Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > kzoopair > Take two- they're small |
Double Exposure
|
Double Exposure “Double Exposure or Naked as the Day We Were Born” Many great works have subtitles. Gerard Winstanley famously employed : “The Law of Freedom in a Platform or, True Magistracy Restored Humbly Presented to Oliver Cromwell, General of the Commonwealths Army in England. And to All English-men my Brethren Whether in Church Fellow-ship 1652” I think I’ve shown reserve and restraint in my own use of the subtitle. Staying surprisingly close to the original theme of our talk on exhibitionism, wickedeasy offered: “it's not like we're not enjoying it too. that rush goes both ways. and yet you're so safely tucked away in separate spaces”  Flashing truckers is not a pedestrian thrill but a proletarian nthetheless. Still I can imagine upper class women doing it as a safer form of slumming and an alternative to gang fucking thugs picked up in a bar on the bad side of town. I'm sure some women do both, and enjoy hell out of the practice. Everybody needs a hobby. It took me some time to really get what was in it for the exhibitionist. What I had formerly thought of, long ago, as exhibitionists, was the guy with pant legs, cut from the knees down, duct taped over his shins and wearing a trenchcoat. And of course I felt the usual revulsion. We look askance at men who expose themselves. But it’s only a visual. There isn’t any touching or assault except on the viewer’s delicate sensibilities. My own inclination is to laugh. Only jealous women criticize the women who show too much. The only man who will complain is Mike Pence. Then too, things has changed, hasn't they? There have always been women who are thrilled at the exposure of their nether regions, but now it's so common as to be nearly universal...or is it ubiquitous? Ubiquitous is a far sexier word. Anyway, you see a lot of it, ubiquity, and I accept that.  It wasn't until I started being able to put myself in the woman's position, I mean, inside what I imagine to be her head, that it began to make sense to me, and the act gets so much more erotic and arousing due to that. Most men resist trying to really think like a woman, usually get it wrong, and I did too. It's kind of a self aggrandizing way of getting in touch with 's femi side, but when you finally begin to actually listen to what women say about themselves and their arousal it becomes more clear. A woman has a much different and more personal relationship with her vulnerability than men do. Hell, males typiy try to pretend that they have no relationship with vulnerability and weakness at all. You'll rarely hear a man admit to his own weakness, unless he's expressing a weakness for hundred year old whisky or anal sex. Let me hasten to add I don't mean hundred year old anal sex. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I'm sure the court of public opinion would take a different view, but in my book what happens between a man and a centenarian is a private affair as long as there’s fore, lots of lube is employed and some comes.  It's odd, you might even say queer if that word had not taken on the connotation that is has these last hundred (Funny how that number seems to keep creeping in. I suppose that once you allow the idea of women who've reached the century mark taking it in the ass, both the image and number will stick with you, for better or for worse.) that a man is if anything more vulnerable than a female when he drops trou in a public place. Women have so few advantages in this world, but they own exhibitionism. I figure it's only fair, and it sure as hell is pleasant. Being naked and exposed in a public place whether seen or not is frightening to me but not thrilling in any sexual way. Meaning that, no, I don't really get Louis C.K. His transgression feels like a lame and weak thing to do. It represents a loss of control that I hate to think of as a male, unless there are lots of other people naked right along with me. Would I pull out and then pummel my pud in front of a woman? No. Would I do it with a hundred other jackoffs around me? Still no. That didn’t go the way you thought it was going, did it? You were expecting me to invoke strength in numbers. But as a female there's the conflict of both losing control- naked and afraid- and being in control of her own sexuality and allure, arousing herself and her watchers. A kind of submission, revealing yourself is. (channeling Yoda) Women can so much more readily identify with submission, even publicly owning up to it sometimes. Even the ancient Greeks considered male submissives as less than real men. Pitching good, catching bad, especially since they had only the dius and the javelin and baseballs had not yet been invented. Females on the other hand are even expected to submit, and when they decline there is consternation all around. To a lot of people it is not only incongruous but nearly blasphemous (Think Mike Pence again-“It's in the Bible”) that a woman should be assertive and in command of her own destiny in all aspects of her life and yet get a charge of libidinous adrenalin out of submitting to a man sexually, and even submitting openly and in public to men she has never seen before. We know now why J. Edgar Hoover wore dresses. It was a release for the poor sick fuck from being all powerful and hunting commies days a week. He just didn't have the balls to do it in public. Not that I want to see those balls any more than I want to see the centenarian edition of Ass Fucked Skanks Volume .  I have rambled and digressed, and more than once. If I keep practicing I might get good at it. Vivé la difference. I don't get- as a male- why Louis C. K. whipped out his dick and jacked off in front of his business colleagues/acquaintances. It feels like a femi thing to do. Maybe wimpy is a better word for it. I do get why a woman strips and masturbates in a public place where she is very likely to be caught. It's a double standard, yeah. I'm not even apologizing for that. I did a post once, for HNW Red for nicelipps, where I went trans for a day and dressed. It was a hoot, but I was being hst when I said that I sort of got how CD's and trans women felt, because I actually felt kind of sexy after putting on the trappings of a sultry seductress. I wasn't sexy by any's estimation, even the s who were really drunk, and there isn't a part of me that craves that, but I got an insight. I had a kind of epiphany. So, would I want to be a woman for an afternoon and flash random men at will? You bet! It's fucking hot.  Become a member now and get a free tote bag. |
