Your thought on this?

[off_trails27]

Is the fetish and love of sinking in quicksand a mere fetish, or is it a deeper, subconscience level of a need or wish to not just be "one with the Earth," no pun intended, or is it something far more greater such as a connection to our ancient and ancestral primal love?

Your thoughts?

[Viridian]

Though some people may feel this way, I think the majority of people in the QS community don't. For myself, I find QS to be the same thrill as seeing someone in peril - the same suspense and danger as, say, being trapped in a room filling with water, or being tied up. Subconsciously, I tend to incorporate other interests and fantasies at the same time. I find it different to mudplay, as there is no "peril" element involved.

[Chimerix]

There have been a couple of great sinking scenes produced in years past that, in my opinion, were utterly ruined when the models started going off on "Mother Earth." So very, very, very not me. My primal urges are more immediate and demanding. To invoke something as cerebral as "a connection to our ancient and ancestral primal love" is to, quite literally, ruin a wet dream.

I acknowledge that my views are just that, my views!

[Cuthbert]

Your thoughts on primal connections are quite interesting. I have similar views on this fetish. Consider what the word FETISH meant to our ancient forbears. It often meant an item of spiritual significance. Often even used in ceremonies. A deep connection to our surroundings is needed now. So our sex fetish can also be seen as a source of power.

[MadMax359]

Though some people may feel this way, I think the majority of people in the QS community don't. For myself, I find QS to be the same thrill as seeing someone in peril - the same suspense and danger as, say, being trapped in a room filling with water, or being tied up. Subconsciously, I tend to incorporate other interests and fantasies at the same time. I find it different to mudplay, as there is no "peril" element involved.

that's how i react as well, with the further point that i'm in the "rescue the damsel" group as opposed to the "grim endings" group (to each his/her own!)

[nachtjaeger]

In my case, the answer is "Yes."

For me, watching a woman play in the mud is sexy. Watching a woman get stuck in the mud is also sexy. And watching a woman struggling in a deep mud pit and slooowly sinking deeper is both sexy in and of itself, and dovetails nicely with my "damsel in distress" fantasy.

Also, I enjoy playing in the mud myself- the deeper, the better. Both the adrenalin rush of being stuck and sinking, and the delicious feel of the mud really work for me.

Third, for me there is a spiritual aspect to mud, especially in the Spring. The "Maiden of Spring" has an "earthy" frame of mind, and her attitude towards any act of love or pleasure is extremely positive. Playing in the mud = good. Sex = good. Combine the two? Why not?

There are a bunch of different aspects to the "mud/quicksand/stuck/sinking" fetish. For example, I have it on good authority that "good girls" don't play in the mud and get their clothes dirty. "Bad girls" do. And of course "good girls" don't get turned on by anything, least of all sliding around in the nasty, filthy mud and spreading it all over your body. "Bad Girls" are sick and twisted enough to get turned on by a mud bath. So when the "bad girl" finds out the mud is deeper than she thought, and she can't get out, she's getting what's coming to her. So of course, when you catch her in the act, and get her out of the mud (only after sincere apologies and promises to behave in the future) she should be appropriately punished. If all she gets is a sound spanking with your hand on her bare bottom, she should count herself lucky. Or, depending on her attitude towards "disciplinary sex" (as opposed to recreational sex) you and she may end up agreeing that she is a bad, naughty, dirty girl, a filthy, kinky little mud slut, and deserves to be treated as such.

Is the fetish and love of sinking in quicksand a mere fetish, or is it a deeper, subconscience level of a need or wish to not just be "one with the Earth," no pun intended, or is it something far more greater such as a connection to our ancient and ancestral primal love?

Your thoughts?

[Duncan Edwards]

There have been a couple of great sinking scenes produced in years past that, in my opinion, were utterly ruined when the models started going off on "Mother Earth." So very, very, very not me. My primal urges are more immediate and demanding. To invoke something as cerebral as "a connection to our ancient and ancestral primal love" is to, quite literally, ruin a wet dream.

I acknowledge that my views are just that, my views!

Your views are my views too.

[Nessie]

Is the fetish and love of sinking in quicksand a mere fetish, or is it a deeper, subconscience level of a need or wish to not just be "one with the Earth," no pun intended, or is it something far more greater such as a connection to our ancient and ancestral primal love?

Your thoughts?

For me, it started out as a simple fetish.

When I watch sinking scenes, this is pretty much simple fetish-feeding. I'm focused on the sinking and the reactions of the sinker and the drama of the situation and whether he or she is attractive in some way. It is very impersonal. The quicksand and the sinker are objects. They are only part of a fantasy.

Actually sinking, however, is different.

Since sinkable mud occurs in nature (unless you have built your own), there is always a certain amount of enjoyment of nature for its own sake on any outing. This sets the mood for the sinking.

Actually sinking also involves four out of five senses (sight, sound, smell and touch...taste is excepted, for mudpits don't make good eating) whereas doing the watching thing involves only two (sight and sound). Any tactile sensations must be somehow self-produced.

After awhile, I developed a weird relationship where I came to regard the mudpit, and sometimes an entire location, as a partner. It is entirely possible to feel love for this "being" and gratitude for the pleasure it gives -- although this isn't the same as loving a human being.

Whether it's primal or ancestral, I have no clue, for I am not spiritual in any other way.

Nessie

[YerK]

As a kid, I loved to play in the mud. I never lost that while growing older. As an adolescent, it never occurred to me that women or sex had anything to do with mud. Once I got out on my own, I still had no connection between women and mud. I liked women and mud, but never dreamed of mixing them, because the women who like messy fun are just too rare to hope for.

Once out on my own, I actually got so daring as to skinny dip and play in the mud. There really isn't a more fun way to be in the mud. That's when I first got a real connection between that and sex. Private mud is rare, but I do have every intention of setting up a mud pit at some point. (Getting out of ribcage-deep clay while naked felt like the most fun situation I'd ever gotten into on that first skinny-dipping trek!)

Now, I am more at peace with myself. I haven't felt the desire to get back out into the mud in years. I think I would have more fun following an attractive female scientist in a short skirt and no panties as she tried valiantly to find a rare something-or-another near a river, such that she kept needing help out of sticky mud. It's more fun for me now, to be honest, that the woman be the right sort that I find irresistible, than that there even be any mud, but if I get any choice of terrain it would be thick and sticky stuff.

Now, those shows from Brazil with attractive young women wearing thongs and getting stuck in the oobleck, those are fun too! I would love to have a girl by to show her a private pit, only just 3' or so deep, where she could play on the surface, so long as she agrees to skimpy attire, and have her enjoy needing help to get out of the pool. Again, though, the girl in question is far more important than the pool.

[Rombik82]

QS fetish for me is sexually agitation based only