditch the damn ring light. You don't know how awful it looks
See those a lot in selfie / close-up videos, never actually used one. But know the circular reflection you see in someone's eyes when they use one. What's the issue with them for WAM scenes?
Nostalgic Erotica Prod said:
- Stop caring how much your videos look like the guy/gal next to you. Be different. Rick Ruben said it best: "If we are aiming to create works that are exceptional, most rules don't apply. Average is nothing to aspire to."
- Nudity is overrated. Sex is low hanging fruit. If you enjoy doing it, go for it but doing it because you feel it will sell better is just false on a number of levels.
- Don't ask for new producers to be shooting content similar to the stuff you enjoy and then ask them why they don't look like someone else's work. Tre' tacky.
- Some of y'all are way too quick to jump right into the mess. Have fun with it! Build a story. The viewer will thank you later
- Some of you who mention you shot your scene in a hotel or bathroom? We can tell. Clean that shit!
- Food stuff never really rung my bell. It's hella fun to shoot. Tons of creative ways to take it. Just not my "thing".
- I gotta second TheSpecialist on the outfits thing. Please, for the love of God, ask your models what they like to wear or at least coordinate with someone who worked wardrobe for a drama/theater club. You would be surprised what we guys get wrong.
- Stop caring how much your videos look like the guy/gal next to you. Be different. Rick Ruben said it best: "If we are aiming to create works that are exceptional, most rules don't apply. Average is nothing to aspire to."
- Nudity is overrated. Sex is low hanging fruit. If you enjoy doing it, go for it but doing it because you feel it will sell better is just false on a number of levels.
- Don't ask for new producers to be shooting content similar to the stuff you enjoy and then ask them why they don't look like someone else's work. Tre' tacky.
- Some of y'all are way too quick to jump right into the mess. Have fun with it! Build a story. The viewer will thank you later
- Some of you who mention you shot your scene in a hotel or bathroom? We can tell. Clean that shit!
- Food stuff never really rung my bell. It's hella fun to shoot. Tons of creative ways to take it. Just not my "thing".
- I gotta second TheSpecialist on the outfits thing. Please, for the love of God, ask your models what they like to wear or at least coordinate with someone who worked wardrobe for a drama/theater club. You would be surprised what we guys get wrong.
Agree with pretty much all of those. And yes, our experience is that while nude/sexy scenes do sell (we have a couple of people who actively like being nude/topless, and getting sexy with each other), they don't sell massively more than our mainline fully clothed scenes do.
Trouso said: Sticking to the topic of 'unpopular' opinions:
Barefoot WAM (Ugh!) Heels should be the last thing to come off, if at all. WAM should go against the conditioning of not getting your best shoes dirty.
Barefoot WAM (Ugh!) Heels should be the last thing to come off, if at all. WAM should go against the conditioning of not getting your best shoes dirty.
No no, all WAM should start with the participants in wellies. Much better for filling, or keeping their feet clean until they come off and then the clean bare feet get messed up.
Trouso said: Casual clothing. Why?
Because to some of us, it's the pinnacle of sexy. I honestly find a girl in high waist jeans and a crop top, or skin tight running pants and top, much more aluring to look at than the same girl in a formal outfit. TBH I'd always thought my view was the unpopular one, but perhaps not?
Interesting in the context of this thread though, for years people have said in various places they want to see more formal (esp in wetlook), and yet the wetlook producer content available is something like 90% jeans. Is that because almost all wetlook producers seem to expect models to provide their own clothes? I only realised they did that a decade or so back, I've always provided everything our people wear so just assumed other producers did too. Or is it that in reality jeans out-sell everything else because of how good denim looks wet?
manufan001 said: There's nothing worse than someone off camera telling a model how to react. Let them react naturally.
Oh, and "look up" is a terrible reaction.
Oh, and "look up" is a terrible reaction.
Absolutely, seconded.
In fact male producer voice on the soundtrack at all is a total no-no. I think I've mentioned before when a certain former producer utterly ruined the scene he was shooting by abruptly barking a telling-off at the model, on camera, for doing something "wrong", which means it can't even be watched on silent as you can see her very negative facial reaction as he starts berating her.
i couldnt find the quote about ditching the ring lights but? I had a ring light handmade for me YEARS ago. Literally before I even knew what wam was.
