When I think of swarthy, I think of dark mid-eastern, like Jamie Farr or Yassar Arafat. Now, Tammy Faye may be a lot of things, but I don’t think swarthy is one of them.
She may have filled out, but here is the quote from The Encylopedia of Bad Taste:
“Flash back with us a moment to the salad days of Tammy Faye LaValley, the prettiest little 73-pound coed at the North Central Bible College in Minnesota…” It turns out that she did “balloon[ed] up from her honeymoon weight to one hundred thirty, then managed to lose it all.”
At 4’10" and slight of build (bone stature, regardless of how much weight she may have packed on later), I think it unusual that she had such a large vagina. Of course, that was only Jim’s opinion. Maybe he was just a neeedledick.
It’s the thumbscrews for you neuroman. However, I’m still interested in how you came to view “swarthy” as being large. Did your wife sigh dissapointedly while viewing your endowment and say “Gosh Neuro. I wish you were more swarthy”. Was your girlfriend modeling a new pair of jeans in the mirror and ask you “Honey - Do you think I’m getting swarthy?”
Oops, and I’m a HUGE (not in reference to the OP, so SHADDUP, you perverts) dumbass; It was said BY Whoopie AS a Jamaican girl ABOUT a very old American guy. Before anyone ELSE tries to correct me.
As for the OP…From all accounts I am still in decent shape (as 'twere) after having had three children, and I have not been doing my Kegels, so it’s not necessarily a given that a woman will be “built for comfort, not for speed” after giving birth. However, I’m going to be doing them from now on, because I have an ego the size of Brazil and I want to be the BEST, damnit.
Hey. I’ve got plenty of “swarth” below the belt. And I don’t have any “swarthy” SOs. (Oy am I digging myself deep…)
I think that when I was a wee laddie, in the distant recesses of my mind “swarthy” became associated with “hog” or “hog-like.” So why didn’t I just call Tammy “hog-like”, you ask?
The lyric ‘it ain’t the meat it’s the motion (of the ocean)’ applies to both genders. Having sex is like, the BEST thing to do ever! Bar none. If you have time to complain about the equipment then your mind isn’t on pleasing your partner which is where it should be.
And whoever complained about irritation when kegeled will be thinking of that kegeler years from now in a frantic lonely attempt to call up that feeling one more time.
If she’s big down there one quick trick besides open communication and kegeling is to clamp your legs OUTSIDE of hers (in missionary) and squeeze some friction back into your life. Or go greek (doing it with a funny black cap on your head). Heard the BBW joke ‘any crease a piece?’ Truly tasteless: rejuvinate a saggy sex-worker? Insert picnic ham and remove the bone.
Sex is so cool that size really doesn’t matter. If it does than I suggest props of the latex variety.
I have decided that the true indicator of a womans size is her ankles/lower calf. Roughly the same circumference. Check it out. But size doesn’t matter. LIBIDO does.
re: ankle size. Majora, not minora. But universal indicators are goofy, inaccurate, misleading, and encourage prejudice (remember ‘cranial capacity’ as an indicator for smarts?. I retract the ankle theory.
OK, rather than post a new thread, this one is recent enough that I’ll just bump it up.
I’m here with a plea for help in convincing a friend that there is no correlation between stature and vagina size. He’s become fascinated by tiny women and is convinced that should he bed one, he’ll be in for an extra special treat. (And of course, this friend is 6’-7" tall.)
I tried the surveys show short men don’t have small penises argument but evidence about penises won’t convince him of anything about vaginas. I’ve also tried to draw analogies to breasts, noses, and feet, but he uses the same logic to also render these examples (ahem) impotent.
My experiences don’t count, either. I can attest to the fact that there are small women with loose vaginas, and large women with tight ones, but despite my protestations, my friend assumes I must have encountered “stretched-out little hoes.”
(What I haven’t told him is that my hypothesis is that there may be some correlation with ear size… but that’s based on a non-scientific sample set.)
Since Kegels keep getting mentioned, I’ll just toss this one in: even better is doing single-leg squats on an exercise machine. Instead of flexing both legs at the same time, you have to flex “bicycle” style, one leg bending while the other leg straightening. It doesn’t even require much weight to work, you just have to have a squat machine to do them on. Try it just once and you’ll feel the burn; do it a couple times a week for six weeks and other people will notice too. ~ Do it a lot and the muscles -esp. on the inner thighs- will start to bulge
(how many kegels will that take?) ,
not that your special guy will complain.
-If he does, ditch him and email me. - MC
[childbirth educator hat on] MC, I think you may be a little confused about what the Kegel exercise does. Kegel exercises strengthen the pubococcogyeus muscle, which looks sort of like a hammock stretched between the pubic bone in the front and the coccyx in the back. It controls the urethra, the vagina, and the rectum and supports the internal organs. It has nothing to do with your inner thighs.
Bughunter wrote:
I can attest to the fact that there are small women
with loose vaginas, and large women with tight ones,
but despite my protestations, my friend assumes I must
have encountered “stretched-out little hoes.”
So, what makes him think that the small women he’s trying to lay won’t be similarly stretched out? Especially considering that any woman who’s willing to bed someone as odious as himself is a likely candidate for being “stretched out.”
What’s the matter with letting him chase after small women, anyway? Let him learn his own lessons.
As for vaginal musculature…it’s a wonderful thing.