|||
|
I love this! [image] Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
Hahaha, very good, I like...don't make me flash you Lol I have been flash by guys about 4 times
| ||
|
Very thoughtful post. I am pleading the fifth about exhibitionism and public exposure. I suppose I am fearful about it coming back to haunt me. Yeah, even us non celebrities can have this fear. Is it jealousy of me to wonder why some other women are so readily willing to do this? It is true I am not confident in my body and looks but still it is there that I don't want every Tom, Dick or Harry knowing my particulars. LOL Am I a prude? Perhaps on the scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the highest ...what should I be okay with?  )Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
Okay. Now that I think of it, you can delete the I am pleading the fifth about exhibitionism and public exposure as I did elaborate.  Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
Hahaha, very good, I like...don't make me flash you Lol I have been flash by guys about 4 times I got flashed by an old degenerate in a restaurant down in Jackson, Mississippi decades ago. I said that my own reaction is to laugh, but I wasn't laughing that day. That disgusting old drunk was repulsive. Fuck! I get the shakes just thinking about him. Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
A great read my friend you had me thinking again when I was young. That is all I am telling you. hugs V Become a blog watcher sweet_vm
| ||
|
A great read my friend you had me thinking again when I was young. That is all I am telling you. hugs V Hugggggggs B Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
public lewdness they used to call it. a fine and off you went back to the wife. i had an uncle who was a pedophile, all well maintained within the family but no one ever let him near the kids. did my aunt divorce him? nope but his kids did. everyone would say oh K, he's brilliant, like being super smart made it okay or maybe was part of the reason. smh. our current witchhunt has a particular scent to it. diversionary. but then, you know me, i'm a paranoid hippy. You cannot conceive the many without the one.
| ||
|
public lewdness they used to call it. a fine and off you went back to the wife. i had an uncle who was a pedophile, all well maintained within the family but no one ever let him near the kids. did my aunt divorce him? nope but his kids did. everyone would say oh K, he's brilliant, like being super smart made it okay or maybe was part of the reason. smh. our current witchhunt has a particular scent to it. diversionary. but then, you know me, i'm a paranoid hippy. I don't know what will be the outcome of the current conversation. I doubt there will be any sea change soon. There will be victims who shouldn't be, as fallout, but then, there already have been undeserving victims, haven't there- the women. It's beginning to look like a feeding frenzy, but I can't ascribe it to a coherent plan. Most conspiracy theories fall apart when it's revealed that the suspected conspirators haven't the wit to organize a cub scout troop to collect firewood in the forest. Paranoid hippie, you and Pam could entertain each other for days on end! Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
I am late to the conversation and will have to check out prior posts...but... "A kind of submission, revealing yourself is (channeling Yoda). " Okay, I am not sure about all the psychology of exhibitionism, so I enjoyed the discussion (and I can enjoy a merry exhibitionist). I don't see exhibitionism as submissive at all, and on the far end of the spectrum, it was an aggressive behavior, or a prelude to hostilities between ancient warriors. I like to think flashing by a woman is something daring, fun, teasing, and an acknowledgement of mutual sexuality. I am not sure what flashing by a guy is, but it doesn't seem to have the same playfulness to me. I remember being on a parade field and women flashing their breasts in protest at us; not a hostile act, but not one I would classify as submissive. God bless the 1st Amendment! "Women can so much more readily identify with submission, even publicly owning up to it sometimes." You Sir, are a braver man than me. (And I have to cast a dissenting vote.) "Even the ancient Greeks considered male submissives as less than real men." Well, as Doc would say, "Credat Judaeus Appela, non ego." (I know, I know, it's latin not greek.) I am not sure what the definition of a "real man" is, but I am pretty certain there are many male submissives that would make the cut (and I have known more than a few). Hmmm... I guess I should add: I don't consider dominant women to be less than real women. Submission should not be confused with meek or cowardly, or any less "manly" (or less "womanly") virtue. But that is another discussion in itself. Thank you for the thought-provoking and fun post! Now to catch up with the previous ones...
| ||
|
I was just kind of rambling here, musing on exhibitionism. I don't think you should quote it as a scholarly treatise! I take your point that exhibition can be seen as an aggressive or at the least an assertive act. As for it being submissive, I was thinking about the element of danger and vulnerability, although again, you're correct that even then it could be an assertion of sexuality. And I'll agree with you again that male sexual submissives are often quite assertive in the rest of their lives. The Greeks did indeed make a distinction between tops and bottoms in homosexual relationships, viewing the bottoms as less manly. This ain't the New York Times and I'm not Dan Savage. Thanks for your thoughts on this. My own point of view here was pretty narrow and personal. I was mulling it over. You commented: " I like to think flashing by a woman is something daring, fun, teasing, and an acknowledgement of mutual sexuality." Me too my friend, me too. I covered that in the previous post. Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
The first adult male penis I saw live belonged to a conscript riding the metro train. Unfortunately I myself was not yet past the age of consent. The first thing I noticed was a wet spot developing at the crotch area of his military green uniform. At the time I understood it to be pee. Then he unzipped his pants and took it out. In front of everyone else in the train. Was he a flasher? Was he an exhibitionist? Something was terribly wrong with what he was doing. I felt that then and I know for sure now. Needless to say, since then I have encountered more flashers, out in the relative open (parks, campuses, beach) but also in restricted locations where my averted gaze, let alone escape, is not possible (cinemas, libraries, taxicabs, airplanes). I don't consider myself a prude, but the only situations where it is appropriate to exercise my own exhibitionism are at a clothing optional beach, or an adult venue (including this site!) - where both parties explicitly opt in to the voyeuristic game.
| ||
|
In our culture nudity is restricted and it's from this that the inappropriate sense of exposure comes. I feel this just like everyone else when males expose themselves, which I tried to communicate in the post. I'm a product of the same culture you are. And since our culture is sexist, I don't feel the same revulsion about women exhibitionists- I see it as a windfall, a surprise gift, being male. Theoretically, in my view, there isn't anything wrong with nudity at all. It's our cultural baggage that makes it so. I'm just not that sensitive about it. BUT! I'm far too shy to easily and comfortably expose MYSELF! It's as hard to talk about this as it is about sexual harassment. We can reason and rationalize it, but very much of it is about gut feeling, not rational at all. Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
| ||
|
I think you are trying to talk about what is going on with all of the men being accused of sexual harassment, sexual exposure to women, and more. When you said it's hard to talk about sexual harassment I think it's because for way to long women, and those men affected by it felt they couldn't until Harvey Weinstein got busted. It's something we do need to talk about, it souldn't be taken for granted, but at the same time we need not just take every woman, or mans words that such things happened. I don't think what Al Franken did was any where close to what Harvey Weinstein, or Kevin Spacey, and let us not forget Roy Moore. I might totally be off guard but I don't see how this has anything to do with exhibitionism, or even submissiveness. I do think we are a society that needs to catch up with Europe when it comes to anything sexual. I have been in the park and made love were there people around no but it wouldn't of bothered me unless there were children around. So is that any different that a stripper? I like being nude and I don't see anything wrong with it. I think America as a whole does that is why I aid we need to catch up with Europe. We have two lives, and the second begins when we realise we have only one - Confucious
| ||
|
This wasn't especially about the "me too" women or the revelation that men are very often entitled sexist pricks. For a long time there's been tacit agreement to let boys be boys and to hell with how it hurts women. I got to thinking- and that's what the post is, just rambling, musing- about Louis C.K. and what he had done, and wondered at a couple of friends if it wasn't some kind of cowardly exhibitionism. You know, a decent self respecting male exhibitionist puts on the trench coat, heads down to the park and takes his chances shocking unsuspecting women. Louis C.K. picked on women who he thought were in some way safer for him. He might have promoted them as comics or aided them in some other way. So it looked like a a sort of chickenshit exhibitionism to me. You could write an exhaustive list of things that are wrong about it, but it comes down to a betrayal of trust and an abuse of power from the point of view of the women to whom he exposed himself. But there's a difference between Louis C.K.'s exposure and outright assault. So this post doesn't address any kind of intrusive touching or violence. As far as I am aware Louis C.K. didn't touch anyone. That all got me to thinking about exhibitionism and the difference in how we think about it depending on whether it's a male or female doing the exposing. I recognize that my point of view isn't completely rational. I'm a product of the same culture and all the same rationalizations that everyone else is. I also got to wondering about the act of exposure and putting oneself in danger by doing it. Maybe it's incorrect to see any submissiveness in the act. Maybe it's just the thrill of doing something dangerous and taboo, teasing. But I had been reading about female subs who are directed by a dom to expose themselves, along with other sexually charged acts, so I had that in mind as well. This was never intended to be a particularly serious post, and it sure as hell wasn't a commentary on the flood of charges about sexual a**ault. There isn't anything studious or scholarly about my approach here. For the most part I think this is a time for women to speak and for men to sit down, shut up and listen. There's a lot of anger that's been simmering and seething for a very long time and it's right and proper that it should come out. I don't think of Europe as some sort of Shangri La of sexual enlightenment. I believe attitudes there are perhaps more realistic, open and permissive regarding sexuality. But not always! Become a member now and get a free tote bag.
|
Become a member to create a blog