Ring lights have given me some of the most iconic pics I have ever seen of me and my girls....and that is hard for me to say bc I am super weird about pics of myself. (screenshots actually, and pics)
but I feel like there is something highly erotic about a dark room, one girl, and the cam in the ring light that makes it sooo much more va vooom than just a regular box light.
I have all different types of lights. Warm and cool box lights, over head stick type lights, hand held lights, on camera lights....but honestly....for my personal preference and the quality and light I wanna see? I have ring lights set up almost everytime. atleast one.
but? I have had some instances where the camera man was in a mood and not paying attention to the lights and did not turn them up or down during certain parts and they were way too bright.
I love the way a ring light makes my eyes look. how they pop out through the mess and you arent missing a thing when it comes to the mess.
but? to each their own
Not just to you but a lot of these im reading are really, really picky. Why are we not just like "thank GOD these bad bitches (and dudes) are getting messy and NOT afraid to show their faces for our enjoyment?? however that may be!"
I have my ticks too...like? I hate tarp. lol. but? its something that I have to deal with to play in my foods!
There is so much wam content here. I feel like if you really search you will find something to tickle your fancy pants!
teee heee heee!Get Messy, Get Wet, C'mon Get Happy!
messyhot said:
I feel yah both from the play point of view I can imagine it being a less than pleasant addition for those reasons. But... hear me out here... when it mixes with gunge, especially methylcellulose, it makes a SUPER interesting texture and can make for some very visually appealing swirls, plus it smells rather nice. It works well for me visually creatively to mix with slime, but I probably wouldn't use it on its own.
xman10 said:
- Shaving cream is great for shaving, not for WAM. It produces TOO much coverage, and you lose the playful fun of licking and eating the mess.
- Shaving cream is great for shaving, not for WAM. It produces TOO much coverage, and you lose the playful fun of licking and eating the mess.
piethrowingfan said: Shaving cream really does not do it for me. Really closer than soap than anything else, so kind of the opposite of getting messy. Also, as already pointed out you have to careful not to get it in your mouth or eyes.
I feel yah both from the play point of view I can imagine it being a less than pleasant addition for those reasons. But... hear me out here... when it mixes with gunge, especially methylcellulose, it makes a SUPER interesting texture and can make for some very visually appealing swirls, plus it smells rather nice. It works well for me visually creatively to mix with slime, but I probably wouldn't use it on its own.
I'll have to get some slime to try it out. I like shaving cream for solo play as it's cheap and feels good on top of being easy to clean. My first time was great with it, completely covering my head and face(taking a page out of Jayces book).
Jayce's comment above is fair enough - there's so much content on here if seems unfair to bitch about particular preferences. However...! I know I'm not alone in having something of a foot fetish alongside my love of WAM. So I do find it frustrating when a scene is shot so you can see almost all of a model but not their feet. If you're looking for it, it is surprisingly common (though equally some producers do clearly make an effort to make sure some shots include feet). It seems such a minor change and yet I can't be the only one who feels it's not really a scene of you don't get at least a bit of a view of the model's messy bare feet!
Brattyshortcakes said:
While it is always fun to have a scripted story, I much prefer a natural scene where the person is just going to town and we see it all. Over-editing and playing up the sexual side of wam is a turn off for me, if it happens-it happens, if it doesn't nothing should be forced. Forced wam sex is cringe.
This has been a great way to start my day!
While it is always fun to have a scripted story, I much prefer a natural scene where the person is just going to town and we see it all. Over-editing and playing up the sexual side of wam is a turn off for me, if it happens-it happens, if it doesn't nothing should be forced. Forced wam sex is cringe.
This has been a great way to start my day!
I agree spontaneity adds to the surprise and shock value for sure! I love it when the model as free reign to enjoy the scene and freedom to play.
I understand that I'm a minority being a female liking male wam and probably not the intended audience but I have many unpopular opinions about it but I'll stick to just a few.
