I've found quite a lot of girls I've been with will not suck on my balls, even if they're more than happy to take my penis in their mouth, and despite the fact that my balls are always nicely shaved and clean. Anyone else found this at all? Any girls out there really don't like testicles?
I'm the same as a few off the other cant really say I'm hugely attractted to them but I do love playing with them lol
I must say I get extremely turned on if his balls slap against me during sex, especially in the doggy style position.
My OH balls don't turn me on in all honesty but it's definitely a turn on seeing the pleasure on his face when I play with them :P
John1986 wrote:
Seriously, balls aren't as delicate as most women think. You can grab them pretty firmly and roll them around without causing discomfort. It's just hitting them that really hurts. If they're squeezed fairly slowly you can be quite firm with your grip.
You have to know how to squeeze correctly.
And don't fall asleep with them in your hands - apparently I suddenly clench when I'm drifting off which is painful! Eek.
On the sucking front - testicles get stickier and sweatier than the penis so they have to be scrupiously clean and shaved (random hairs in my mouth - not fun) for me to enjoy sucking and licking but sometimes I just want to feel them in my mouth - they do feel great, smooth and soft!
Adx
John1986 wrote:
SweetSubmission wrote:
John1986 wrote:
Just a thought - do you girls get turned on by a man's balls? Is there such a thing as a nice pair? I would have thought that on a kind of primal, animalistic level, large testicles would be associated with high virility and so would make a man sexually attractive. I also believe a similar theory holds true to explain why a lot of men (I believe) find boobs attractive and like very busty women - larger boobs are more likely to be able to support potential offspring. What does everyone think about this?
Hi John,
I do get turned on by my man's balls, but it's not because of their size, it's because they're so much fun to play with. I like how they taste and smell and feel, and how much I can turn him on by playing with them or taking them in my mouth.
I once had a fling with a guy who only had one testicle and I was no less attracted to him because of it and it didn't make any difference to our sex life at all.
I think with balls it's different to boobs, in that by the time you can see a guys crown jewels, you've probably already decided that you find him sexually attractive - if he didn't appeal to me when fully clothed, I wouldn't undress him to see if his testicles changed my mind! With boobs, you can see when you meet us whether they're on the fuller side or not. I do appreciate that for whatever reason some men have a preference one way or the other when it comes to breast size, but Ad is right, there's some very questionable science in your "bigger size = better functionality = higer levels of attraction" theory - ladies with small boobies are just as capable of feeding their babies!
SS xx
Of course women with small breasts are just as capable of feeding their babies but the things that stimulate attraction aren't always logical. Can't think of any right now, but there must be examples in nature where an animal chooses their mate on the basis of a physical characteristic. And you have to think why men find boobs attractive in the first place - cos on some sort of level it tells them that the woman is able to support any potential offspring. Well that's what I've always thought anyway.
Sorry John, I clearly misunderstood your original post. The bit in bold seemed to me to suggest you genuinely thought that larger boobs are more likely to be able to support potential offspring.
Let me get this straight... I think you're actually saying that although you know intellectually that breast size is no indicator of fertility and breast feeding capabilities, you believe that you are more attracted to big breasted women because you think on a subconscious level you associate maternal potential with bustiness? Is that right? And that therefore it might also follow that women might make the same subconscious link with big testicles?
It's an interesting theory. Although the responses above seem to suggest it doesn't work that way with balls at least. I wonder, if that subconscious association between large breasts and fertility were universal, how would you explain those men who are attracted to teeny tiny elfin girls? Are they linking different physical attributes to fertility, or is fertility less of a priority for these men? Is it just breasts, or do you think hip-to-waist ratios or other things are a factor? More fundamentally perhaps, if sexual attraction was based on fertility, where does homosexuality fit in?
Maybe there is something in your theory, although as Ad says, it'd be impossible to prove (or disprove). I just think it's a bit reductive - and to be totally honest, it makes me a bit sad! I believe sexual compatability is a gloriously complicated, nebulus and mysterious thing and I'd hate to think it was founded on something as base as the size and shape of someone's genitals or, even worse, an instincive assessment of breeding potential based on subconscious associations that we know make no scientific sense. I love my man's balls because I love my man, rather than loving him because of his balls.
Sorry if I've ranted - I can't sleep and found it quite an interesting thing to wrap my brain around.
SS xx
nope you stated the item quite well you love your man and his balls he's so lucky t have someone who can take him as he is and take him in hand too mmm
I love them:) I like to get them in my mouth when I am giving him a wank and he goes crazy if I squeeze them when he cums. Must be hairless though, I like to tie him up and shave them with a cut throat razor, ahh yes testicles are fun.
*gulp*
SEXYGET 69 wrote:
*gulp*
lol SG....you would love it, I am a really trustworthy gal.....just have a touch of the DTs in the morning
I'd deffo put my faith in you Miss B! ;)
I have good knife/sword skills myself. Just got a lovely outdoors Mora knife last week, verrry Sharp!
SG x
Just spilt my Coffee -Miss B!!!
Miss Behaviour wrote:
I love them:) I like to get them in my mouth when I am giving him a wank and he goes crazy if I squeeze them when he cums. Must be hairless though, I like to tie him up and shave them with a cut throat razor, ahh yes testicles are fun.
That would be a massive turn on for me. Very sexy.
SweetSubmission wrote:
John1986 wrote:
SweetSubmission wrote:
John1986 wrote:
Just a thought - do you girls get turned on by a man's balls? Is there such a thing as a nice pair? I would have thought that on a kind of primal, animalistic level, large testicles would be associated with high virility and so would make a man sexually attractive. I also believe a similar theory holds true to explain why a lot of men (I believe) find boobs attractive and like very busty women - larger boobs are more likely to be able to support potential offspring. What does everyone think about this?
Hi John,
I do get turned on by my man's balls, but it's not because of their size, it's because they're so much fun to play with. I like how they taste and smell and feel, and how much I can turn him on by playing with them or taking them in my mouth.
I once had a fling with a guy who only had one testicle and I was no less attracted to him because of it and it didn't make any difference to our sex life at all.
I think with balls it's different to boobs, in that by the time you can see a guys crown jewels, you've probably already decided that you find him sexually attractive - if he didn't appeal to me when fully clothed, I wouldn't undress him to see if his testicles changed my mind! With boobs, you can see when you meet us whether they're on the fuller side or not. I do appreciate that for whatever reason some men have a preference one way or the other when it comes to breast size, but Ad is right, there's some very questionable science in your "bigger size = better functionality = higer levels of attraction" theory - ladies with small boobies are just as capable of feeding their babies!
SS xx
Of course women with small breasts are just as capable of feeding their babies but the things that stimulate attraction aren't always logical. Can't think of any right now, but there must be examples in nature where an animal chooses their mate on the basis of a physical characteristic. And you have to think why men find boobs attractive in the first place - cos on some sort of level it tells them that the woman is able to support any potential offspring. Well that's what I've always thought anyway.
Sorry John, I clearly misunderstood your original post. The bit in bold seemed to me to suggest you genuinely thought that larger boobs are more likely to be able to support potential offspring.
Let me get this straight... I think you're actually saying that although you know intellectually that breast size is no indicator of fertility and breast feeding capabilities, you believe that you are more attracted to big breasted women because you think on a subconscious level you associate maternal potential with bustiness? Is that right? And that therefore it might also follow that women might make the same subconscious link with big testicles?
It's an interesting theory. Although the responses above seem to suggest it doesn't work that way with balls at least. I wonder, if that subconscious association between large breasts and fertility were universal, how would you explain those men who are attracted to teeny tiny elfin girls? Are they linking different physical attributes to fertility, or is fertility less of a priority for these men? Is it just breasts, or do you think hip-to-waist ratios or other things are a factor? More fundamentally perhaps, if sexual attraction was based on fertility, where does homosexuality fit in?
Maybe there is something in your theory, although as Ad says, it'd be impossible to prove (or disprove). I just think it's a bit reductive - and to be totally honest, it makes me a bit sad! I believe sexual compatability is a gloriously complicated, nebulus and mysterious thing and I'd hate to think it was founded on something as base as the size and shape of someone's genitals or, even worse, an instincive assessment of breeding potential based on subconscious associations that we know make no scientific sense. I love my man's balls because I love my man, rather than loving him because of his balls.
Sorry if I've ranted - I can't sleep and found it quite an interesting thing to wrap my brain around.
SS xx
I know what you mean - attraction is very complex because there are no strict rules to it. But at the end of the day, we're mammals like any other and I believe we still retain very basic natural instincts when it comes to selecting a mate and I believe things like breast size and waist to hip ratio like you mentioned play a part with quite a lot of men's preferences for women. I know we don't like to believe this as like you say it "seems quite reductive and makes us a bit sad"! But that doesn't mean it's not true. I think we try to rationalise attraction and sex way too much and forget about the importance of "natural urges".
