Mentioning foot fetishism twice in the past several posts got me wondering why it's so popular a reference for symbolic naughtiness. After all, I'm sure we could all cite sexual fetishes more morally questionable, or non-sexual transgressions far more harmful than those. So on one hand, maybe that's what makes it safe to reference. On the other, I do think it's also just too comically... random! I mean, come on, feet? Mouths, buttholes, abs, shoulders, hair, napes and thighs, okay, fine, plenty of spots carry some sensual implication by transgression, proximity or suggestion. Feet though? It's like saying "oooh, baby, that patch of skin a hand's breadth below your right shoulderblade gets me so hot!"
... and now thanks to Rule 34 I've probably invented "just down the right shoulder" fetish porn.
No comments:
Post a Comment