Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Sink Into On-Topic Discussions
User avatar
redjak6t4
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:09 pm

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby redjak6t4 » Thu May 26, 2022 4:25 pm

Fred588 wrote:
redjak6t4 wrote:These are all interesting responses.

But I don't see anyone who either likes going under themselves or likes watching others go under mentioning the elephant in the room. That is, the D-word. Death. Surely the core thrill of 'going under' quicksand fetishism is the risk of death by drowning in the mud?

Am I wrong here? Is the D-word somehow taboo? Or, is it the fuel that drives 'going under' quicksand fetishism?

Thank you.

Redjak.


I think what you are missing is that this is all fantasy. Also, while the sexual double metaphor of foreplay and climax has been mentioned in this thread already (by me) there is also a second metaphor, I believe totally unrelated, for quicksand. In fiction, at least, quicksand is often used to represent the worst possible death - being pulled into the grave while still alive and conscious. [This is a theory expressed by others, not me] I have seen it expressed somewhere that one of the reasons it is almost always the bad guy who dies by quicksand in the movies is because the bad guy somehow deserves it.


Fred,

I like and tend to agree with what you say about sexual metaphors. That analysis explains a lot. Thank you.

But I must strongly disagree with you when you claim that I'm missing the point of this being fantasy. If I were really missing the point, the QS fakes that I post here represent what I think is acceptable behaviour towards women. If I really were missing the point, that would mean that I really DO want to see women sinking to their deaths in quicksand. Not understanding that this is all fantasy would make me into a very twisted and dangerous person indeed.

But, that's clearly not the case. I fully understand that ALL of my posted content is totally and 100% fantasy. I like to think of myself as someone who can help to visually realize the fantasies that some of us QS fetishists think about. No more than that. It must stay on the screen or in our heads, but must never become reality.

I started this thread to try and explore the psychology underpinning our fetish and I mentioned the D-word because as far as I can see it cannot be divorced from the consequences of going under, into the embrace of the quicksand. Hence my comment about the elephant in the room.

Duncan has summed it up pretty well. If quicksand were only a minor inconvenience and not something lethal, then all of the thrill of the struggle and the frantic urge to escape would be absent. It is the danger of death that makes quicksand exciting to some (if not most) of us. If that's too much like a celebration of death and too necro for some, then I apologize.

If others see going under in non-necro terms, then please enlighten me. As I mentioned above, I am exploring our fetish here, not condemning anyone and not seeking to offend anyone.

Thank you.

Redjak.

Fred588
Producer
Posts: 16649
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Central Arkansas (At Studio 588)
Contact:

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby Fred588 » Thu May 26, 2022 4:33 pm

redjak6t4 wrote:
Fred588 wrote:
redjak6t4 wrote:These are all interesting responses.

But I don't see anyone who either likes going under themselves or likes watching others go under mentioning the elephant in the room. That is, the D-word. Death. Surely the core thrill of 'going under' quicksand fetishism is the risk of death by drowning in the mud?

Am I wrong here? Is the D-word somehow taboo? Or, is it the fuel that drives 'going under' quicksand fetishism?

Thank you.

Redjak.


I think what you are missing is that this is all fantasy. Also, while the sexual double metaphor of foreplay and climax has been mentioned in this thread already (by me) there is also a second metaphor, I believe totally unrelated, for quicksand. In fiction, at least, quicksand is often used to represent the worst possible death - being pulled into the grave while still alive and conscious. [This is a theory expressed by others, not me] I have seen it expressed somewhere that one of the reasons it is almost always the bad guy who dies by quicksand in the movies is because the bad guy somehow deserves it.


Fred,

I like and tend to agree with what you say about sexual metaphors. That analysis explains a lot. Thank you.

But I must strongly disagree with you when you claim that I'm missing the point of this being fantasy. If I were really missing the point, the QS fakes that I post here represent what I think is acceptable behaviour towards women. If I really were missing the point, that would mean that I really DO want to see women sinking to their deaths in quicksand. Not understanding that this is all fantasy would make me into a very twisted and dangerous person indeed.

