A Place of Safety
I expect simple behaviours here. Friendship, and love.
Any advice should be from the perspective of the person asking, not the person giving!
We have had to make new membership moderated to combat the huge number of spammers who register
















You are here: Home > Forum > A Place of Safety > General Talk > Half formed thoughts about genitalia
Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67648] Thu, 11 April 2013 23:14 Go to next message
timmy

Has no life at all
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13739



There are a good many things I find interesting about genitalia, even female genitalia. That I find interesting because it lacks any particularly obvious method of showing that its owner is aroused, save, of course, for increased moisture levels. I also find its neatness and tidiness interesting until one gets close too, when it looks rather ragged at the edges.

Having disposed of the ladies and their pudenda, the male version is of much greater interest.

It's very interesting that it shows instantly that its owner is aroused. More interesting still is that this arousal is contagious. School showers showed that! Males get aroused by seeing other males in a state of arousal.

Other areas that interest me are certainly my own ability to separate enticing male genitals, in which I include the anus, from lovely male faces. I know each set of male genitalia will have a face, but I can be very excited at a comely (no pun intended) set of male parts without regard to the face, and I can become very excited by a comely face without regard to the dangly bits.

Indeed I seem to separate objects of desire into "clothed with faces" and "naked and erect (or exposed". Having a great face and a great set of genitalia is obviously ideal. I go back to school showers when I could bask in the glory of both, and also the hideousness of some faces and their attached rather ugly genitalia. Indeed the cute boys always seemed to have cute genitalia and the ugly ones had the more aggressive looking parts. Was I just prejudging the dick by its cover?

Am I alone in being aroused by faces, and in being aroused by genitalia with no obvious face?

And, of course, though I have no idea how to get an accurate answer, are heterosexual men also aroused by a well formed set of male parts that are not their own?

[Updated on: Fri, 12 April 2013 09:26]




Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67651 is a reply to message #67648] Fri, 12 April 2013 09:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nigel is currently offline  Nigel

On fire!
Location: England
Registered: November 2003
Messages: 1756



I have no interest in female genitalia, but I'll write from the point of view that I find male genitalia aesthetically as well as sexually attractive.

When I was at school, a classmate said that it didn't matter about showering together as we were all boys and the same. Well, he was wrong. We are not the same. Male genitalia come in varied shapes.

To begin with, I'll mention the testicles which I am going to call balls. Some males have low hangers while others have a tight scrotum where you can see the two distinct balls or a tight scrotum with an indistinct cluster. Then some balls hang down directly and discreetly between the legs while others stand out from the body with the penis resting at 45° on top. These make the best packages in underwear, speedos, shorts and trousers.

Then the penis (which I shall refer to as a dick)is broadly divided into circumsised and uncircumsised. The arguments for and against have been amply set out on this forum and I am not getting into that discussion here. Broadly speaking, cut dicks are a comparative rarity this side of the Atlantic, while the opposite is true in the countries of North America. Perhaps our correspondents from New Zealand, Australia and South Africa can say what applies in their countries.

Aesthetically I prefer an uncut dick, although those with excess foreskin can prove pretty unappealing. On the other hand cut dicks are less attractive, unless a especially neat circumcision has been performed and some of the foreskin has been left.

You will notice that I have not mentioned size. I am not a size queen and while particularly small genitals may not rouse me, I think anything over 6 inches (15cm) can be gross and is interesting on the level of a sideshow at the circus.

When I see a male, if his face is interesting I want to look at his package. Conversely, if he has an interesting package, my gaze ascends to his face. I suppose that an interesting package will trump an interesting face.

Talking of packages, I have not mentioned dicks pointing north, down, left or right, together with dressing on the left, right or centre. My preference is down. It increases the bulge.

I shall be interested to read how this thread develops.

Hugs
Nigel




I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.

…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67652 is a reply to message #67651] Fri, 12 April 2013 09:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
timmy

Has no life at all
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13739



"Nigel wrote on Fri, 12 April 2013 10:15"
You will notice that I have not mentioned size. I am not a size queen and while particularly small genitals may not rouse me, I think anything over 6 inches (15cm) can be gross and is interesting on the level of a sideshow at the circus.


I find great size to be intimidating. The instrument needs to be in proportion with its surroundings. There were a couple of brothers at school with flaccid units the size of a coke can, length and girth. Everyone was amazed, and not a little intimidated by such armament. About ten years ago I met the wife of the elder. After I'd moved on a fellow alumnus said to me "I was wondering about asking her what being fucked by that enormous dick is like! How can anyone take that?"



Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67653 is a reply to message #67651] Fri, 12 April 2013 09:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kitzyma is currently offline  Kitzyma

Likes it here

Registered: March 2012
Messages: 215



"Nigel wrote on Fri, 12 April 2013 09:15"

Talking of packages, I have not mentioned dicks pointing north, down, left or right, together with dressing on the left, right or centre. My preference is down. It increases the bulge.

