VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Sunday, December 22, 11:15:22pm [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Monday, October 21, 05:32:46pm
Author: Admin
Subject: Is subtle sometimes sexier than the spectacular?

Here's an example of a "spectacular" belly button exposure, an inadvertency in which you get so much abdominal skin/flesh on display (it's former WNBA star Christi Thomas in a pic that was posted at least once many years ago) -



Maximum skin exposure is great, which is probably why we love string bikinis and the skimpiest bikinis & monokinis so much, but is it always better & hotter than seeing only the BB? Remember the following old message that I posted years ago? -

https://www.voy.com/245957/1995.html

When you have just the belly button & the little strip of belly including it, the subtlety of such an exposure seems to be possibly just as sexy as a spectacular display - wouldn't you agree? Many people probably didn't or wouldn't even notice the cheerleader's subtle BB exposure, but for "fetishists" like us, it's like getting away with something we shouldn't have, as if we got a special treat when we shouldn't have, which is sort of the opposite of a "foof", a word originated by Corkab & his younger brother Rich, who once visited our msg. board on Corky's behalf - not getting to see IT when we should have.

Any of this making any sense? The cheerleading photo is the best example of umbilical subtlety that I can think of, and yet it stands out in my personal memory because it's one of the sexiest belly button exposures I've ever seen or witnessed.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: Is subtle sometimes sexier than the spectacular? -- Max, Tuesday, October 22, 09:37:57am [1]

I also feel that way.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Sorry -- Admin, Sunday, October 27, 05:26:57pm [1]

I apologize (sorry) for this posting, as it certainly wasn't one of my best, and lengthier & dorkier than it should have been.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Re: Sorry again -- Admin, Sunday, October 27, 11:16:58pm [1]

I inadvertently posted my reply in the wrong msg. thread yesterday, but I eventually corrected it, several hours ago.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]


[ Login ] Create Account Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
 * HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:

Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.