Posted by Lotg on November 29, 2004
In Reply to: I read the reports posted by Lewis on November 29, 2004
: : : : : : : : : Hello to you all:
: : : : : : : : : Could anyone tell me the possible definition of *meat-packy"? and if I presume it to mean *tightly packed* will it make sense?
: : : : : : : : :
: : : : : : : : : She looks mean-packy in her super-tight bikini.
: : : : : : : : : Thanks
: : : : : : : : There's an expression from my West Virginia childhood -- solid as a meathouse -- referring to someone's physique. Maybe the two phrases are related?
: : : : : : : I'd venture a guess that since the bikini is "super-tight," she's bulging a bit around where the strings cut in, the way a pork roast is tied, tightly enough that the string indents the meat.
: : : : : : Ten pounds of sugar in a five-pound sack.
: : : : :
: : : : : I came a cross an an article that likened Arnie Schwarzenegger's body to a condom stuffed with walnuts. It's sort of the same idea I think
: : : : I can identify with those descriptions - when I was a bit chunkier, briefs got a little lost - the pouch was there (worry ye not) but the sides got a bit lost. there are two things a guy can do in those circs - change his waistline or change his style of underpants. I did both.
: : : : however, some women do not have the same public decency I showed and wear bikinis with straps that disappear into flesh like a cheese wire into brie.
: : : : the butchers' string disappears into a roast when it expands, the same as a bikini strap sinks into overdone flesh.
: : : : I once read that a 'bondage hook' had changed a couple's sex-life and tried to imagine what one looked like. turned out it was a bondage 'book' and just poor printing. I hoped the printing was better than the article that mentoned it!
: : : : L
: : : I will never look at the Sunday Roast in quite the same way.
: : : As an aside, my gallery once featured a show of artists protesting the Spanner ruling (gay men doing time for GBH after having consentual S&M sex). I can tell you that "hooks" are a common feature. I'm guessing the editor of the article missed it because it was just plausible.
: : Just when I thought Lewis had laid the hooks issue to rest, here it is again. I must have lived a sheltered life, because I can't visualize or even imagine the use of hooks in that particular endeavor. (shows how shallow a scientist must be in these other areas of knowledge)
: Not into that level of pain myself - but I read the law reports - it is an S&M thing to use piercings - you can do that on a pro tem basis with fish hooks or other such devices. some people like it - you'd find the pleasure/pain distinction can be quite blurry if you have ever tried a bit of consensual spanking/whipping.
: some people use accupuncture needles and suchlike into sensitive areas.
: each to their own.
: the legal point was can a person consent to an assault that causes them significant pain? the court found that you were not allowed to permit another person to hurt you. makes boxing illegal if the same standard was applied to sexual and non-sexual pain.
Well, my rather biased viewpoint is that if you're flaky enough to want to subject yourself to pain - then why not I suppose. Personally I have absolutely no concept of why - as I would far rather delight in the agreeable and delightfully sensuous pleasures in life. Pamper me - don't punish me. Or I might get nasty - hehe!!!