But, that's clearly not the case. I fully understand that ALL of my posted content is totally and 100% fantasy. I like to think of myself as someone who can help to visually realize the fantasies that some of us QS fetishists think about. No more than that. It must stay on the screen or in our heads, but must never become reality.

I started this thread to try and explore the psychology underpinning our fetish and I mentioned the D-word because as far as I can see it cannot be divorced from the consequences of going under, into the embrace of the quicksand. Hence my comment about the elephant in the room.

Duncan has summed it up pretty well. If quicksand were only a minor inconvenience and not something lethal, then all of the thrill of the struggle and the frantic urge to escape would be absent. It is the danger of death that makes quicksand exciting to some (if not most) of us. If that's too much like a celebration of death and too necro for some, then I apologize.

If others see going under in non-necro terms, then please enlighten me. As I mentioned above, I am exploring our fetish here, not condemning anyone and not seeking to offend anyone.

Thank you.

Redjak.

what I meant was that the question misses the point, not that you were off base by asking it. No offense was intended.
Studio 588 currently offers more than 2200 different HD and QD quicksand videos and has supported production of well over 2400 video scenes and other projects by 13 different producers. Info may be found at:
http://studio588qs.com
http://quicksandland.com
http://psychicworldjungleland.com

User avatar
Duncan Edwards
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby Duncan Edwards » Thu May 26, 2022 5:19 pm

redjak6t4 wrote:But I must strongly disagree with you when you claim that I'm missing the point of this being fantasy. If I were really missing the point, the QS fakes that I post here represent what I think is acceptable behaviour towards women. If I really were missing the point, that would mean that I really DO want to see women sinking to their deaths in quicksand. Not understanding that this is all fantasy would make me into a very twisted and dangerous person indeed.

If others see going under in non-necro terms, then please enlighten me. As I mentioned above, I am exploring our fetish here, not condemning anyone and not seeking to offend anyone.


Okay fine. You can disagree all you want. Do what you want. It's not a search for truth because you can ask any three of us what we think and get seven different opinions on it. You're missing the point by thinking this is about women and not about sex.

Consider yourself enlightened.
It's a dirty job but I got to do it for over 20 years. Thank you.

User avatar
dlodoski
Wizard of Ooze
Posts: 9607
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:10 am
Location: The Land of Ooze
Contact:

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby dlodoski » Thu May 26, 2022 5:28 pm

redjak6t4 wrote:These are all interesting responses.

But I don't see anyone who either likes going under themselves or likes watching others go under mentioning the elephant in the room. That is, the D-word. Death. Surely the core thrill of 'going under' quicksand fetishism is the risk of death by drowning in the mud?

Am I wrong here? Is the D-word somehow taboo? Or, is it the fuel that drives 'going under' quicksand fetishism? ....

We're here to share thoughts and material and knowledge. In my opinion, everyone takes some or all of these things and does weird shit in their minds with it. The fact that people share 'source' material doesn't necessarily mean they are going to share (mental) output. That's a different level of 'personal'.

I think you're going to have to be satisfied with the vast majority of folks who participate here indicating that they like this or that - without necessarily explaining the underpinnings of it.

Personally, I think that the concept of death is best placed in the realm of "If nobody ever dies, it wouldn't be dangerous", and leave it at that. It's a head thing. I seriously doubt you're going get the philosophical satisfaction you are looking for here.
The Wizard of Ooze stays behind the curtain!

https://allmylinks.com/dlodoski

Stay signed up to Club MPV and bank 10 free download tokens every month!

User avatar
redjak6t4
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:09 pm

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby redjak6t4 » Thu May 26, 2022 5:55 pm

Duncan Edwards wrote:
redjak6t4 wrote:But I must strongly disagree with you when you claim that I'm missing the point of this being fantasy. If I were really missing the point, the QS fakes that I post here represent what I think is acceptable behaviour towards women. If I really were missing the point, that would mean that I really DO want to see women sinking to their deaths in quicksand. Not understanding that this is all fantasy would make me into a very twisted and dangerous person indeed.