Wrestling singlets are highly unattractive in even the hottest guy
Humiliation should come from mess and not by their clothing
Hunched over and jacking it is unappealing. Stand up or sit up straight
~Chloe
Wrestling singlets are highly unattractive in even the hottest guy
Humiliation should come from mess and not by their clothing
Hunched over and jacking it is unappealing. Stand up or sit up straight
~Chloe
Reiver2 said: Jayce's comment above is fair enough - there's so much content on here if seems unfair to bitch about particular preferences. However...! I know I'm not alone in having something of a foot fetish alongside my love of WAM. So I do find it frustrating when a scene is shot so you can see almost all of a model but not their feet. If you're looking for it, it is surprisingly common (though equally some producers do clearly make an effort to make sure some shots include feet). It seems such a minor change and yet I can't be the only one who feels it's not really a scene of you don't get at least a bit of a view of the model's messy bare feet!
A big issue in lots of WAM vids I've seen (mentioned this just the other day in regard to something I saw on the Wetlook forum) is photographers and videographers obsessed with keeping the model's head in shot at all and any cost, even if it means all the actual money shots end up happening out-of -view off the bottom of the frame. Arrghhhhh!
I can only assume it comes from memories people have of taking their first ever photographs, of family members on a day out, and being told to make sure everyone's head is in shot. Which obviously matters when you're shooting Great Aunt Clarissa and all her brood in the cocktail lounge of the Overlook Hotel, but is absolutely NOT how to approach things when filming fetish content.
Feet aren't our main theme but we do always try and include them where practical, and the girls know if we're using our usual standing-up framing, where the shot is just above heads to mid-calf, that if they're going to fill each other's boots or mess up bare feet, to raise their feet onto one of the chairs so they're in shot.
If you've not already seen it you might like this one of ours - I framed the video so the view is full head-to-feet when the girls are sitting down. This does mean their heads rise out of shot if they stand up, but the only times they do that is to either have their pants/skirts filled, or to place a cake that they then sit on. As they sit back down their faces come into view so by the time the newly added gloop is going squish and they are reacting to it, their faces are back in shot. The trailer illustrates this rather nicely with Friday standing up to have her pants filled with custard, and then sitting back down and feeling it as she does so.
https://saturationhall.umd.net/download_info/the-card-game-businesswear-maude-honeysu
A few video frame stills attached below to show how it works.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
Reiver2 said: Jayce's comment above is fair enough - there's so much content on here if seems unfair to bitch about particular preferences. However...! I know I'm not alone in having something of a foot fetish alongside my love of WAM. So I do find it frustrating when a scene is shot so you can see almost all of a model but not their feet. If you're looking for it, it is surprisingly common (though equally some producers do clearly make an effort to make sure some shots include feet). It seems such a minor change and yet I can't be the only one who feels it's not really a scene of you don't get at least a bit of a view of the model's messy bare feet!
Seconded.
I've found so much content on here just by taking the time to search, especially because my specific clothing kink is rare on this website as well.
My only other opinions that I think may be unpopular are-
- clothes ripping is stupid. Unless it's like, so messed up that it's beyond cleaning, required for a scene to make sense, or it's been used for a ton of scenes and is being retired, I just think it's a waste of clothing.
- I also feel like someone wearing clothes for a scene but then taking them off before they get messy is kind of pointless.
- then one last one in response to Jayce's response to mine about bathing suits- I've seen multiple videos on here that's just someone in a bathing suit swimming in a pool. I can see that appealing to the wet hair aspect, but apart from that it's about as kinky as watching the beginning of a race at the Olympics when they first dive in. (Speaking of which, on a side note, as a former competitive swimmer, I laugh my ass off whenever I see someone doing a scene in a fast skin because my first thought is how f*king long did it take them to get that thing on?)
But also- what the last two people have said- you do you. I'm not here to judge.
A few possibly unpopular opinions
1: Scenes where the mess goes on the models face first / at the start (pie to face, gunge over head etc.) I much prefer to see the build up with the face/head/hair covered last.
2: Using milk is an instant turn off. I don't see the appeal, textureally it feels no different to water and unless the model is literally bathing in it looks no different once poured. If poured after other mess it washes off other mess. All I can think of with milk is how bad it smells unless you clean it up imediately (thouigh I don't have this issue seeing other dairy products!)
3: Cake sitting in chocolate cake / filling knickers with chocolate cake, to me chocolate cake round the bum area looks far to much like something else that could occur in that area and that's an instant turn off for me.
