As I'm always insisting, going barefoot is good for mood and anxiety reduction. (In fact, last summer I suggested it to a seriously anxious autistic girl -and it worked for her! Not for all autistics, though.) So, as a consequence it improves many human activities including sex.

Another Oxford memory illustrating this: There was a svelte redhead at Somerville College when I was doing my postgrad, with feet just like Pauline Bonaparte as carved in marble by Canova:

http://celebheaven.fpb.yuku.com/topic/1095...on#.VwDCKBMrIxE

Her summer Saturday pleasure might be to walk barefoot through the Parks to Magdalen College (grass, loose gravel, asphalt, stone slabs), pick up her (shoe-wearing) boyfriend and then walk back along the River Cherwell (long stretches of gravel embedded in asphalt) to her rooms in college for "tea" (a wonderfully English euphemism).

However, my question here is as regards the extent that the mechanical stimulation of a lady's soles can be directly erogenous. The one famous case that I know of in the literature concerns an American housewife in the Fifties. She went off sex with her husband, because she was obtaining better orgasms through sucking on her soles with a vacuum cleaner. So, I wonder how much of this sort of thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcPVJjQLQic

is actually masturbatory instead of merely obliging?

When I was a schoolboy, an older girl would walk barefoot to school for three miles each way, and go off the direct route to walk across rough ground. I remember that she could enjoy it rather intensely......her face suddenly going red!

I've also come across erotic speculations in classic court Persian erotic literature of the Mughal and Safavid empires, concerning women achieving erotic gratification through walking barefoot on marble floors.

Given the psychological reticence of the feminine gender concerning their own sexual experiences and preferences, I've come across very little confirmation of this possibility myself -but wonder if (e.g.) the Feetosopher and Hal Heaven have anything to note?

Nearly all the models I have worked with told me that barefooting gives them pleasant sensations most of the time.
The few ones who are into BDSM told me that they often take pleasure also from barefooting in extreme conditions.
In both cases, there is both a physical and a psychological gratification.
The latter one is more interesting to me, as it has to do with the main feature I am looking for in a model.. the infamous "attitude".. you can read the INTERVIEW I have made for WU's FEET LINKS to know more about this.
All of them get pleasure from feeling the people's attention on them, because they are barefooted => out of the pack.
The BDSM girls also take pleasure from the fact that - enduring pain - they are able to tackle barefooted surfaces which most people would dare to tackle only with heavy-duty boots.

I can certainly confirm the physical gratification aspect!

I regularly go for barefoot walks in the forest in which I live, and (e.g.) this morning went out at 4:45 for a five-kilometre walk through sunrise. Awesomely beautiful! It was too dark to see on what I was walking to begin with, and I was on sand, gravel, rubble, twigs, mud and dogshit (the difference between the last two being tactilely immediately obvious). Completely enjoyable, and also pleasant was the "buzz" in the soles afterwards, like the muscle pain after a good workout.

I can also do some of the extreme, and have done broken glass (bottle, window, windscreen -NOT drinking glasses!), hot asphalt, loose stone chippings on concrete and cigarette ends. I'm not interested, however, in lasting tissue damage. The fascination is in being able both to experience and to contain the pain. (I have the ability, which the medical professionals find interesting, to switch off pain if it becomes overwhelming. That proved useful when I broke both bones in my lower left leg in a forest with no mobile phone signal, and had to crawl out. Didn't need the morphine when I got to hospital.)

However, sex doesn't feature in any of this -in fact, for me going barefoot ameliorates sexual tension. Perhaps I never developed that half of your "attitude" because expecting women to become excited by male bare feet is a rather forlorn hope!

Good interview, BTW.

Glad that you liked it.

You seem to be a very prolific writer (to say the least ).. are you maybe a journalist, novelist..??
Whatever.. you have taken the forum by storm, I'd say.. 9 topics out of the 15 in the front page were started by you.. if I dared to have more than 3-4 active threads at once in this forum, some friendly guys would surely start complaining..

Well I'm not complaining. It's a free forum isn't it?

To be fair Feetosopher, this is the City-Feet board, not the Feetosopher board

Well, a Martian just landed from a spaceship looking at the board's main page would possibly think that it is the "Timonenkarkku board"..

Whatever.. if you and your friends want me and my circus out of here, Duffman847.. you'd better address your complaints to Paul, or the admins.
Troll attacks in the "Diminished Harmony / Altered Dominant" style.. have produced no results.. I am a stubborn Italian motherfucker.. don't you forget..

Until this OFFICIAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN ME and PAUL stands (and the fact that I am still here means that I have always been compliant with the related conditions).. I am afraid that you and your friends will have to suffer my presence here.. and my combined 160,000 views out of just TWO main threads..

It is not my fault if the average dude (and even Paul ) is not interested in your own over-complicated City Feet contests.. or in your friend's Timonenkarkku ponderous essays..

Ciao ciao..

@Timonenkarkku: please forgive this last incursion of mine in one of your threads.. I had to set a couple of matters straight with Mr Duffman847..
I will not comment your threads anymore, unless you make a direct reference to me.
This said.. I happily re-trench myself in my two main threads..

The GOAT Tournament was the best thing to ever happen to this board, and you know it Feetosopher...focusing interest on the very reason this forum exists...the CF models.

Feeto - I'm not going to turn this into a war as I am bigger than that. But I will reply nonetheless.

You don't think much of my contests.... fine, that's your opinion. So I'll cut to the chase.

Exactly WHERE did I say I wanted your "circus" out of here? Please tell me the exact number of times I have said that.

BTW, just for the record - I voted in your favour last year when you just had to go to war with AlteredDominant.

My issue is not with your content - I think we're all big enough to make of it what we will. My issue is with you calling people out for daring to knock your threads off the top.

Like that time I revived the Valeska thread and you called me out. Please tell me WHERE in the rules it says I cannot revive old threads which I feel are of interest to the board!

Guess what - THIS IS A FORUM! IT HAPPENS, so deal with it!

It's not even as if it was going to stay top for long..... mere hours probably. But no, you just had to publicly bite my fucking head off didn't you? I'd say THAT is bad "netiquette".

This is my final word on the matter. Good day sir.

Thanks for the olive branch!
(BTW, I've been called much, much worse things than "ponderous" in more "respectable" fora than this one!)

I agree the GOAT tournament was great. Duffman do not let any comments discourage this. We need more people like you who share the same enthusiam we all have for barefooting woman. A contest shows much enthusiam. Also the more posts we have the better. I do wish we had some more real women on the board here though. What a shame.

Exactly!!

I have got better things to do than battling against you and other dudes in this forum, Duffman847.
Plus, starting a battle here would be extremely rude towards Timonenkarkku, who has started this thread on a completely different topic (an interesting one indeed, and I was glad to comment about it)
You and I have clearly different views about netiquette.. no problem, I can deal with this.
I will stick to my word.. I will re-trench in my two main threads.. quietly promote my stuff.. and hope that nobody will pester my balls anymore.
You have the final word. Farewell.
P.S. honored to see that you have changed your signature in my honor, chap..

Thanks! But if we are to feetosophise, perhaps we need to define our terms:

BAREFOOTER. This is a person who simply enjoys going barefoot. I'm one, so are some of you.

FOOT-FETISHIST. This term is being seriously misused. It means somebody who can only perform sexually if feet are involved. I'm certainly not one of these, and I suspect that most of you aren't, either. It's a disorder, and can cause unhappiness. (However, I've come across a happily married couple where the wife obtained a useful erection from her husband by inserting her entire foot up his rectum to the ankle. This is true!)

PODERAST. This is a person who finds feet sexy. That's most of you, and presumably so are all members of "City-Feet". It obviously varies in intensity, but the accepted test is whether you look at a nude girl's feet before her breasts (test yourself on the "Barefoot Nudity" teaser-thread, if you like). I'm one, but only mildly -I can find beautiful feet sexy, but only if the rest of the girl is beautiful and friendly (some of the models on the Feetosopher's threads put me off my lunch, but I'll be a gentleman and not say which!)

PEDEXHIBITIONIST. This is a person who likes people looking at her (or his) feet. It can be sub-erotic, or overtly so. The "attitude" that the Feetosopher describes as looking for in his "Wu's Feet Links" interview, consists in a woman being both a barefooter and a pedexhibitionist.

The major problem that the barefooting community has with poderasty is, that girls who like to go barefoot but don't want the attention are being put off. Perhaps the majority of barefooter girls are not pedexhibitionists. Hopefully the models on City-Feet and the teaser-threads are. (OK, some of them might be doing it for the money only, we know this).

PODEROGENIST. This is a person who obtains sexual excitement or gratification from stimulation of the feet. It's what my original post on this thread was about. Now, although mostly my barefooting is completely sex-free, sometimes when I go a bit extreme (broken windscreen glass, sharp gravel, hot asphalt, dogshit) I can get a mild genital response. So, I'm a mild poderogenist and could compare notes with the Feetosopher's Red-X or with DG2001's Yuditza.

So, the thought is again: How many women are genuine poderogenists, who become sexually stimulated when going barefoot when there's nobody looking, or who enjoy sucking their toes and soles while masturbating in private? Certainly as regards the latter, I can make a good guess as to the answer to the question: "How many are prepared to admit doing it"? -almost none!

First of all, I am happy to publicly announce that after a private exchange of clarifications and quick negotiations, I have signed a peace treaty with Timonenkarkku.. consistently with my "live and let live" Feetosophy..

In the light of his taxonomy, I can say that I am NOT:
a barefooter, a strictu sensu foot fetishist, a pedexhibitionist, and a poderogenist.
I AM surely a poderast (even if I prefer the term "foot enthusiast").. but I have the "problem" that I am into beautiful/interesting faces as much as I am into bare feet (and legs).. and that I go nuts at the sight of bare tits, ass, pussies.. PROVIDED THAT they are combined with bare feet.
I would NEVER find a naked shod woman sexually arousing.
Kind of a strange animal, maybe.

As for "some of the models on the Feetosopher's threads put me off my lunch, but I'll be a gentleman and not say which".. well, kinda a matter of tastes, and you cannot please everybody!
If we all had the same tastes for women, the world would be a giant perennial battlefield (even more than it is already now).
Sure I find a number of barefooting women (featured in other paysites or in "homemade" web spaces) ordinary or plain ugly.. but I usually manage to be polite enough to keep my judgments for myself (unless they have the bad idea of pestering my balls.. )

As for your final question.. it's not professional to make such questions to models.. but combining the elements I have at hand.. I would say that few (if any) of my models can be labelled as "genuine poderogenists".. or at least, that they are not into letting other people know this.