However, I also believe our complex, intelligent minds and characters mixed in with society pressures also plays an equally important role, which explains why a lot of men go for different types of women, not just the voluptuous type.
Finally, do we actually know if there's no scientific logic behind the idea that larger breasts produce more milk and larger testicles produce more semen? I saw a documentary about breasts once and a very small breasted woman did have difficulties producing enough milk for her baby. And I would have thought that maybe larger balls could produce more sperm? If not, it could still be relevant - would a curvy, busty shape represent high levels of female hormones necessary to be highly fertile? And likewise, wouldn't large testicles be a sign that the man has a lot of testosterone and so to a potential mate, may have have more of the manly characteristics necessary for survival of the family - strength, aggression, dominance, etc.? To me this makes sense, although of course doesn't mean it's true...
i love my oh's balls- i love to hold them and play with them and smell them and suck them etc etc
i think the smell of them is what turns me on the most- the smell musty and testosteroney which is amazing- the most secret smell.
he doesn't shave them though or any other parts- doesn't bother me at all
I had no idea smell was a factor at all. In fact, I never new my balls had a smell! I'll be asking my gf about this. By the way katmiaow, that is an amazing bum. It's perfect! Wouldn't mind having my balls slapping against that!
John1986 wrote:
...Finally, do we actually know if there's no scientific logic behind the idea that larger breasts produce more milk and larger testicles produce more semen?
Yes, we do. There is no link between size and functionality in breasts whatsoever.
"
The woman with the enormous breasts only has more fatty tissue than the small breasted woman and that makes them bigger. However, the http://breastfeeding.about.com/od/breastfeedingbasics/a/breastfeedbasic.htm is generally the same in both big and small breasts, so breast size has nothing to do with the ability to produce breast milk and to breastfeed."
taken from this website: http://breastfeeding.about.com/od/breastproblems/f/bigsmall.htmIt's also not true that men with bigger balls are more fertile or produce more sperm. Sperm count is dictated by many factors such as lifestyle, temperature, frequency of ejaculation etc. However, it is true that some testicular problems cause both shrinking of the testicles and decreased fertility, so if your testicles get smaller relative to their previous size then there is cause for concern.
I saw a documentary about breasts once and a very small breasted woman did have difficulties producing enough milk for her baby.
Lots of women have difficulty breastfeeding, for lots of different reasons. It's common. The fact that the woman you saw on this documentrary had small breasts is sheer coincidence.
would a curvy, busty shape represent high levels of female hormones necessary to be highly fertile? And likewise, wouldn't large testicles be a sign that the man has a lot of testosterone and so to a potential mate, may have have more of the manly characteristics necessary for survival of the family - strength, aggression, dominance, etc.?
What is interesting is that there is evidence that body shape can be an indicator of fertility to an extent - but it's more to do with body shape indicating health really, rather than directly indicating fertility, the link being that people in good health are more likely to be able to conceive. Actually, this evidence relates to Waist-Hip ratios in both men and women, not breast size or ball size. It's also absolutley nothing to do with personailty traits like aggression. The wikipedia article on this is actually very good, and lots of the sources it cites are worth a look.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waist-hip_ratio
To me this makes sense, although of course doesn't mean it's true...
I just think it's important to check facts before putting forward strong opinions that could offend people. I'm really uncomfortable with the suggestion that small breasted women are less fertile and less capable of breastfeeding or small testicled men are weaker and less fertile. These are untrue assertions, and I feel that they devalue people with these physical traits.
Really interesting research paper into female and male perceptions of female physical attractiveness available here:
http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/m.j.tovee/BJP.pdf
SS xx
This is very interesting. I genuinely believed there might be some truth in these assumptions. I'll definitely take a look at that paper when I get a chance. I just assumed that testicles and breasts were like other organs where greater size was linked to better functionality eg. larger lungs will give you a greater lung capacity, and larger muscles generally mean greater strength.
I love to suck balls, its a great turn on, but alas, i dont get the chance cause O/H says its too uncomfortable. Can it really be that uncomfortable?? Its not like i suck hard on them but he rarely lets me go near them! Hmmm
why not try just gently licking them to start with?? he might prefer a more subtle approach