--

When people refer to 'dressing' in such a context I often get the impression that it's thought to be a choice.
(I don't mean that the above quote indicates it's a choice, but the quote is just what happened triggered my train of thought).
It isn't a choice for me. Is it for others? No matter how it's positioned originally, mine always ends up on the left. The time taken for the migration will, of course, depend on the tightness of the underwear. For me, any underwear tight enough to prevent migration would probably be too painful to wear.

Perhaps I'm odd in that I find the sight of an erect penis only marginally more exciting than the sight of a soft one. On the other hand, the feel of an erect penis is much more exciting than the feel of a soft one. I find some dicks aesthetically more pleasing than others, but the 'beauty' of the organ is often not correlated to how aroused I am by the sight or touch of it. Size doesn't bother me at all unless it's too large to fit comfortably in my mouth.

Generally, I much prefer uncircumcised dicks, but a neatly circumcised dick, preferably with some skin, wouldn't put me off someone I otherwise fancied. That brings me to what is for me perhaps the most interesting part of this topic - comparison of facial beauty and genital beauty. If I find a face attractive, the genitals would have to be exceptionally ugly to put me off wanting sex. In practice, that's never actually happened. Smile

When I get to see the genitals of someone with an attractive face, I generally find the genitals are also attractive. However, as Timmy points out, it's likely that the attactiveness of the face predisposes me to find the genitals alluring. On the other hand, if I don't find a person facially appealing, no amount of genital beauty would sexually arouse me.
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67654 is a reply to message #67652] Fri, 12 April 2013 09:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kitzyma is currently offline  Kitzyma

Likes it here

Registered: March 2012
Messages: 215



"timmy wrote on Fri, 12 April 2013 09:29"

After I'd moved on a fellow alumnus said to me "I was wondering about asking her what being fucked by that enormous dick is like! How can anyone take that?"

--

I would have thought that a passageway that could allow passage of a baby's head shouldn't have much difficulty adapting to something as wide as a coke can. Smile

Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67655 is a reply to message #67653] Fri, 12 April 2013 11:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nigel is currently offline  Nigel

On fire!
Location: England
Registered: November 2003
Messages: 1756



I do not find 'dressing' a choice. However I place my dick, it will do its own thing and end up where it wants to go. I do find any dressing to the right (of the owner, not of the beholder) inelegant.

Hugs
Nigel

[Updated on: Fri, 12 April 2013 14:24]




I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.

…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67656 is a reply to message #67648] Fri, 12 April 2013 12:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NW is currently offline  NW

On fire!
Location: Worcester, England
Registered: January 2005
Messages: 1558



For me, an attractive face does it every time. Pretty male genitals are a bonus (though I think they're rare) - but ugly genitals wouldn't be a turn-off.

A too-tight foreskin that has led to splits and cracks is a bit of a turn-off, but more on health grounds than anything.

But my preferred ways of lovemaking are generally face-to-face (mutual masturbation or anal sex), so I don't really spend much time looking at a partner's genitals - touch, kissing, and the expressions on their face are what I go by.



"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67657 is a reply to message #67655] Fri, 12 April 2013 12:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NW is currently offline  NW

On fire!
Location: Worcester, England
Registered: January 2005
Messages: 1558



In the days of reasonably-tight jeans with optional boxers underneath, it was common for gay men to dress on the side that things didn't hang naturally. The tightness of the jeans prevented any migration to the other side, and the natural hang of the penis meant that it was always pushing against the fabric of the leg of the jeans, so increasing visibility / apparent size. The consequent slight stimulation also tended to increase the size of the penis a bit, I think.

This was especially common among the gay skinhead community in the 1980s. Depending on the guy, I found it either a massive turn-on or "too much information".



"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67658 is a reply to message #67648] Fri, 12 April 2013 23:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
solsticeman is currently offline  solsticeman

Likes it here

Registered: November 2012
Messages: 109



For me... its faces, some clothes (not a lot)and... no genitalia. For those of us whose idea of beauty was formed early... that minimal clothing is essential... or as our mums said "do turn your back dear, your bottom is so much more polite"... if only she had known... or then again, maybe not Smile
Re: Half formed thoughts about genitalia  [message #67664 is a reply to message #67652] Sat, 13 April 2013 22:33 Go to previous message
NW is currently offline  NW

On fire!
Location: Worcester, England
Registered: January 2005
Messages: 1558



Humans have proportionately bigger penises than other primates, which suggests that there's been some kind of evolutionary pressure favouring big dicks.

The blog post at http://blogs.redorbit.com/your-wifes-a-liar-size-does-matter -bigger-penises-in-science/ suggests that that may be female choice. I guess it makes sense - we're one of the few species to have any kind of female orgasm, after all.

Personally, I think penis size is pretty irelevant, and of the people I know well enough to discuss the matter and be pretty sure they're not just saying what's expected, there are at least as many guys who go for men with smallish (up to five inches) as go for largish (seven inches and over)



"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
Previous Topic: When did porn become poop?
Next Topic: Bringing 'Em Back
Goto Forum: