>>153350999I mean yes, but feminizing is the opposite of sexualizing. When you feminize a man, his sex parts stop working. Sexualize manly men again. Make the ladies swoon at them.anyway is this supposed to be Mark?
Its impossible
>>153351405whatever you say, kiddo
>>153351418still too soon
>>153350999
>>153350999>>153351815>>153351215 is rightIn order to sexualize men we need to make men more masculine. Make men look like sex machines that will fuck the living daylights out of you with a sensual passion powerful enough to make you uncontrollably cum over and over and over again until your very mind is a pleasure filled mess barley able to think.
>>153352053Post your examples or get out
>>153352118No I’m staying without contributing and you can’t stop me.
>>153350999They already are
>>153352118FPBP here:whom do I think are the ideal male role models (not that fiction should have role models, but I mean literally a model of what our role is, and what other fictional characters should strive to be) include:>Goliath>Iroh>Worf>Samurai Jack>Peter Parker>Superman>Yuri Lowell from Tales of Vesperia>Beast (X-men)>Beast (Disney, once he gets his shit together)Aaand uhh.. Let's throw Splinter in there, but particularly the old movie version. I was gonna say Mufasa, but he really does so little since he's basically King Claudius, who is barely part of the storymost other shows only get like, on either side of it. like 2011 thundercats, Lion-O and Panthro are just about straddling the line of perfect masculinity on opposite sides.
Based
>>153352417Not Peter. He's too much of a twink.
>>153350999you have to dress men like women to be able to sexualize them?
>>153352148based
>>153352711I don't mean Tom Holland Peter or fuckin Tobey "I should have been Harry and Franco should have been Peter" Maguire.I mean this motherfucker. In the comics he's even more handsome, almost unrealistically. And for such a short guy, he's downright statuesque. He's the very image of David, ready to slay Goliath.But more importantly, he's got what a man needs on the INSIDE. self-sacrifice, placing others above himself.
>>153351215What if the man wears feminine clothes but is still physically virile and masculine?
>>153352053Tell me how I was immediately able to tell that this post was written by a gay man and not a woman
>>153353140let's be realour clothing gender norms are as fucking backwards as our attitudes toward hair.Men should be wearing cool, flashy clothing that emphasizes the shoulders and minimizes the hips. Beyond that, it really doesn't matter. Yes females need to wear skirts, but there's no reason males can't wear long robes, kilts, whatever. we just don't need to for hygiene.The important thing is that it's attention-grabbing and it doesn't do the shockingly gay modern JRPG thing of like, having shoulder cutouts, armpit cutouts, or a sleeveless top with high arm socks.. or for that matter a shirt whose sleeves stop midway down the forearm. it doesn't work geometrically.same goes for legs, no highwater pants on men, that does not work.
>>153352417All those you listed except for Peter Parker and Superman are ugly.
>>153353239>no highwater pants on men, that does not work.Men have a higher waist. Our center of gravity rests closer to the abs than the pelvis.
>>153353239Why do women need to wear skirts?
>>153353263I take issue with the fact that you're implying two of those characters are ugly and both of them wield a katana.
>>153350999and boys
>>153350999You really can't "sexualize" men without making them seem gay. And women don't even want to fuck men that are gay like that, they want to see them assfucked by men that actually seem masculine.
>>153351215A lot of what straight men tend to think of as feminizing is just sexualizing. Eyes lips and ass, skimpy clothing.
>>153353840>And women don't even want to fuck men that are gay like thatNo, I promise women are thirsty freaks. You shouldn't be taking advice on who women want to fuck from hypermasculine dudes, has it not occurred to you that they might have a bit of bias going on?
>>153352690God I'd give anything to be built like that.
>>153353840You can definitely, the problem is few know how to do it, weebs seem to have it down somewhat, capeslop sorta? To sexualize men you can't do it like how is done with women or you just make them look gay like you said. Sissy shit. To sexualize a man you portray him as strong, powerful, etc. Leaning into the things that are pillars of traditional expectations of masculinity. Strength and leadership and all that. But that's mainly for women. As for gays you got all kinds of things to appeal to them when it comes to male sexualization. They love the cool guys, the twinks, bears, and all that.
>>153354035>To sexualize a man you portray him as strong, powerful, etc. Leaning into the things that are pillars of traditional expectations of masculinity. Strength and leadership and all that.Hahaha. A bit. Not really. Lean into the things that are sexy.
>>153354067What is sexy for one sex isn't considered sexy for the other.
Nearly 100% "sexualised men" pictures so are clearly fag coded.
>>153354112Importantly: are you both straight and male?
