Junk Photos
Whenever I receive a Friends Request, I always check out their profile. Part of that is checking out the photos. Too many times I'll find that the photos from a single male contain about a dozen selfies with their junk prominently displayed. I want to be friends with people, and not their junk therefore, I usually deny the request. For me, a straight male nudist, this is a complete turnoff. And while we're on the subject, other turnoffs include the request to exchange e-mail addresses and photos, Skype and other social media. We have no problem with these things after we have established a solid relationship, but not before. Maybe some people would think that I'm being too picky, but that's the way I feel. Perhaps the people sending out such requests will find one reason they get so many denials, but in reality they probably send out so many requests that they are unaware of any denials.
I think interactions on social media should be treated like real life. Although as an introvert I do like having some information available up front it does tell you a lot more about the person what information they have in their profile, including pictures, that most people wouldn't provide to a random stranger that they just met. The same goes for some of the personal information they might request too quickly.
Hmmmm. I have a reasonable number of pics posted but went through them today and restricted many to certified friends. I did this because I got nervous about who was really getting a hold of these and how it might come back to haunt me.
But this post makes me wonder If I went too far. I'm genuine and wish to meet and get acquainted with folks. When you see my profile, does the limited access to pics turn you away? Just wondering.
Whenever I receive a Friends Request, I always check out their profile. Part of that is checking out the photos. Too many times I'll find that the photos from a single male contain about a dozen selfies with their junk prominently displayed. I want to be friends with people, and not their junk therefore, I usually deny the request. For me, a straight male nudist, this is a complete turnoff. And while we're on the subject, other turnoffs include the request to exchange e-mail addresses and photos, Skype and other social media. We have no problem with these things after we have established a solid relationship, but not before. Maybe some people would think that I'm being too picky, but that's the way I feel. Perhaps the people sending out such requests will find one reason they get so many denials, but in reality they probably send out so many requests that they are unaware of any denials.
I fully concur with your thoughts on this topic DesertRat and also reject pics that afront my own sense of decorum and confronting exhibitionist displays.
Yes we males all have "Junk" or what else you prefer it to be called, but I dislike being slapped in the face with photos of it as the main focal point of the photo.
For the uniformed, my wife like many women find such pics as totally gross. Where as she is OK with a normal male nude pose. As the ones she took of me for my profile.
I'm with the poster who finds the term "junk" offensive. It's just a nasty term. My crown jewels are far more precious! There are so many words for the twig and berries, that we could use any number of euphemisms and upset someone with each of them.As for the original question? It's a nudist site, and I expect to see cocks on profiles. I find it far more annoying to receive requests from total strangers who've never contacted me before in any way, or from people who've sent one message, but have a blank profile or one with only a single clothed photo. That's annoying, not offensive.We've all got our own little niggles. Airing them on here is like moaning over a coffee at work.
As we say in the antiques/collectibles world, "one persons junk may be another persons treasure".
...but I guess photos of a single woman's junk being prominently displayed is okay?
In our case a photo of a nude woman gets the same reaction as the men, from both of. Us.
We dont want to see what they had for breakfast, a little decorum goes a long way.
A nicely posed or candid photo is more plesant than a photo focused on displaying one's genitals for their own or others gratification.
Boy are some people antsy over names, but I guess when it works it is like a treasure, but when it don't work any more it then becomes real junk.
Have a good one.
...but I guess photos of a single woman's junk being prominently displayed is okay?
IMHO, no I don't think that it's OK. I have no problem in seeing a person's genitalia, either male or female, as in a photo with the subject involved in a normal, everyday nudist activities. The photos that I am referring to are the ones where the subject poses in an unnatural manner that their genitals are prominently and purposely displayed. We had this discussion several years ago about one particularly offensive individual, who was labeled "Miss Spread Eagle", and had dozens of photos prominently displaying her vulva. One of the key objections to the photos was the fact that of all the hundreds of women we have seen at various nudest venues, we have never seen a woman who lounged in a "spread eagle" position. This we find unnatural and thereby offensive. At the time this was pointed out to the TN owners who chose to do nothing about the photos.
...but I guess photos of a single woman's junk being prominently displayed is okay?
IMHO, no I don't think that it's OK. I have no problem in seeing a person's genitalia, either male or female, as in a photo with the subject involved in a normal, everyday nudist activities. The photos that I am referring to are the ones where the subject poses in an unnatural manner that their genitals are prominently and purposely displayed. We had this discussion several years ago about one particularly offensive individual, who was labeled "Miss Spread Eagle", and had dozens of photos prominently displaying her vulva. One of the key objections to the photos was the fact that of all the hundreds of women we have seen at various nudest venues, we have never seen a woman who lounged in a "spread eagle" position. This we find unnatural and thereby offensive. At the time this was pointed out to the TN owners who chose to do nothing about the photos.
But in your OP, you targeted single males, not married, not couples, not single or married females. All of which post inappropriate "junk" photos. It just seems that the single male is targeted yet again.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!