If you did not find the right match in either category, why not post a wanted ad?
While the rest of the world was chomping on chips and gluing their unblinking eyes to a TV on Superbowl Sunday, I was busy debating the relevance of the term “sex toys” on Twitter. It started with an interview question I received via email last week.
You will find cross dressers, ladyboys and sissys, all of whom are looking for either a one-night stand or casual fun.
If you are a top looking for a bottom or bottom looking for a top, try looking in the Pakistan Men Looking for Men category.
Call something a “dong” and nobody wants to fucking put that inside themselves.
If you read this blog on a regular basis, you’ll notice that I prefer to call things what they are.
As I was trying to articulate why I favor the term “sex toys,” Metis Black (president of Tantus) chimed in with links to this article she wrote in 2008 and the ensuing butthurt response from AVN. In the case of the sex toy industry, where we have to claw and fight to even be seen as legitimate at all, this is immensely important.
Therefore, I like “sex toys” because it is straightforward. I’ve always considered the word to be all-encompassing, but I can see his point.
Still, every other option for that slot kind-of sucks.
These days it is hip and trendy for companies come up with their own cutesy little terms — “pleasure objects,” “erotic toys,” “love toys” — which are obviously marketing ploys more than anything else.
Nataly deeply rims Henessy, sodomizes her with a thick toy and butt-fucks herself with an even fatter vibe.
Are you looking for a transsexual or transvestite in Pakistan for a night of fun and sexual intimacy?