Nearly Touching, Contact, and First Touch by KristineButterfly

lunch break and 🧚 by spitroses

Milo Manara’s Gulliveriana spends a woefully brief time in Brobdingnag with no real sexytimes. Some editions, however, include the following “bonus” illustrations.

Mike and Ines by SWGTSdrawing

The “Thing” by Lord Xarnor

I’m in the mood for some depraved self-indulgence, and this series captures it wonderfully. My only complaint is that these ladies are clearly too big to swallow whole. Preferably two-inches-tall, three-inches tops. Give me enough wine and I’ll knock back half a dozen.

M/ff Vore by @GiantessLover45

PillowTalk1 by catster

Commission - Madison and Austin - 5 by SultanOfSize

Synchronized Orgasms - artist unknown

続きをファンティアで公開しております。 ※仕様上月をまたぐとバックナンバー販売でのご観覧となります。ご注意ください by るち餡

Tyzul the goblin giving my fairy Shee some deep head by Geier

Trying to keep and modify “giant” seems futile. In English the suffix “-ess” is how a generic noun is “marked” as female. It’s a deliberately sexist construction, assuming the default person is male.

I think we’d be better off using another synonym altogether or even inventing entirely new words.

Loud calm by Cochinote

@TakoAlice8

I agree that we need a better term for male giants, if only for the Size community. I actually find the word “giantess” to be both tired and too narrow for the many purposes to which it is put. If we’re getting into the business of defining new terminology for the Size community, we might also want to consider making a distinction between true giants who are larger than the rest of society and normal-size men who interact with anomalously tiny people.

Shrunk Lisa from Genshin Impact sitting on the Traveler’s pelvis by inksGirls

Lucya and Marco by Steilhex
Follow link for 30-second video with sound

Jude Doyle goes into much greater detail and has some important insights here.

This Is How You Lose the Sex Wars

Trying to pick a pathway through forty years of the ugliest conflict in feminism.

squish by OversizedAurmael
Follow link for larger video with sound

The tension here is between an individual (if influential) woman expressing her sexuality (and, yes, selling her album) as she sees fit and a sexist society that prioritizes the male gaze and normalizes male dominance. There is no easy resolution of this tension; everyone has to weigh individual expression against social obligation every day in every aspect of their lives.

The second wave feminist argument is that Carpenter’s choices not only affect Carpenter but everyone exposed to those choices. Third wave feminists will claim that Carpenter is owning her sexuality, including an expression of submission.

These two poles are much less helpful at the extremes; the Marxist analysis assigns too little agency to individuals, whereas “choice” feminism assigns too much. No one “chooses their choice” in a vacuum, but each of us can transcend our historical and class circumstances to make decisions for ourselves.

The feminist objection to Carpenter’s image is not that it is sexual but that it reinforces a very specific vision of heterosexual relations. Second wavers will argue that Carpenter has an obligation not to celebrate sexual submission because both men and women will necessarily see it as an endorsement of male supremacy. Third wavers will deny that Carpenter has any such obligation.

In my opinion we are each responsible for what we put into the world, regardless of our intentions. Any human expression has the potential to have unintended consequences, but that does not mean that we should stop expressing ourselves.

All locked up by Honeycombchew