Its a harmless fetish, until someone goes out in public offending everyone around them by smelling like a garbage truck.
Hypothetically, one could work from home and only shower when they go to get groceries, etc.
>By the way is there a NAME for a fetish where someone likes human feet looking like animal feet?
Yes…..the name is "disgusting"
It certainly looks like a good game.
> Speaking of peanuts, you know what else is bad for squirrels?
this is not how you walk a good boi >:|
Not into choking but damn that is a cool picture.
Not gonna lie, I'd fuck 3B right in her stanky cunt.
All the soap in the world won't unstink my dick after tapping that.
VR Foot massage simulator >:) What was those high tech gloves where you can feel virtual objects from Player 1? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSp1dM2Vj48
Massaging furry's feet would be fun!
Im not even a foot guy and I'd pay to massage her beans.
Paw fetish art in escalating levels of lewdness (did I miss anything?). Where do you find yourself?
1. Detailed paws at a conspicuous angle; art not necessarily aimed at paw fetishists.
2. Paws the focus of the artwork; clearly aimed at paw fetishists.
3. Paws being touched/massaged/tickled.
4. Paws shoved in the viewer's face.
5. Paws stepping on the viewer/other character's face.
6. Paws being licked or sniffed.
7. Hot steam, not necessarily stink, rising off the paws.
8. Cum-covered paws.
9. Sweaty paws.
10. Stink lines emanating from paws.
11. Character saying how bad their paws smell.
12. Dirty or smelly socks/shoes on or near paws.
13. Dirty paws covered in stinking filth.
14. Micros being crushed to death by paws; feet covered in gore.
i occasional like a piece despite its paw fetish bs. You're right, 90% of paw "art" is hard to even look at.
What ever happened to the artist of the second picture, "Kasedries?"
Haven't see anything by him (her?) for years now.
BTW, I just looked up Kasedries at FA and DA, last entries was from 2005.
I'm new to heterosexuality. Is the first pic anal or vaginal?>>3601831>What ever happened to (artist name)
Either they use a different account name they don't want associated with the old one, or they don't draw anymore.
So you've decided to dip your toes into the most degenerate of all fetishes: heterosexuality. I'll be your guide.
The intensity and their expressions suggest vaginal. But the alignment suggests anal. Things like that are typically tagged "ambiguous_penetration" on e621. That particular image is just tagged with "penetration".
sometimes artists just up and vanish. My favorite erotic story writer, mule boy, wiped his fa and stopped writing after getting married.
I don't like that it's ambiguous. I want to know exactly what I'm looking at. Things like this is why heterosexuality is so difficult to get into. You've got two holes down there, but only one penis to fill them with. It just doesn't add up. At least with gay it's one plug, one socket, and no room for error.>>3601852
"Just up and vanish" is applicable to lots of things, not a phenomenon unique to artists. That neighbour you never see anymore, that co-worker no one knows what happened to, the kid in high school that one day stopped showing up, the ducks you used to always feed at the pond, and so on.
Yeah, it used to annoy me too. But I mean, just use your imagination. If you want it to be anal, it's anal. If you're in the mood for vaginal, it's vaginal.
That's what I don't understand. Why do people care so much what the artist intended. I mean, that's good to know too. But what matters is how it makes you
feel. Let the ambiguities in art be a springboard for your imagination.
again, don't care about the feet but that ass…
It prowls for days
Autists just need everything to be explicit.
If you wrote a novel with an anti-communist message, and you found a book review online where someone misunderstood your book and thought the message was pro-communist, you would want to correct them.
Misunderstanding the artist's intent is an error by the viewer. You may not imagine anal if it is not meant to be anal.
What if an artist intends for it to be ambiguous?
Then no misunderstanding of the artist's intent occurs.
The artist's intent is irrelevant if nobody can tell what it is.
Like drawing a black dot and getting upset that people don't get what it means. If it's just in your head, it doesn't matter.
Interpretation means there's room for ambiguity, which means the artist left the question open.
Again, draw a black dot and then rage when people don't understand what it means.
That's why I hate when artists leave the description field blank. Tell me about the artwork, don't just throw it up online with absolutely no explanation.
I do love when artists put something interesting in the description field: agreed.
Fossas have interesting feet. Probably pretty dexterous with all the time they spend in trees.
I like when artists at least try to make the anatomy accurate to the species instead of just recolored human feet.
Already posted one of these. I wonder why the file wasn't rejected…
There's nothing nasty about the first three doggies. They're nice.
Why would you assume that "nasty" has anything to do with the images posted in the first place?
Dad bods are good and sexy
Read the OP subject line.
Do you have sources for these?
Sorry, I usually append artists to Twitter file names, but I didn't do it that time. Mobile Chrome won't let me.
Does anyone know if mobile Firefox prompts for a file name when saving images?>>3605484
You're right, I just threw them in there for no reason.
Here, have a cookie.
>>3605501>Does anyone know if mobile Firefox prompts for a file name when saving images?
It doesn't. Not on Android, at least. Phones are severely crippled devices.>cookie
Yes, punished twice!!
He was punished for having feet like that!!
And she was punished for trying to help him.
Anybody have those two models?