User: unsanesarah
2008-09-04 | |
2 | |
434 | |
12 | |
unsanesarah@aol.com |
Polls Created
- How Far Should Actresses Go for Role? (Graphic)
- 2014-01-06 17:48:47
- Holding Your Pee (Girls Only)
- 2008-09-07 23:21:37
?
I get the fascination with it being a chance, but they could do some acts where there's a smaller chance and some where death is guaranteed. I think each type would have some girls volunteer.
I think that makes sense. I don't have an issue with the girl being nude or exposed, so long as that was her choice. The important part would be ensuring the experience was a good one and that no one was manipulating it to make it sexual or about them. There should be a wholesome and positive energy for sure
Ultimately the act is meaningless without true free will, so if a girl chooses and then follows through it's meaningful. If she is hesitant then she is not ready and if she is pushed in any way the genuine nature of the act is always in question. Anything less is the full or partial imposition of another person's will, which then stops being truly about the girl. She becomes a pawn or tool, and that is an entirely different subject and one that I oppose. The discussion was about girls making their own choices, with agency, and being allowed to follow their goals 100% on their own terms. Zero pushing, zero manipulation, zero hesitancy, zero input from any other person.
Unfortunately it trayed too far. It would have worked best with younger girls on a tropical island where they ended up naked the whole time.