4: Swimsuit scenes that turn out to be bikini scenes , I love seeing swimsuit fillings but seeing models getting messy in bikinis does nothing for me and tbh just seems lazy (was the model not prepared to get messy in anything else).
5: Wetlook in swimwear is not WAM that's just swimming
6: There is nothing hotter than a model using gross (savoury) mess and genuinely enjoying herself getting messy in that gross mess
1: Scenes where the mess goes on the models face first / at the start (pie to face, gunge over head etc.) I much prefer to see the build up with the face/head/hair covered last.
2: Using milk is an instant turn off. I don't see the appeal, textureally it feels no different to water and unless the model is literally bathing in it looks no different once poured. If poured after other mess it washes off other mess. All I can think of with milk is how bad it smells unless you clean it up imediately (thouigh I don't have this issue seeing other dairy products!)
3: Cake sitting in chocolate cake / filling knickers with chocolate cake, to me chocolate cake round the bum area looks far to much like something else that could occur in that area and that's an instant turn off for me.
4: Swimsuit scenes that turn out to be bikini scenes , I love seeing swimsuit fillings but seeing models getting messy in bikinis does nothing for me and tbh just seems lazy (was the model not prepared to get messy in anything else).
5: Wetlook in swimwear is not WAM that's just swimming
6: There is nothing hotter than a model using gross (savoury) mess and genuinely enjoying herself getting messy in that gross mess
SlimeHead1 said: I'm gonna be that guy. I guess my unpopular opinion is to just enjoy what you enjoy, let others do the same. I really feel this has turned into a "What I hate" post, some with not so subtle jabs at specific producers without naming them.
WAM has so many different facets and tastes, that not everyone will be pleased all the time. There is an insane amount of hate and negativity in society right now, that posts like this just kinda unnecessarily add to it, in my unpopular opinion.
WAM has so many different facets and tastes, that not everyone will be pleased all the time. There is an insane amount of hate and negativity in society right now, that posts like this just kinda unnecessarily add to it, in my unpopular opinion.
What he said. Probably 90% or more of what's on this site holds no appeal to me whatsoever, but I'm not gonna criticize that 90%. I'm gonna enjoy the other 10%. I'm sure my silly illustrations only appeal to like 0.000001% of the people coming here.
dalamar666 said: Mud is not WAM. Yup I said it, I know the mud lovers will come out in droves against this. Yes it is wet and yes it is still messy from a certain point of view. However, to me WAM is something in the your not meant to do this kind of area. That food play and clothed swimming is a form of rebellion against the norm. They have a whole industry built on relaxing people and overpaying to have mud smeared on their bodies. Romping around in the mud is more socially accepted than the other facets of WAM. However, that line gets crossed when it becomes sexualized. That introduces a little bit of the rebellion to it. Nobody turns a head if you are riding around in an ATV or a side by side and you get all muddy. In some places, coming home with your vehicle drenched in mud is a badge of honor. Nobody assumes that anything sexual was done if you go mudding. There is no sense of wondering what people are thinking when you talk about going mudding or when you come home muddy. But, when you are in a grocery store and buy out their stock in cool whip, pudding and pie tins. I think there is enough of a hint out there that something devious might be happening. You might get the knowing nod from the cashier or other people in line. Maybe a little smirk or a flushed look from people who would love to do what you are doing but are not quite brave enough.
My biggest fears at my favourite mudspot are:
a) spooking an innocent passer by who's them traumatised at seeing a mudmonster they didn't expect on their dog walk
b) someone spotting me in the (tidal) goo and dialling 999 because they think I'm stuck - giving me surprise company in the form of the local rescue service.
A quick search of local news articles for the area in which I play reveal that I'm in no way paranoid in having these thoughts - there's been several reports of people in distress with nobody found, which are quite clearly relating to mudders. Plus something more sinister on the TV years ago, same area, a guy pretending to be stuck and luring women passers by to his 'help' before asking if they were having fun "Police believe the incidents to be sexually motivated".
Every time I go there, to a location with the second biggest tide in the World, I'm risking all sorts, so I'd disagree that it's not rebellious.
Do it!
