| Revision as of 21:01, 17 July 2006 editPublicgirluk (talk | contribs)58 edits →Proposal to merge with []← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 14:48, 25 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,094 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Facial (sexual act)/Archive 4) (bot |
| (611 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{talkheader}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Censor}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1= |
|
==Proposal to merge with ]== |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality|importance=mid}} |
|
*'''Merge''' I think this article would fit comfortably in an ''Oral Sex'' subsection. |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Pornography|importance=mid}} |
|
*'''Keep''' While the two are similar, they should stay separate as ''Oral Sex'' is a separate part of the subject, and Oral Sex does not always lead to a facial, and vice versa.] 18:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
}} |
|
*'''Keep''' Definetly keep, they are two very different things, the two can not occur at the same time. --] 21:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 125K |
|
==Changes== |
|
|
|
|counter = 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 0 |
|
This article had a strong bias towards quasi-feminist views of the facial--that a facial always represents subjugation of women and so on. That's a fringe view of (mostly male) feminist academics. I have rewritten the article to make it more balanced, but the quasi-feminist view is still represented. In addition some of the article was poorly written and I tried to clean that up--a facial is an ejaculation, not a depositing. If you drip semen from a cup onto someone's face, you may have deposited semen but you haven't given a facial. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|algo = old(90d) |
|
=="Disrespectful"?== |
|
|
|
|archive = Talk:Facial (sexual act)/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
Here is a quote from this article: |
|
|
|
|
|
Some people consider this act disrespectful to the person on the receiving end, although some people do receive sexual pleasure from it, and some claim that since the human face is an amalgam of our most unique physical characteristics - it is an expression of the desire to copulate directly with the most intimate part of one's partner. Whether it is really an act of disrespect depends on the mutual perceptions and intentions of the participants. |
|
|
What do you believe? |
|
|
|
|
|
i think this line |
|
|
|
|
|
"The people that claim a facial is "disrespectul" and don't engage in it however, are most likely very conservative people who refuse to explore and experience in life." |
|
|
|
|
|
is a little 'disrespectful' towards people who don't enjoy the act - it doesn't make them conservative, it just means they may not like it ! |
|
|
|
|
|
I am a 28 year old married woman my husband gives me regular facials & i enjoy them a lot for me its a loving act & for both of us a good alternative to him coming in my mouth . |
|
|
|
|
|
==Related information?== |
|
|
Does anyone know where there is related information (book, webpage, other) similar to this article. |
|
|
|
|
|
--] 14:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)==Substitute sex act?== |
|
|
|
|
|
It is OK to consider this act as a substitute sex act for those girls who are not yet ready to engage in other sexual activities. In my experience most girls like to remain passive while ejaculation on their face is occuring, mostly to avoid other areas, specially their hair, from receiving the semen |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes of course it can be a substitute sex act I agree with the comments above i like my husband to straddle me when I am lying with my head on a pillow that way I can watch him mastubate or I can matubate him or suck him its sometimes hard not to get it in the eyes or hair but thats a minor problem when one considerers the great turn on when that first squirt hits your face. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Pictures?== |
|
|
|
|
|
What, no picture to accompany the article? How are we young'uns supposed to learn if there are no visuals for reference? Tut. Sigh. Off now to watch more porn. Bye. |
|
|
|
|
|
:I don't really think sarcasm is necessary here. As for no picture, I think the description is more than adequate ] 20:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
well,happy news,i have posted a picture.--] 11:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
There must be pictures! That's right, multiple! --] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Removal of link == |
|
|
|
|
|
Removed the link to . It is a pay site and not really relavent to the page as the topic is description of the act, not the act in pornography as such ] 20:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Silly== |
|
|
|
|
|
Much of this article comes across as silly. "Some people think it's disrespectful." "Others don't." "It's OK if both partners are into it." "Don't get cum in my eye." (OK, some of these are paraphrases.) And to cap it all off, "A facial may also occur accidentally." (not a paraphrase) Why don't we just say what a facial is and leave all the angst out of it? ] 04:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:OK, well I trimmed the article. Hope no one is upset. ] 05:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Bukkake== |
|
|
The addition about strawberry shortcake is the common term that is actually used for the act described. If the strawberry shortcake description doesn't belong here, then the bukkake description is unnecessary as well, as I believe it has its own article. |
|
|
:"Strawberry shortcake" is a fictitious sexual practice, is it not? There are bukkake videos. Do you know of any strawberry shortcake videos to substantiate that this is a "real" practice and not a joke? But go ahead and delete bukkake from the article if you want -- I almost did so myself. ] 05:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::bukkake has it's own article so it isn't needed in this one. I don't know of any strawberry shortcake videos but I believe they would be of questionable legality because of the violence. There are entries in slang dictionaries on strawberry shortcake in slang dictionaries such as urban dictionary, although I acknowledge that that is not a reliable source. Also this entry is incredibly brief after taking out the bukkake information as well. maybe it should be just put into the oral sex entry and deleted? |
|
|
::: has a whole list of these humorous but fake (I think) sex acts. If you add Strawberry Shortcake, I guess you should add Angry Dragon as well. I thought about your suggestion of deleting the page and putting the content in Oral Sex, but didn't want to go that far. Maybe others have some additional content they want to add that has to do with facials per se but isn't just a bunch of angst about whether they're proper, how they can happen accidentally, etc. For example, the first porno to depict a facial, the prevalance of the activity in various cultures, etc. ] 06:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Pharrell1's favourite == |
|
|
|
|
|
Or so i heard. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Merge with cum shot? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Seems redundant. —] 02:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Male Domination? == |
|
|
"...some believe that if the partner is a female, the act may be one of male domination". It seems that it ''may'' be an act of male domination regardless of the partner's sex.--] 14:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Definitely needs pictures == |
|
|
if copyright is an issue i have many pictures of my wife taking a "facial." i would be happy to share these since the pictures are "area specific" (chin, cheeks) and you cannot tell who she is. |
|
|
:''shrugs'' If you upload them under GFDL, sure. —]<font color="green">]</font>] ] 17:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
.svg){kind=small}
