Cassius, i will tell you what happened Ihr Geheimnis: Das ausgeklügelte Profil. Gemma Collins, Guy Ritchie and Judi Dench bring star power to Chelsea Flower Show preview day

vagina stretching?

Vagina selber bauen: Die Tüten Muschi Das brauchst Du: eine Plastiktüte oder Gefrierbeutel zwei Badehandtücher Gleitgel oder Öl Speiseöl Gewichte z. That "the image is not a clear depiction of fisting" and "the focus of the image is on his erected penis and scrotum" is both true and false. Max Impact View Profile View Forum Posts. Why is the solo female fister a cartoon, and the male fister a photo, for a start?

11/10/ · I was seeing a fresh girl who was pretty tight. I think it made work difficult for her sometimes. suddenly she has come from time off and was her little sister was quite open, and she was very, very loose. Has anyone heard of a shop doing something to the girl to do that? Sorry it sounds weird, but it is a serious question. It meant I could hardly feel anything in the session.

Taschenmuschi selber Bauen - YouTube

Taschenmuschi selber Bauen

'kunstliche vagina' Search - XNXX.COM

Similar searches detention house spy cam gay tolett travel pussy kunstmuschi slim girl never be the same fetisch masturbator kunst vagina gummimuschi kunstlich tess lejk kunstliche teen pool mastubator cougar boy ekstase stohnen kunstliche muschi bllutjung und schon gefickt 金色淫毛美女 acrobatic sex kunstliche vagina selber machen vagina aus plastik kunstliche pussy sexspielzeug ...

Kann die Vagina von zu viel Sex ausleiern? Oft wird Frauen, die regelmäßig ihre Sexualpartner wechseln, nachgesagt, dass ihre Vaginen (okay, eigentlich ist e.

But when it came time to try this pick-up tactic on her own, she wasn't ready to send out actual pictures of her own vagina. She then downloaded Bumble, a dating app she chose because it allows users to send pictures within the app, instead of having to move to actual text messages.

When she matched with , she sent each of them a quick note reading 'hello handsome' to start the conversation. Just a regular day? Outsourcing: Kerry found the picture online because she didn't want to send strangers a photo of her own genitalia.

Three men responded to Kerry immediately. She flirted heavily with them and, after four or five messages, sent each the pre-selected 'v-pic'. Though many women feel that similar treatment from men constitutes sexual harassment, the men perhaps desensitized by the increasingly prevalence of online pornography, seemed unfazed.

Not only did they not freak out as Kerry expected, but many sent long, detailed replies explaining just what they would like to do to the vagina in the photo. Undeterred, Kerry tried a different tactic with the next round of men who responded. This time she sent them the v-pic immediately after they replied to her 'hello handsome' message. One man told Kerry that he'd actually received a vagina picture from a girl before. That for me? A few others were less obscene — but no less unintentionally comical — in their replies.

A man named Andrew told her quite simply that the 'lighting is a little off', while Lachlan fired back with: 'Nice. Let's catch up some time. Getting a little cutesy: A few of the men responded to Kerry's revealing picture with emoji. Myki, in a bid to either be romantic or make sure Kerry had a nice figure, too, wrote: 'Zoom out. I want to see all of you. Finally, Kerry tried one last tactic to see if she'd get a reaction, sending the v-pics as soon as she matched with a man, without so much as a 'hello'.

Even then, seven out of ten men responded positively — and the other three didn't respond at all. For some men, however, a working vagina seems to be the only thing necessary when securing a date. The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline. Argos AO. Latest Headlines Meghan Markle Fashion Finder Mail Best Shopping Gardening Parenting Blog My Profile Logout Login. Privacy Policy Feedback.

RELATED ARTICLES Previous 1 Next. Share this article Share. Here's What Happened. Share or comment on this article: Woman sends men vagina pics on Bumble dating app and is horrified with the result e-mail 1k.

Comments Share what you think. View all. Follow DailyMail Follow DailyMail Follow dailymail Follow DailyMail Follow MailOnline Follow Daily Mail.

Gigi Hadid gives behind-the-scenes look at daughter's birthday bash featuring a custom Buddy Valastro cake and quirky decor A WEEK to better sleep! Small steps to help you get the rest you've dreamt of - and the energy you need Ad Feature Advertisement. Prince Charles and Camilla are in high spirits as they open the redeveloped Aberdeen Art Gallery 'They don't deserve their right on the show!

Sussexes to take first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park Naomi Campbell cuts a glamorous figure in a geometric printed midi while Emma Raducanu wows in white as they join Jourdan Dunn at British Vogue bash Corrie SPOILER: Abi Franklin pulls a GUN on Corey Brent before being scared off by police as Kelly Neelan and Nina Lucas share intense chat Kanye West allegedly 'bragged about hooking up with Christina Milian' and claimed he 'cheated' on Kim Kardashian in a outburst MIC FIRST LOOK: Ollie Locke's surrogacy plans hit a wall Idris Elba: Bond candidate looks dapper in a sharp brown suit while wife Sabrina wows in a red gown at British Vogue party Wendy Williams was 'drinking every day before being taken to hospital for psychiatric evaluation' and is now fighting a breakthrough COVID infection Emma Raducanu flashes a smile as she dons a chunky blue sweater and jeans for casual stroll in London with her tennis agent Chris Helliar Alicia Silverstone reveals she's joined a dating app I request editors to give their input on the issue.

Thanks -- Camilo Sanchez talk , 2 December UTC. Is it just me, or does it seem totally illogical that a photograph depicting some dude getting fisted is neccessary to illustrate this article when we have far better material available that won't give schools across the world an excuse to ban wiki from classrooms? Is it neccessary or essential to provide an informative element in and of itself? Does it in any way enhance the understanding of the act beyond what the words of the article does?

So, I submit that this image serves absolutely no purpose and would ask that it be removed. I have no strong opinion about the image in contention, but the other image should be removed because it is worse. It doesn't tell me anything about fisting, it just tells me what happens if you put indesign and a straight male virgin in the same room.

And how long is that woman's left thigh? Can someone please remove this disgusting and offensive image? How could anyone possibly think this is appropriate. Children use this site for gods sake!! There is also a page on suicide, but you don't see a photo of someone with their head blown off with a shotgun, or a baby after it was aborted on the abortion page.

Fisting is also just as repulsive and really is not significant to warrant this. What kind of sick deviant would let someone do this? Disturbing — Preceding unsigned comment added by I started the discussion regarding this image and I would like to clarify a few things so we can speedily reach consensus.

Thanks -- Camilo Sanchez talk , 21 December UTC. Barts1a Talk to me Yell at me , 3 December UTC. Not done. When you ignore the "I don't like it", the accusations of homophobia, ad hominems "should be ashamed of themselves" and the "per aboves" and look at the actual comments, there is no clear consensus that the image should be removed. There is discussion about whether it is a good illustration for the topic or not which is what the discussion should be about , but there is no consensus either way yet.

Thryduulf talk , 4 December UTC. Reactivating request. It seems to me that consensus of the RfC is to remove the image. Barts1a Talk to me Yell at me , 6 December UTC. Separate from the above discussion, does the image of the gloves in the gallery really add to the article? The caption is overly long, and should probably be moved to the body of the article - if you need that much text to show relevance to the article either it's not relevant or the article is missing something.

If a picture is necessary, it's a low quality image and doesn't explain why a fisting glove is any different to a normal PVC glove is it? No, seriously — it shouldn't be there. Carrite talk , 4 December UTC. Per these two now combined sections , I've removed the gallery as it didn't add to the article galleries are discouraged anyway, see WP:GALLERIES and wasn't sourced. I have though moved the first image the "duck beak" hand position to an inline image as it does illustrate the first part of the "Techniques" section and so can't be classed as OR.

That isn't to say that we should or equally that we should not have it , but it needs to be discussed separately. Given that masturbation has been divided with two sub-headings under "male" and "female" techniques, I propose one of the following splits might appease some of the "social discomforts" people may have with regards this article being all squashed into a few poorly organised paragraphs:.

Also the higher degree of infection from anal "exploration" should be separately identified. As an encyclopedia the article should not only be discussing the practices in terms of what it looks like, as seems to be the clear agenda from certain groups forcing the picture issue and arguing the toss. If people want to know what it feels like to have a hand shoved up their arse, they need only try it, no photo on Earth is going to provide that answer!

If you still disagree.. Why don't we just remove filth like this from the internet?! It's disgusting! Why is it that the image of a woman engaging in fisting is an illustration, and the male image is a photo? Could this be a double standard? Should we introduce an illustration to replace the photo for the male, if only for the sake of consistency, and to eliminate any double standards?

Someone should mention shoulder-deep anal fisting and all the info about it. Noting that File:Sissy in schoolgirl uniform gets anally fisted. So that's three editors clearly objecting to the image, and two clearly wanting it to remain. By that, I mean that, as was noted on Largefoot's user talk page, it's not a good image for the subject by displaying the man in a schoolgirl uniform, but it's the only image of anal fisting freely available to Wikipedia.

It should be cropped to only show the anal fisting, and the title of the image should then be changed to better reflect the imagery; I'm sure that the title of the image the inclusion of the term sissy is one of the things that has bugged some editors about the image, though I am not offended by the title.

Like the aforementioned linked deletion discussion shows, the image was also up for deletion earlier this year. Flyer22 talk , 2 September UTC. Hello, I came across this article via Gawker. I found the photos in the article to be totally unsuitable for younger audiences, X-Rated images, and they are basically pornography!

Therefore the photos should be removed without questioning and are absolutely not appropriate to be on Wikipedia which is a public website! Polloloco51 talk , 13 November UTC. Update: I went ahead and removed the two images. Wikipedia is a public educational website accessed by all ages, and isn't a pornographic website. Wikipedia is accessed by people of all ages. Removing the clearly pornographic images is not censorship but rather keeping Wikipedia a healthy educational encyclopedic website.

People from 8 years old to can access this article. Unless a warning can be placed prior to someone accessing the article and the pornographic images, the images should be pulled until then.

It is not the matter of liking the images or not, that is irrelevant! The images are pornographic, X-rated and are not appropriate for an encyclopedic website that is accessed by all ages! The images add nothing to learning about "fisting". Again, it is not the matter of liking the images or not, that's totally irrelevant period. The images are what they are. They are pornographic, X-Rated, and extremely inappropriate for younger audiences who may especially accidentally come across the article accidentally.

The best way to visually demonstrate "fisting", is perhaps illustrated pictures rather than photos taken by god knows who, during sexual intercourse.

I can't see them as anything other than their submitters getting their jollies by exhibitionism rather than genuine contribution to the subject matter. The illustration is the "least astonishing"; the two photos do nothing to enhance understanding of the subject matter but only perhaps gratify whoever submitted them. Firstly, I appeal to the human behind posting the articles and images not the author hiding behind the technical policies and codes on this matter, I'm sure this has been debated and discussed and could be done elsewhere but im doing what i can here and now where i can.

This is important. Just because you technically can do something it does not mean its right or that you should do it. With far reaching negative effects and consequences. Secondly, Images for sexuality information on Wikipedia is not necessary. A description is enough.

Cartoon pictures do not make it any less inappropriate. Wikipedia is not a How-to manual it is an Encyclopedia. Along side information content, Wikipedia should stand for equal access opportunity and consideration for the whole community of users. Minors could access this and or be exposed to it by other minors and it would constitute carnal knowledge.

Whether its allowed or not, you are the one responsible for allowing that to be possible to happen. Think of the children. I cant believe I have to be even trying to fight against this. Whoever put these sexuality pages up is inconsiderate for starters but to put up the images and to defend themselves for it is really inconsiderate, irresponsible and inappropriate. This information is useful but should be in a better location, not on Wikipedia, you could make a great website with all your content, but for the love of children and all humanity, even straight and conservative people, please not on Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia, we could value your information contribution but your persistence in showing images approved only by a minority is selfish and not appreciated.

Children should be able to learn about sexuality, but within reasonable limits and certain moderation and discretion should and could be exercised. It is not a majority of humans that engage in such activities, and it shouldn't be depicted and given as an impression that these kinds of sexual things are so normal and widely accepted that they can be completely publicly viewed, publicly shown and displayed.

This content is not universal and is not the norm and is not commonly accepted. Children should have access to Wikipedia's wealth of information, I don't want my children seeing these images on Wikipedia that were put up by some irresponsible adult or pervert or both. Such content is damaging to young minds! If people want to learn about this sort of thing they should find it elsewhere, Wikipedia should give innocent non explicit brief descriptions on these subjects if anything at all, but leave the excessively detailed descriptions and the pornographic adult only content out of it!

To the user that has put images to these sexuality articles; "Please remove all the images" To the Wikipedia community; "Please do what you can to help remove this adult only content" — Preceding unsigned comment added by The legal section lacks any info on U. For many decades, since the Supreme Court handed down the Miller decision, California and other states routinely prosecuted or threatened prosecution for depictions of fisting anal or vaginal.

Then Deputy L. She argued that the video was filled with scenes that depict sexuality in "a patently offensive way. Glasser decided fight the charge in court, as he felt he could successfully demonstrate to the jury that fisting could not in this day and age be viewed patently offensive.

Part of his argument rested on that fact that in fisting was common enough in gay and lesbian sex and was also growing in popularity among heterosexual couples.

Shortly before the trial was set to begin, he agreed to a settlement with the Los Angeles city attorney's office. He also agreed to offer an edited version of "Tampa Tushy Fest, Part 1" for California buyers but was also free to sell the unedited version in California without fear of future obscenity charges.

The above link provides a good starting point for adding info about fisting related obscenity prosecutions in the U. If I come across any further info then maybe I will write up a short paragraph or two on the legal situation of fisting in porn in the U.

There doesn't appear to be anything in the referenced sources indicating that fisting was invented by gay men, with gay women following their example. The source talks mainly about the genesis of the 'fisting scene' at the Catacombs, and how it was initially only open to gay men. It does not state or imply that fisting was invented at that time, only that it was 'popularized' and a subculture formed around it.

I can find at least one source that states " Regardless of the claim that fisting is " I have just added archive links to one external link on Fisting. Please take a moment to review my edit. I made the following changes:. When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found. The article says the photo of fisting on a man is illegal in the UK. So why do I have access to that? Your assumption is wrong. When someone visit an encyclopaedia is generally expecting to find information, not pornography.

And I'm not talking about a drawing but homosexual pornography at the end of the page. If you wish to see these images then go to a porn web site. It's you who are in the wrong place, not the rest of us. I don't see porn photos or videos in the article about Pornography. According to you, why are they not relevant there? What is relevant or not depends on the purpose you seek. If your intent is to explain what fisting is, a drawing would be enough. An image of a gay male being sodomized in a session of sadomasochism is clearly not relevant.

You don't need this image for explaining what fisting is. I have just modified one external link on Fisting. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February After February , "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:.

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fisting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Learn to edit ; get help.

Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed. Human sexuality portal. This article contains instructions, advice, or how-to content. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to train. Please help improve this article either by rewriting the how-to content or by moving it to Wikiversity , Wikibooks or Wikivoyage.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows. Some editors would prefer a non-photographic illustration, but there were multiple objections to artsy, interpretive ones like the present image of the woman, versus medical-style diagrams; others would still prefer a photo. An argument for replacing the image does not equate to an argument for removing and not replacing it, especially when the expressed reasons to do so when any were given are contradicted by policy.

Also, many! There should be a different consensus discussion about proposed replacements. One comparable replacement was already suggested in the course of the debate, but lost in the shuffle.

Arguments for removing the image. Arguments for keeping the image. Full debate. The discussion above is closed. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Categories : Wikipedia objectionable content Start-Class Sexology and sexuality articles Mid-importance Sexology and sexuality articles WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles.

Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in. Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit New section View history. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file. What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Page information. Download as PDF Printable version. Archives : 1. Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter.

WikiProject Sexology and sexuality. Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Sexology and sexuality Wikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality Template:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality Sexology and sexuality articles.

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Consensus of involved editors is against adding the image, and only one editor wants to keep adding it.

False and moot: Self-evidently not the case when broader attention is brought to bear, or the debate would have been very one-sided. Also not the only time debates of this sort have appeared here. This RfC is a classic example of why WP:SNOWBALL is not policy and should not be cited early in a discussion. It is illogical that the article needs to be illustrated with a photograph of someone being fisted. No consensus: Others strongly disagree, with multiple rationales based in policy, guidelines, precedent in similar articles, etc.

Some would prefer a non-photographic replacement. A photographic fisting image will be too offensive to too many people. Schools may block Wikipedia from classrooms because of this image. In point of real-world fact, what actually happens is that school censorware already blocks this and other sex articles, so common sense is against this rationale, too.

I actually showed images like this to teachers and it turned them away from Wikipedia. Irrelevant and pointless: That's on you.

It's like breaking a kid's nose on purpose in front of his parents on sign-up day to warn them that taking up your karate class has its risks. Side note: If that really happened, the political fallout would be massive in a democracy like Australia; meanwhile, in a totalitarian state, we expect WP to be blocked anyway, for its political, human rights, etc. The image does not help convey any information or understanding not conveyed by the article text, and thus serves no purpose. Irrelevant: Per WP:AADD , WP:NOT DEMOCRACY , m:WM:PAE , etc.

The image is poor quality. Consensus to replace but not remove: I don't see anyone at all claiming it's a great photo. But many disagree that it is so bad that it must be removed. The image clearly depicts someone with a disease or rash, and may confuse readers.

The problem is, it's not clearly a rash or disease, but easily could be razor burn from shaving the area, a very common practice. So, perhaps another argument for replacement, but not for bare removal. The fisting in the photo isn't clear enough. Curiously, some seemed to feel it essentially wasn't graphic enough, effectively contradicting several others. The focus appears to be on an erect penis, not the article subject. And has distracting elements, like leatherwear.

No consensus: Others disagreed, feeling that the penis was simply being pulled up an away, and no one supported the "distracting leather" argument. Given that fisting of [one sort] seems to be a popular activity in the gay "leather men" scene, the presence of leatherwear in the photo being "distracting" rather than simply accurate is an iffy proposition.

The non-photographic female illustration is simply sufficient. Consensus against: Numerous objections to this claim were raised, on multiple grounds, and few seemed to hold this view, including some opponents of this image. The male image does not accurately portray fisting. Common sense against: It's an actual photograph of anal fisting, whether it is enough of a close-up or not. Someone in favor of the picture has a personal connection to it.

Evidence against, and irrelevant: The photo came from Flickr, and nothing suggests that is is a photo of anyone in the debate or anyone known to anyone in the debate. That wouldn't preclude its use, anyway, it could just discount the! Being in favor of the picture means someone is a big fan of fisting.

False and irrelevant. This is just self-evidently ad hominem nonsense, like being in favor of a picture of a zucchini at the Zucchini article means you must be obsessed with that vegetable. Policy, guidelines and common sense against: See WP:CONSENSUS , WP:RFC , WP:DONTPANIC , WP:TEA , etc. Adding the image is vandalism. Policy disagrees: Does not qualify under WP:VANDAL. Accusations of vandalism when one simply disagrees about content or appropriateness assumes bad faith and is not civil.

The image is too prurient — it is pervy masturbation fodder. We have no control as editors over this, and given the number of paraphilias out there, the same can be said of thousands of images in thousands of articles. An image depicting a sexual activity is by definition going to be sexy to some subset of people. The image should be replaced with something comparably informative but better, meanwhile this one should be removed until then.

The guiding policy here is simply WP:CONSENSUS on editorial agreement on encyclopedic value, since this suggestion does not propose censorship of any such image, just removal of this particular one, and there is clearly no consensus to remove the image.

Children might see it, so it has to go. As someone else pointed out, any child curious about this topic can simply Google it for endless pictures, so censoring it here wouldn't prevent minors from seeing such images.

Some other pages that could have graphic illustrations don't, like Suicide and Abortion , so this shouldn't either. Remove, because entire article is poor quality. Irrelevant: That simply does not compute, like "destroy my windshield because my car is crappy. Consensus against: Even the editor accused of homophobia doesn't go this far; see also WP:NOT SOAPBOX.

Images generally, not just this one do not add meaning to the article. Policy, consensus and common sense against, for reasons already given.

The image is causing disruption. An editwar between two reverters is not disruptive, it's a WP:EDITWAR. An RFC is not disruption, it's WP:DISPUTE -resolution.

Images don't cause disruption, editorial behavior does. There is nothing "ambiguous or mysterious" about fisting as described in the article, so get rid of the images. It's just a homemade image. Common sense agrees: This is obvious. Masturbation , strongly supports equal treatment, even separate sections, when particulars differ. And several strong arguments could be made against using only female images on a sexually explicit topic as form of obvious bias.

Opposing the image is homophobic. Common sense and guidelines disagree: No evidence of this; the active party in the photo is not visible and so not necessarily male to begin with, meanwhile repeated accusations of homophobia are ad hominem and incivil , as well as assumptive of bad faith , even when some WP:DICKish behavior has transpired. Opposing the image is just a personal preferences thing.

Common sense against: Strong evidence to the contrary on the part of specific individuals, such as the Australian anon's pro-sex comments while nonetheless opposing the image. The image illustrates partner vs. This argument will be seen as moot by those would oppose any illustration of fisting at all, but policy and guidelines clearly contradict them. No consensus, and irrelevant: There's been little discussion of what is allegedly wrong with the female drawing, though no one has contradicted the assertions that it is anatomically flawed.

But that's another discussion, and keeping, removing or replacing the one image has nothing to do with that decision about the other. Distracting elements can be cropped out. True: The license permits derivative works. Several objections to the image can be resolved simply by zooming in a bit. It's not our task to prevent people from masturbating.

Policy and consensus support: WP:NOT , generally. Common sense supports, but irrelevant. It demonstrates that the subject is actually anatomically possible, which not all readers would necessarily believe and which is not clear from artistic drawings.

marekvosahlik.cz

marekvosahlik.cz

Required Cookies & Technologies. Some of the technologies we use are necessary for critical functions like security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site and maintenance data, and to make the site work correctly for browsing and transactions. Fisting, in the context of this is a mutually consensual sexual act. In the disputed illustration, it is an act of punishment (as you have noted yourself) and as such, the recipient is not consenting. Re 2: It is a corruption, because Michelangelo did not depict the hand actually being inserted into the anus. Singles auf Partnersuche in Balzheim Balzheim in Baden-Württemberg bietet für Singles viele Möglichkeiten zum kennenlernen und flirten. Wir haben Kuenstliche Vagina Selber Machen für Dich einige interessante Singles aus Balzheim zusammengestellt, vielleicht findest Du hier schon bald die Liebe deines Lebens! Bleibe nicht länger allein, melde Dich kostenlos an, erstelle ein.

Our Projects