Jock Foot Fantasy

[Brody]

Be wary if you choose to join this site. They advertise themselves as a site of barefeet and tickling, but they have recently decided to have entire updates with no barefeet or tickling---just shoes. The weekly updates are usually well filmed and hot, but if you expect the updates to be true to the advertising, you may be disappointed. They are not responsive to emails about this issue.

[fructis]

shoes videos?

kind of a waste if u ask me - as an xtra I dont mind it but as a whole video and update? HELL NAW.

Just saying.

[luc]

yes, sadly, jff has gotten pretty repetitive with models. not very imaginative lately. and yes. there is no need of an update without bare feet. each update, imho is best to start with shoes, go to sock and always needs to satisfy with the feet. there are shoe fetish sites for those into that sort of thing, right? thanks for starting this thread! luc

[alanalt]

Actually, one of the things I found most appealing about JFF is that they neither tie themselves to one particular type of model (or at least their range of 'jocks' is a petty wide one) nor to one particular aspect of the foot fetish (i.e. they have tickling, barefeet, socks, shoes, domination, 'gentler scenes' etc.). It seems to me that too many sites focus specifically on only one particular aspect (like tickling or barefeet) or one particular kind of model (like twinks). I also like how the site has improved since it was first launched.

But while I applaud the site's aim to be diverse in exploring the fetish, when the updates are so infrequent, it does have the negative effect noted by the previous posters. Also when I was a subscriber, I was often p*ssed off by the fact that an update often only included 'part' of a scene and that you had to wait weeks for further updates to see how the whole scene played out. I also wished that you could have the option of downloading the 'entire' scene rather than having it broken into a bunch of smaller separate clips.

In short, while there are a lot of things I like about JFF, there just are too many 'irritants' and not enough 'value for money' that keep me from being a regular subscriber to the site.

[ftlaudft]

There's no doubt that JFF has a great variety of beautiful hunks, some of the hottest on the Net. But the downloading in segments is a bit of a drag.

You have to compare, inevitably, with other sites such as ToeGasms. ToeGasms allows you to download the whole segment in one simple operation. It's true, many of the models are very youngish, but many of the "twinks"' have very adult sex packaging. Cain and Boomer and Rad and Puppy look very young. But their dicks look like the map of Florida and they squirt enough juice to turn the Gobi Desert into an oasis. And there are enough of the regular big-boy jocks like Kelly Cooper and Mike Roberts to keep my motor oiled and running. Throw in a stud like Cherokee and you can take your solo digital sex to new heights. He's so sexy you'll find yourself indulging in vegetable sex. (That's where the cucumbers vanish from the salad bowl. Try it, but don't let on we told you.)

Yes, I do miss Seth and Lars and others from JFF. What did we ever do before the Internet?

[alanalt]

Sorry, I disagree with the last post, because I find Toegasms to have even less 'value for money' than JFF. For one thing, while it looks like Toegasms has lots of updates, the reality is that a lot of their updates are picture sets only and most of their video updates are solos. That ends up leaving you with one (maybe two, if you're lucky) video update(s) a month that has more than one model in them.

I also tend to see the Toegasms model pool as one vast (white) sea of twinks, with only an occasional skater-boy in for 'variation', if you can call it that. Also, while most of the videos offer you the choice between downloading a single clip or several smaller clips, it's not quite the case with all of them (or at least it wasn't when I was a member earlier this summer). And finally, you'd think that a site that offered so many pictures, would give their members the option of downloading a gallery as a single .zip file, but if that feature was there, I sure didn't see it (but then I'm not all that wild about pictures anyway - when videos, IMO, are so much better and, quite honestly, I can find tonnes of barefoot guy pics on the Internet for free).

In short, to this foot lover, JFF has lots of flaws - but Toegasms has more...

[ftlaudft]

Well, one thing I think we will all agree on is that every site has its plusses and its minusses, its strong points and its weak points. What a person finds a strong or weak point will depend on what he comes to the site looking for, what he brings with him in terms of expectations and preferences. Some look for twinks and some look for bears. Some tickle and some worship. Some like 'em hot and some like 'em cold.

How lucky we are to live in a country where we can have a polite disagreement over foot fetish sites! I was recently reading an article in which an Iranian actress was describing the death by stoning of two gay teenagers in Iran. They were buried up to their waists in the ground and then the crowd threw stones at them. It took them over an hour and a half to die. In this country we have a black president addressing the largest gay rights group in the nation, supporting our right to exist at all. What a difference!

I enjoy reading the reports of the different members here, some who like one site, some who prefer another. In the long run, if it's a pay site, we can vote with our wallets. But what impresses me most of all is the vastness of the sites on the Internet. It's not just one lone foot fetish site that I can explore. There are dozens of them! And I used to think I was the only footlover in the world! How wrong I was!

Jock Foot Fantasy, ToeGasms, MyFriendsFeet, BigToeFanciers, LittleToeWorshipers - there's room for all you guys here! The complaint booths are always open! And so is the compliment department!

[Brody]

My complaint with JFF is that ENTIRE updates are sometimes given over to models wearing shoes with no barefeet. That would be fine for a site that advertised itself as a site featuring footwear, but it claims to be a site about bare feet and tickling. It would be much more acceptable to this subscriber to include at least one or two clips of barefeet among the typically 6 clips per update. Also annoying is the lack of response from the owner of the site about this.

[ftlaudft]

When you tell a site owner what you don't like about a site, you're doing him a favor. How can a site improve if the owners don't know what brings customers in and what keeps them away? If enough complaints come in about model types or particular scenes (such as the shoe thing), you'd think the site owners would realize they're losing business if they don't modify their direction. We vote with our pocketbooks. If I ran a pancake palace and served only blueberry pancakes - and nobody bought them - what do you think I should throw out? The blueberries or the pancakes? It's good to let the sites know what we do like about them, too.

[noahwestin]

Does anyone know the background of Jock Foot Fantasy? I have followed JFF since its opening in the fall 2006 and have noticed its changes.

Originally, it featured much more tickling, the models were exclusive and changed much more often, there was at least a small attempt at a set up or story line, the same guy did the tickling and worshiping, the action seemed to take place in a spare bedroom, and bare feet were always included. Even when the action was nominally about worship or teasing, some tickling would be included. There were signature details like the unusual feather used to tickle the guys, and the way that the tickler ripped off the guys' socks. I got the feeling that the tickler/worshiper was the site owner and that he ran the site because he himself actually enjoyed jock feet and tickling. The site was fresh. The tickling scene with Adrian, a baseball player, was probably the best example of the original content, and one of my favorites.

Changes in direction seem to coincide with the changes in graphics in early 2008. At first, the overall graphics were on a blue background. The logo used to include an animated feather tickling an animated pair of jock feet. Around February 2008, the logo was reworked and the backgrounds became today's red and yellow.

Now, tickling is much less featured in favor of worshiping and other aspects never shown originally, such as sniffing, rubbing, domination, foot play, shoes and run-of-the-mill oral sex. Teasing, which never interested me anyway, seems thankfully gone. Many of the guys, such as Zach, Graham, Lars and Ryan, can be seen elsewhere—not necessarily a bad thing, but I did appreciate having exclusive models. Action seems to take place in a staged studio. The tickler, worshiper, top, or bottom, seems to change. Unlike the original tickler, the present ticklers do not seem to know what they're doing. An example and low point for me was Aidan, who spent far too much time mugging to the camera and goofing off when he tickled Dawson, and likewise when Aidan himself was the ticklee. (Dawson was my near-ideal ticklee—easy-going, strong, nice feet, good laugh, genuinely ticklish—and with Aidan's goofing off, Aidan seemed to waste the opportunity with Dawson.) I absolutely do not get domination, smells, shoes or socks (although I acknowledge that other people do and that's fine with me). So I did not even bother watching last week's post with Evan in shoes dominating some poor guy, or Josh doing the same thing a few weeks ago, or Seth's trashed chucks some months before that—I found all a complete waste of time and money. (How can a site claiming to be about feet not show feet? Claiming that shoes are worn on feet seems a stretch to me.) I also agree that posting four more segments of a scene started weeks earlier does not qualify as new content, and is therefore not giving the audience its money's worth. The original poster to this thread said that the site owners are unresponsive to E-mails about this issue. Being unresponsive is also not giving a paying customer his due. In short, these days, the site's whole performance, from jock to worshiper/tickler, to the photography, to postings seems phoned in by a new owner who's running the site for money only.

I recognize that everyone's preferences are not my own, and that the owners have their own reasons for running such a site. Even so, I'll say that I enjoyed JFF much more in its original form than in its present. This year's direction especially has changed so much that I almost don't recognize the site and I'm considering dumping it.

Back to my original question: Anybody, what's behind the changes? Although I'll take speculation, I'd love to get some concrete, behind-the-scenes knowledge, such as the site's ownership changed, or audience feedback prompted the new direction.

Thanks for any info anyone might have.