The male producer excessively touching the model.
The occasional re-positioning of a messed up gal is one thing, but more than that starts to creep me out a little.
Head down for gunging, where only the hair gets messy. So I'm OK with a little 'face raised' for coverage, as long as its not for the whole pour. A balance is great.
Savory foods. Meh. Similarly dog food belongs with scat ..... beyond gross.
Over acting on the part of the model.
Having said all that, this whole thread just goes to show how spoiled we've become these last 15 years or so
The occasional re-positioning of a messed up gal is one thing, but more than that starts to creep me out a little.
Head down for gunging, where only the hair gets messy. So I'm OK with a little 'face raised' for coverage, as long as its not for the whole pour. A balance is great.
Savory foods. Meh. Similarly dog food belongs with scat ..... beyond gross.
Over acting on the part of the model.
Having said all that, this whole thread just goes to show how spoiled we've become these last 15 years or so
Ok so since everyone else is doing what they dislike....
1. Music (of any form) before or during a scene. It's just cheesy, distracting or off putting.
2. Food wam of any form is unethical, there's people starving, just no. Also there's animals starving, given the recent emergence of dog food (yuk)
3. Unlikely attire. Nobody goes looking for a lost phone in the woods wearing a bikini, thigh boots or a party dress. Give me a 'girl next door' in simple jeans & T shirt or outdoor clothes every time, or if it's mud, alternatively just dress for the job.
4. Damsels in distress. Immediate turn-off, yes I know it's just acting but I don't want to see a woman in distress. I want to know that she's having fun.
1. Music (of any form) before or during a scene. It's just cheesy, distracting or off putting.
2. Food wam of any form is unethical, there's people starving, just no. Also there's animals starving, given the recent emergence of dog food (yuk)
3. Unlikely attire. Nobody goes looking for a lost phone in the woods wearing a bikini, thigh boots or a party dress. Give me a 'girl next door' in simple jeans & T shirt or outdoor clothes every time, or if it's mud, alternatively just dress for the job.
4. Damsels in distress. Immediate turn-off, yes I know it's just acting but I don't want to see a woman in distress. I want to know that she's having fun.
Do it!
SlimeHead1 said: I'm gonna be that guy. I guess my unpopular opinion is to just enjoy what you enjoy, let others do the same. I really feel this has turned into a "What I hate" post, some with not so subtle jabs at specific producers without naming them.
WAM has so many different facets and tastes, that not everyone will be pleased all the time. There is an insane amount of hate and negativity in society right now, that posts like this just kinda unnecessarily add to it, in my unpopular opinion.
WAM has so many different facets and tastes, that not everyone will be pleased all the time. There is an insane amount of hate and negativity in society right now, that posts like this just kinda unnecessarily add to it, in my unpopular opinion.
I hope no one interprets any reply here as hate hehe. Maybe some opinions are a bit negative. Hopefully no one feels insulted or shamed by any opinions here. Hopefully producers do not feel discouraged from producing something because a few people said they don't like it.
I think the popular opinion is to keep your unpopular opinions to yourself, and people view it as unacceptable to disagree. Like if I replied to a released scene saying "I don't understand why people like this", that would be rude to the producer and shaming people that do like it.
Positive and constructive feedback is almost always better. It is nice to be able to release and give negative feedback about things that are disliked. Posts like this are a good place to do it because it seems acceptable.
It is best, like SlimeHead1 said, enjoy what you enjoy. Give feedback for what you enjoy. Ignore what you don't enjoy, and avoid shaming others for enjoying it.
Hopefully this thread is interpreted as dislikes and not hate. We can all agree to disagree, or agree with the unpopular opinions hehe.
Unpopular opinions savoury mess is just rancid. The colours can look great and sometimes visually can appeal but then the descriptions make me want to puke when you actually think about it. will never gonna change my mind on it.
AI is stupid and I don't care what people think. It's cartoons.
AI is stupid and I don't care what people think. It's cartoons.
mrangry said:
Strongly agree. Absolutely detest them
MaxEffort said: I'd rather see a model in a boilersuit than a model in a bikini if she has tattoos. Tatts ruin everything, including WAM.
Strongly agree. Absolutely detest them
Another strong agree here. It almost feels as if liking tattoo-free models is becoming a fetish in itself.
