Accidentally find candid shoeplay videos (others not)
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:40 am
- Contact:
Honestly, dude, you need someone to teach you to relax. This is not real life, it's just an Internet forum where perverts go to find masturbation material. We all know why we're here.notalwaysright10000 wrote:Yes, the last refuge of the internet dipshit: :
Despite your incessant, loud protestations to the contrary, you're not terribly impressive. You brought a gun to a pillow fight. And I'm having a tough time with your comparisons to Tyson and Ali. Those guys were the pinnacle of their sport. You're a common or garden Internet masturbater.
-
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 2:12 am
More fluff.
There is no prosody in text, but you can't even read my rather obvious tone despite the smilies. I'm not ranting at you in stentorian terms, I'm laughing at you in tone of sardonic levity. Someone is fucking up my fun and I don't like it. Can you grasp that, dipshit?
If whether I'm "terribly impressive" is contingent on your capacity for astute assessment, it's clear nothing of consequence is at stake on that score.
And you flatter yourself, with rather extravagant self charity, in suggesting you wield anything nearly as substantial as a pillow. You're trying to chop down a cactus with a balloon.
Now make an intelligible point or don't.
Shit or get off the throne.
There is no prosody in text, but you can't even read my rather obvious tone despite the smilies. I'm not ranting at you in stentorian terms, I'm laughing at you in tone of sardonic levity. Someone is fucking up my fun and I don't like it. Can you grasp that, dipshit?
If whether I'm "terribly impressive" is contingent on your capacity for astute assessment, it's clear nothing of consequence is at stake on that score.
And you flatter yourself, with rather extravagant self charity, in suggesting you wield anything nearly as substantial as a pillow. You're trying to chop down a cactus with a balloon.
Now make an intelligible point or don't.
Shit or get off the throne.
Uh, OK, what should I write here...
Sweet and to the point:
My strong preference is for seated, both-feet shoeplay. Dangling, and shoeplay with open-toed shoes or mules, I'm afraid don't do as much for me.
Sweet and to the point:
My strong preference is for seated, both-feet shoeplay. Dangling, and shoeplay with open-toed shoes or mules, I'm afraid don't do as much for me.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 4:43 am
- Contact:
- llama
- Posts: 1220
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:16 am
- Location: United States
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 2:12 am
Isoteric? Maybe if you had a little more exposure to guys like me you'd be less prone such embarrassing malapropisms.
I'm actually from a working class background. My dad is a mechanic but he knows what a library card is for and could tell you more about ancient history or English literature than many of my professors. One of my fondest childhood memories is of watching him deal a thoroughgoing verbal smackdown to a smarmy psychologist who had grossly underestimated him. And guess what? I'm not going to apologize for having read few books and gotten into a good grad school.
The comments from people like you are always the same crushingly banal tripe, even using the same five or six words again and again and again like it's some kind of linguistic Babinsky reflex.
It's always the two p's ("pompous" and "pretentious", as if these even mean anything), ad poplulum appeals to how "everyone else" supposedly speaks, and juvenile, cartoonish comparisons to what you imagine people sounded like some time in the past. (Did I use a single anachronism?)
Next you'll be telling me to stop abusing my thesaurus (I've heard that at *least* sixty times) to which my response is, stop neglecting your dictionary.
Believe it or not I despise the kind of person you think I am, but people like you, who can't tell the difference, and are so easily threatened by a few less common but perfectly serviceable words, make it very difficult for me to be polite or give a damn about your insecurities.
I'm actually from a working class background. My dad is a mechanic but he knows what a library card is for and could tell you more about ancient history or English literature than many of my professors. One of my fondest childhood memories is of watching him deal a thoroughgoing verbal smackdown to a smarmy psychologist who had grossly underestimated him. And guess what? I'm not going to apologize for having read few books and gotten into a good grad school.
The comments from people like you are always the same crushingly banal tripe, even using the same five or six words again and again and again like it's some kind of linguistic Babinsky reflex.
It's always the two p's ("pompous" and "pretentious", as if these even mean anything), ad poplulum appeals to how "everyone else" supposedly speaks, and juvenile, cartoonish comparisons to what you imagine people sounded like some time in the past. (Did I use a single anachronism?)
Next you'll be telling me to stop abusing my thesaurus (I've heard that at *least* sixty times) to which my response is, stop neglecting your dictionary.
Believe it or not I despise the kind of person you think I am, but people like you, who can't tell the difference, and are so easily threatened by a few less common but perfectly serviceable words, make it very difficult for me to be polite or give a damn about your insecurities.

Uh, OK, what should I write here...
Sweet and to the point:
My strong preference is for seated, both-feet shoeplay. Dangling, and shoeplay with open-toed shoes or mules, I'm afraid don't do as much for me.
Sweet and to the point:
My strong preference is for seated, both-feet shoeplay. Dangling, and shoeplay with open-toed shoes or mules, I'm afraid don't do as much for me.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 4:43 am
- Contact:
Oknotalwaysright10000 wrote:Isoteric? Maybe if you had a little more exposure to guys like me you'd be less prone such embarrassing malapropisms.
I'm actually from a working class background. My dad is a mechanic but he knows what a library card is for and could tell you more about ancient history or English literature than many of my professors. One of my fondest childhood memories is of watching him deal a thoroughgoing verbal smackdown to a smarmy psychologist who had grossly underestimated him. And guess what? I'm not going to apologize for having read few books and gotten into a good grad school.
The comments from people like you are always the same crushingly banal tripe, even using the same five or six words again and again and again like it's some kind of linguistic Babinsky reflex.
It's always the two p's ("pompous" and "pretentious", as if these even mean anything), ad poplulum appeals to how "everyone else" supposedly speaks, and juvenile, cartoonish comparisons to what you imagine people sounded like some time in the past. (Did I use a single anachronism?)
Next you'll be telling me to stop abusing my thesaurus (I've heard that at *least* sixty times) to which my response is, stop neglecting your dictionary.
Believe it or not I despise the kind of person you think I am, but people like you, who can't tell the difference, and are so easily threatened by a few less common but perfectly serviceable words, make it very difficult for me to be polite or give a damn about your insecurities.
-
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 2:12 am
Oh, by the way, if anyone else is tiring of this (who isn't?) Mr. Mike made a great post on topic a ways back that I wouldn't want to get buried.
Uh, OK, what should I write here...
Sweet and to the point:
My strong preference is for seated, both-feet shoeplay. Dangling, and shoeplay with open-toed shoes or mules, I'm afraid don't do as much for me.
Sweet and to the point:
My strong preference is for seated, both-feet shoeplay. Dangling, and shoeplay with open-toed shoes or mules, I'm afraid don't do as much for me.
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:53 pm
- Contact:
1:28 black girl / 12:58 girl with glasses little heelpopping - 13:13 slipped in / 23:25 see bottom left corner / 1:08:53 / 1:44:34
1:08:47 girl on the left dipping / 1:17:28 - 1:17:52 little heelpopping / again 1:33:25 - 1:34:30
59:40
56:45 girl in yellow
1:02:20 - 1:02:45 mature wife / again 1:06:00 - 1:08:50
1:36:45 girl in red pantyhose / again 1:39:30 - 1:43:02
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:53 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:50 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:50 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:53 pm
- Contact:
1:00:30 - 1:02:10 / 1:51:00 (left girl dipping)
25:40 + 43:20 (girl in grey)
35:20-35:40, 48:50, 1:06:20 (girl with grey top, shoeplay in slingback) / 45:09 (girl in the middle) / 50:45-51:30 different shoeplay
1:06:35 (girl with glasses)
17:18 (girl with glasses) / 19:30 (girl in the middle)
1:24:53, 1:32:02 (girl in the middle) / 1:26:29 - 1:27:20, 1:31:32 (girl with glasses)
2:20, 11:30, 12:40, 28:10 (girl in the middle)
21:50 - 22:10 (in the background, hard to see), 22:53, same girl as in the previous video
27:48 (girl with glasses)
0:58 (girl in blue) / 31:00, 31:35 (girl in the middle)
0:04, 34:56, 46:55 (girl in the middle) / 22:08, 1:11:02-1:12:50 (girl in blue) / 41:06 (girl with glasses)
More will come...
25:40 + 43:20 (girl in grey)
35:20-35:40, 48:50, 1:06:20 (girl with grey top, shoeplay in slingback) / 45:09 (girl in the middle) / 50:45-51:30 different shoeplay
1:06:35 (girl with glasses)
17:18 (girl with glasses) / 19:30 (girl in the middle)
1:24:53, 1:32:02 (girl in the middle) / 1:26:29 - 1:27:20, 1:31:32 (girl with glasses)
2:20, 11:30, 12:40, 28:10 (girl in the middle)
21:50 - 22:10 (in the background, hard to see), 22:53, same girl as in the previous video
27:48 (girl with glasses)
0:58 (girl in blue) / 31:00, 31:35 (girl in the middle)
0:04, 34:56, 46:55 (girl in the middle) / 22:08, 1:11:02-1:12:50 (girl in blue) / 41:06 (girl with glasses)
More will come...