If others see going under in non-necro terms, then please enlighten me. As I mentioned above, I am exploring our fetish here, not condemning anyone and not seeking to offend anyone.


Okay fine. You can disagree all you want. Do what you want. It's not a search for truth because you can ask any three of us what we think and get seven different opinions on it. You're missing the point by thinking this is about women and not about sex.

Consider yourself enlightened.


Duncan,

The 'disagreement' was a misunderstanding between Fred and myself, which has now been clarified. He's not offended, I'm not offended and no offense was meant by either party.

I think I'm going to go with Dave's sage advice and just accept that most people here have no particular explanation for the psychological underpinnings of their fetish. Which means that this thread probably won't be helpful and may do the opposite and provoke or cause misunderstandings, where neither was intended.

If I've unintentionally provoked you or or if some misunderstanding has arisen between us, then I'm sorry and I apologize.

Thank you.

Redjak.

User avatar
bogbud
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 6:43 am
Location: Stuck and sinking

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby bogbud » Thu May 26, 2022 8:35 pm

redjak6t4 wrote:These are all interesting responses.

But I don't see anyone who either likes going under themselves or likes watching others go under mentioning the elephant in the room. That is, the D-word. Death. Surely the core thrill of 'going under' quicksand fetishism is the risk of death by drowning in the mud?

Am I wrong here? Is the D-word somehow taboo? Or, is it the fuel that drives 'going under' quicksand fetishism?

Thank you.

Redjak.


I have gone under a couple times and also did post about it. Totally Sinking in my mudbog does involve a real risk of not being able to get back up in time because of its thickness and weight of the mud that is squeezing you.
The risk is a serious turn-on and probably related to other fetishes like breath-play or mummification. It's also important that I'm not able to find a bottom. When Sinking at other places, even when the mud is otherwise perfect, hitting a solid bottom is some kind of regaining control of the situation and an immediate turn-off and just turns a dangerous adventure into an exercise.
I'm already chindeep in this mudbog and every desperate attempt to move my stuck legs only drives me deeper in. The thick mud slowly swamps my waders and my arms have nothing to hold onto.
I'm feeling home.

User avatar
redjak6t4
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:09 pm

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby redjak6t4 » Thu May 26, 2022 11:12 pm

bogbud wrote:
redjak6t4 wrote:These are all interesting responses.

But I don't see anyone who either likes going under themselves or likes watching others go under mentioning the elephant in the room. That is, the D-word. Death. Surely the core thrill of 'going under' quicksand fetishism is the risk of death by drowning in the mud?

Am I wrong here? Is the D-word somehow taboo? Or, is it the fuel that drives 'going under' quicksand fetishism?

Thank you.

Redjak.


I have gone under a couple times and also did post about it. Totally Sinking in my mudbog does involve a real risk of not being able to get back up in time because of its thickness and weight of the mud that is squeezing you.
The risk is a serious turn-on and probably related to other fetishes like breath-play or mummification. It's also important that I'm not able to find a bottom. When Sinking at other places, even when the mud is otherwise perfect, hitting a solid bottom is some kind of regaining control of the situation and an immediate turn-off and just turns a dangerous adventure into an exercise.


Thank you for this input, bogbud.

I was going to take Dave's advice and not prolong this thread any more.

But it would be impolite of me not to thank you for what you've described here.

Redjak.

User avatar
dlodoski
Wizard of Ooze
Posts: 9607
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:10 am
Location: The Land of Ooze
Contact:

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby dlodoski » Fri May 27, 2022 2:16 pm

It's interesting because I did have second thoughts about my previous post. I don't want to be a buzzkill and I certainly didn't want to derail the topic.

We (the board management) have been accused of being too uptight in the past. And while some of that was misplaced (it's hard for others to see some of the liabilities that we feel) I have to admit that the welcome mat has not always been there for topics that aren't 'one size fits all'.