I have lots of dislikes that would definitely be considered unpopular but that's just personal taste I guess, there's no point listing them for someone to say that's what they love the most.
As for opinions, unpopular or not, I feel AI wam is discussed too much. If you're into it that's fine, it's got its own group now and if you're not into it you can ignore it. But there's been too many posts lately about it and its future etc. Discussion is fine but I've just read the same thing too many times lately.
As for opinions, unpopular or not, I feel AI wam is discussed too much. If you're into it that's fine, it's got its own group now and if you're not into it you can ignore it. But there's been too many posts lately about it and its future etc. Discussion is fine but I've just read the same thing too many times lately.
I confess I'm a mess, some kind of error!
1. A pie has a crust and filling. A paper plate covered with shaving cream is not a pie.
2. A few tasteful tattoos are fine; anything more than that is not for me. I'm not a piercing fan either.
3. Technicolor pies are awful.
4. Anything more than three pies to the face is a waste. Pies to other parts of the body are pretty much wasted too, the exception being cake/pie sitting.
5. I like curvy women just fine, but morbidly obese, not so much. I don't want to see grotesquely obese guys either, for that matter. In fact, if a "model's" appearance tells me they don't care much about their health, I can't watch at all. Instant turn off.
6. I prefer nice clothes to bikinis, lingerie, or nudity. The more elegant and classy the better.
7. Acting humiliated or upset at having a pie smashed in your face is sexy, but actually being humiliated or upset is not. Similarly, the over the top humiliation stuff (ball gags, "whore" written on a woman in red lipstick, pillories, etc) doesn't do it for me.
8. Don't tell me how to shoot or light my amateur wam videos. I know I'm no Spielberg, and I'm not spending any more money on tech. Be thankful I posted some pics.
2. A few tasteful tattoos are fine; anything more than that is not for me. I'm not a piercing fan either.
3. Technicolor pies are awful.
4. Anything more than three pies to the face is a waste. Pies to other parts of the body are pretty much wasted too, the exception being cake/pie sitting.
5. I like curvy women just fine, but morbidly obese, not so much. I don't want to see grotesquely obese guys either, for that matter. In fact, if a "model's" appearance tells me they don't care much about their health, I can't watch at all. Instant turn off.
6. I prefer nice clothes to bikinis, lingerie, or nudity. The more elegant and classy the better.
7. Acting humiliated or upset at having a pie smashed in your face is sexy, but actually being humiliated or upset is not. Similarly, the over the top humiliation stuff (ball gags, "whore" written on a woman in red lipstick, pillories, etc) doesn't do it for me.
8. Don't tell me how to shoot or light my amateur wam videos. I know I'm no Spielberg, and I'm not spending any more money on tech. Be thankful I posted some pics.
pieandslimeonly said: Dog food isn't wam
This x 1000
Please, please, please can we have a filter so I don't have to see this disgusting shit? If we can filter out relatively inoffensive stuff like AI or men, why can't I have the option to not see this?
Other unpopular opinions:
I'm really not interested in seeing your girlfriend or wife getting slimed in your bathtub. I'm glad you're having a good time but I can't help thinking if she truly understands what she's agreed to by you posting it on here.
Why would someone born in, say, 1998 quote a TV show that aired in 1980? Why is this even relevant? Stop doing it.
PVC is not sexy and especially not for getting messy in.
AI wam isn't wam, and belongs in its own section on this website.
Yes, it may look realistic. No, I don't want to see it plastered all over the Wall.
Yes, it may look realistic. No, I don't want to see it plastered all over the Wall.
kinkywam123 said: AI wam isn't wam, and belongs in its own section on this website.
Yes, it may look realistic. No, I don't want to see it plastered all over the Wall.
Yes, it may look realistic. No, I don't want to see it plastered all over the Wall.
You can filter it out.
Click "Profile" on the main menu.
On the page that loads, click "edit" under "Profile" on the sub-menu.
Make sure both password boxes (just under your email address) are blank. If one has dots or stars, clear it.
Scroll down to "Content Filters".
Set "Block synthetic / AI content?" to Yes.
Scroll all the way to the bottom and click the big blue "Save" button.
All AI WAM will now be banished from your wall view.
If any still shows up, reload the page. If it still shows up after that, click it, click "Report", click the "Wrong Tagging" option, and type "should be synthetic" in the text box, and Submit it. Admins will then be alerted and able to correctly tag it, though if it's been posted in the AI WAM Group this should be automatic.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
SlimeHead1 said: I'm gonna be that guy. I guess my unpopular opinion is to just enjoy what you enjoy, let others do the same. I really feel this has turned into a "What I hate" post, some with not so subtle jabs at specific producers without naming them.
WAM has so many different facets and tastes, that not everyone will be pleased all the time. There is an insane amount of hate and negativity in society right now, that posts like this just kinda unnecessarily add to it, in my unpopular opinion.
WAM has so many different facets and tastes, that not everyone will be pleased all the time. There is an insane amount of hate and negativity in society right now, that posts like this just kinda unnecessarily add to it, in my unpopular opinion.
You pretty much explained why I deleted my post to begin with. After some thought, I felt it was best to bow out and not contribute to it. Everyone is gonna have their appeals or looks or preferences, including me.
Making smut is easy. Making art takes more!
Regarding 'wastefulness' (of food wam):
I understand this criticism (I used to question this waste too, in the past). However, let's put things into perspective:
The World wastes 2.5 billion tons of food each year. Americans (who lead the pack, as usual) waste approximately 60 million tons (or 30 - 40% of our food supply, per year; USDA estimate). That's about 1250 calories per person, per day. It's value is $240 billion (USD).
Now, a good deal of this waste is intentional (farmers will let grain, produce, rot in the fields because storage costs are too high, and sometimes to match fluctuating demand for foods, such as during the recent pandemic, where 75% of the wholesale food market vanished, as restaurants closed down). As much as 10% of the milk produced in the US got dumped during the pandemic.
But a great deal of our annual food waste is 'unintentional' in that our meal servings (restaurants, commercial kitchens) are excessive (in calories, and in food weight/volume). Even with home-cooked meals, we waste food (even though many cities have food compost collection services).
The convention / conference industry wastes an enormous amount of food routinely in that they must prepare 2 to 3 meals each day for many hundreds or a couple thousand of 'conventioneers' -- many of whom do not show up to eat their meal (I used to work as a food server at a convention center). Most of this food gets tossed (one time, my fellow servers and I were able to take home backpacks full of t-bone steaks that were cooked but not served; about 500 + steaks, if I recall).
Anyways, the point is that, we in the US waste an enormous amount of food just in the normal course of living and working. Only a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of this waste is from people engaging in 'food wam' (note: even 'non-dairy' whipped cream products are made from vegetable oils and soy products that must be grown first).
So, while concern for food waste in wam is laudable -- and we all have to do our part to reduce food waste in general -- from the perspective of our mass-consumer society, wam food waste is minuscule...simply because those who indulge regularly in wam fetishism or erotic play -- and aren't we always calling wam a 'niche' fetish'? -- are a tiny minority...you can make a bigger difference (if you truly care) by reducing edible food waste in your home meals, at work, dining out, or in our schools.
I wouldn't sweat the wam waste (but maybe cut back on the eggs/custard, milk/cream, and chocolate sauce, a tad). And definitely the dog food.
I understand this criticism (I used to question this waste too, in the past). However, let's put things into perspective:
The World wastes 2.5 billion tons of food each year. Americans (who lead the pack, as usual) waste approximately 60 million tons (or 30 - 40% of our food supply, per year; USDA estimate). That's about 1250 calories per person, per day. It's value is $240 billion (USD).
Now, a good deal of this waste is intentional (farmers will let grain, produce, rot in the fields because storage costs are too high, and sometimes to match fluctuating demand for foods, such as during the recent pandemic, where 75% of the wholesale food market vanished, as restaurants closed down). As much as 10% of the milk produced in the US got dumped during the pandemic.
But a great deal of our annual food waste is 'unintentional' in that our meal servings (restaurants, commercial kitchens) are excessive (in calories, and in food weight/volume). Even with home-cooked meals, we waste food (even though many cities have food compost collection services).
The convention / conference industry wastes an enormous amount of food routinely in that they must prepare 2 to 3 meals each day for many hundreds or a couple thousand of 'conventioneers' -- many of whom do not show up to eat their meal (I used to work as a food server at a convention center). Most of this food gets tossed (one time, my fellow servers and I were able to take home backpacks full of t-bone steaks that were cooked but not served; about 500 + steaks, if I recall).
Anyways, the point is that, we in the US waste an enormous amount of food just in the normal course of living and working. Only a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of this waste is from people engaging in 'food wam' (note: even 'non-dairy' whipped cream products are made from vegetable oils and soy products that must be grown first).
So, while concern for food waste in wam is laudable -- and we all have to do our part to reduce food waste in general -- from the perspective of our mass-consumer society, wam food waste is minuscule...simply because those who indulge regularly in wam fetishism or erotic play -- and aren't we always calling wam a 'niche' fetish'? -- are a tiny minority...you can make a bigger difference (if you truly care) by reducing edible food waste in your home meals, at work, dining out, or in our schools.
I wouldn't sweat the wam waste (but maybe cut back on the eggs/custard, milk/cream, and chocolate sauce, a tad). And definitely the dog food.
'Our Favorite (Pie) Hits' now available!
Don't like paint or other 'agressive' ingredients such as grease.
Can take nude or clothed (preferably with no underwear). Clothed to nude is great.
I don't see the point of successive dunkings, once the participant is wet after the first dunking, there is no point in repeated dunking, they don't get any wetter. Head dunking is great, (into messed up hair).
For me it is important that the recipient is visibly enjoying the experience.
Not really into male WAM, but co-ed is fine.
Like savoury.
Can take nude or clothed (preferably with no underwear). Clothed to nude is great.
I don't see the point of successive dunkings, once the participant is wet after the first dunking, there is no point in repeated dunking, they don't get any wetter. Head dunking is great, (into messed up hair).
For me it is important that the recipient is visibly enjoying the experience.
Not really into male WAM, but co-ed is fine.
Like savoury.
Bobographer said: If someone who isn't model-material wants to wam and sell videos, that's great, but please stop referring to them as 'models'... I'm referring to the really out-of-shape, no makeup, no attention to hair or even smiling or having any expression at all being referred to as 'models'... Again, the 'ordinary girl next door' can still do wam videos, but without the 'model' title to mislead the potential purchaser.
simplepies99 said: I like curvy women just fine, but morbidly obese, not so much... In fact, if a "model's" appearance tells me they don't care much about their health
There was no doubt this thread would draw out some strong preferences against BBW models. That's ok, but to judge them as not caring for themselves is not really a personal opinion, it's prejudging a community of people. You don't really know why they're that big, and a lot of us like meat! Also some prefer realism to the dolled-up look. To call them "models" in quotes, as if no-one else should even objectively consider them models, or to say they're doing it to mislead somebody? That's projecting an agenda onto people just because they're big.
Why does it have to go there?Stay messy, my friends
This will be QUITE unpopular, but here it goes:
I hate it when the new girls on "Messy Girl" get nude in their first video.
Don't get me wrong -- I love seeing them nude. But... it's their FIRST video. They are aware that this is a fetish, but it's their first time doing this kind of stuff. Maybe their first time should be fully clothed. After the third or fourth time, then they would feel comfortable being topless. After that, fully nude (again, if they're up to it)
I just don't think that every new girl for her site should start off doing a full nude messy session.
Obviously, if they've done fetish videos before, then nudity shouldn't be an issue. But if they're not fetish models, then they shouldn't have to go topless/nude from the start. Let them ease into it.
That's all.
I hate it when the new girls on "Messy Girl" get nude in their first video.
Don't get me wrong -- I love seeing them nude. But... it's their FIRST video. They are aware that this is a fetish, but it's their first time doing this kind of stuff. Maybe their first time should be fully clothed. After the third or fourth time, then they would feel comfortable being topless. After that, fully nude (again, if they're up to it)
I just don't think that every new girl for her site should start off doing a full nude messy session.
Obviously, if they've done fetish videos before, then nudity shouldn't be an issue. But if they're not fetish models, then they shouldn't have to go topless/nude from the start. Let them ease into it.
That's all.
I even wanna be me! -- Zoe