After thinking about this for a while, the context for me is taking a fantasy to its logical conclusion. Maybe that's the quiet part that redjak6t4 is referring to. I'm trying to deconstruct the generic 'conclusions' that push me over the edge and I realize that the most potent ones are near the beginning of a sinking sequence. It has to do with the state of mind of the lady. Preferably there is some obviousness that the mire is deadly (somebody just went under) and she has just stepped in herself - intentionally or otherwise. Anyways, that's the latest general flavor for me. There have been others. But effectiveness generally starts dropping off at waist deep.

Years ago, someone sent me a 'comment' that remarked about how convenient our fetish was because you couldn't see the body under the mud/quicksand. I was taken back by that for a couple reasons. First, I thought it was pretty cheeky for the guy to project stuff onto me. And second, because that thought/image had never occurred to me. But I realized that it must occur to others - whether they are 'one of us' or not.
The Wizard of Ooze stays behind the curtain!

https://allmylinks.com/dlodoski

Stay signed up to Club MPV and bank 10 free download tokens every month!

User avatar
SinkThatDamsel
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:25 pm

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby SinkThatDamsel » Fri May 27, 2022 2:45 pm

dlodoski wrote:Years ago, someone sent me a 'comment' that remarked about how convenient our fetish was because you couldn't see the body under the mud/quicksand. I was taken back by that for a couple reasons. First, I thought it was pretty cheeky for the guy to project stuff onto me. And second, because that thought/image had never occurred to me. But I realized that it must occur to others - whether they are 'one of us' or not.

This is interesting. For me, the scene ends cleanly as soon as she disappears -- or when you see a few bubbles on the surface -- and that's it. I love submersion, but contemplating her agonizing suffocation below the surface is a huge turn-off.

I'm also a fan of the damsel-tied-to-the-tracks trope, but I absolutely don't want to see her smashed by the train.

It's the line in my head that keeps it playful and arousing but prevents it from spilling over into truly dark/disturbing. I think everyone has that line, rarely in the same place.

For me, a big part of the appeal of a submersion is the taboo. "They're not really going to let her go under, are they? OMG they are!" It's extreme and forbidden and un-chivalrous, and there's a thrill to that.

User avatar
redjak6t4
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:09 pm

Re: Why is going under the 'Money Shot' for QS fetishists?

Postby redjak6t4 » Fri May 27, 2022 6:24 pm

I'd like to thank Dave and SinkThatDamsel for their input and insights.


Both of them have described a kind of cut-off point in their quicksand fetishes, beyond which they lose interest. When I read this I thought of MadMax359, who has mentioned that he has a similar kind of cut-off in his fetish. He likes to see the girls sink no further than breast-deep and after that he tends to lose interest. For myself, my cut-off point is after submersion, when the bubbles indicate a grim ending. None of these examples is any better or any worse than any other. They are just different. Each person has their own unique and highly personal take on this fetish and we should respect each other on that level.

But, I think these four examples do display a common pattern. Many years ago, possibly in Foster Blake's Deep Sinking forum, I posted a graph that people found interesting. The vertical axis showed the level of sexual interest/arousal and the horizontal axis showed the depth of sinking, from ankle-deep all the way to full submersion. Perhaps there's a link between what this graph showed and the idea of a personal cut-off point?

For instance, a qs fetishist who likes rescuing-the-damsel scenarios would show an increasing rise in their interest, followed by a sharp drop, when the damsel sinks beyond the depth that 'works' for them. That would be their personal cut-off point. MadMax's cut-off point would be anything beyond breast deep. SinkThatDamsel's cut-off point would be upon submersion. Bogbud's would be after submersion but before drowning. Mine would be after drowning. Dave and Duncan and Fred will probably have their own cut-off points, as will every other qs fetishist here.

Whatever works for the individual should be respected and the differences we all display should be respected too. Vivre le difference!



OK, so have I over-analysed this or do others see the pattern that I think I see here?

Thank you.

Redjak.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest