|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
turboshaft (0)
|
| 1-40 of 40 Posts | Page 1 |
| 07-25-14 02:28am - 3804 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Sorry if that title makes no sense, but it's the best way to describe this story I heard on The Daily Show about Megumi Igarashi. If you haven't heard of her yet, Igarashi is a Japanese artist who was recently arrested over distributing 3D scans made of her vagina so people could use them to make plastic kayak molds. (Yes, that last sentence is equal parts awesome and absurdity, but it's actually what happened.) As many PU'ers know, the genitals, or at least the vagina, can be a taboo subject in Japan, specifically when displayed, even in porn. So for emailing plans to sponsors of her crowdsourcing project she was arrested for distributing what could be considered obscenity. The controversy is that this is seen as hypocritical when there are penis-worshipping festivals in Japan (which I guess would only be suitable for making a mold for a personal submarine). Here's a short YouTube video of her being interviewed making some of her other vagina-related art (non-explicit, but it explains why she's doing this), like a "Hole-In-One" model of a putting green. And if you're interested, here's the original page for the crowdfunding campaign, which is somehow more insane than I even imagined. Obviously, a few things got mangled in translation, and about half the illustrations look like storyboards of dreams I've had. But the text is generally clear, if unintentionally entertaining. Some of the highlights: "The World’s First 3D Scanned Peach on the Beach," "mold by hand is not suitable for making large art pieces such as a pussy door, a pussy car, or a pussy boat" (well, duh), and "I would love to give you my data of pussy."  If it's not clear, I don't exactly find this offensive, and certainly not worthy of arrest. She only spent five or six days in jail before being released, but it's still stupid and puerile that she was ever arrested in the first place. I hope she's cleared of all charges and the Japanese government realizes how silly this looks to most of the modern world. Though at least for once it's not the U.S. being the prudish country.  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 06-17-14 10:49pm - 3841 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Vice posted an article about the rising (blooming?) popularity of rosebuds. You know; the prolapse.  It's obviously a controversial subject within porn and definitely raises questions about the physical risks of performing, especially the more extreme acts people are dreaming up. The article really only mentions Sheena Shaw, Roxy Raye, and Amy Brooke. Dirty Garden Girl is linked, though not by name, and HotKinkyJo's stomach-bulging acts also go unmentioned, and that's probably for the best. I've got mixed feelings about this myself. I'm not on the extreme end of some of the commenters of the article, but I can't exactly give an unconditional thumbs up to an obviously physically demanding (possibly damaging) act either. Roxy Raye seems to genuinely enjoy it on a certain level, while HotKinkyJo's talent is unique, to say the least. I'm not sure if such acts were inevitable, but I hate to ask: did porn have to come to this? And if you find this subject too upsetting, here's a photo of an actual rose. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 05-07-14 08:20pm - 3882 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Believe it or not, I had never heard of the lovely Asa Akira until the recent press she's gotten over her new memoir, Insatiable. (The watercolor cover even made me mistake her for Sasha Grey for a moment.) I've never been much of a fan of porn star memoirs, or memoirs from 28-year-olds in general, so I have my biases. And in a Vice interview she warns, in regards to who she wrote the book for, that "I think the guys who like porn are either never going to jerk off to me again or jerk off to me forever after reading this book. I think more so the first one, but that is fine by me." That interview also calls her the "Queen of Anal," which is probably as close to respecting a royal title as I'll ever come, but nothing I've read so far indicates this is a story of an abusive, horrifying career. In fact she claims to have enjoyed herself throughout the years--aside from the occasional grim hazards of vigorous porn work. Any PU'ers ever read anything of value from porn stars beyond Twitter feeds and occasional blog posts? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 04-10-14 08:27pm - 3909 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Saw this article on Slate the other day, thought I'd share. If you don't have time to read the article, it basically boils down to how the vast majority of porn is catered and sold to straight men, including "lesbian" (more accurately girl-girl) material. Not to sound too dismissive of this "pornography crisis" but I couldn't help laughing as I read. Not all performers are "Women with extra long fingernails and fried blonde hair looking bored while idly thumbing one another’s [privates]," like the author quotes one of her friends. Nor do they all have "vast, implanted chests" as another respondent complained. Like I say for so many other issues my advice would be to watch more porn, as not all performers are blonde, bored, and buxom, if such things are ruining your fantasy (as they sometimes do for me). But it's not all bad, as one commenter noted, because despite all of its problems at least lesbian porn passes the Bechdel test.  PS: This thread and my sarcasm relating to the article's premise should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm not trying to offend anyone just because they think porn should cater to more than one type of viewer, just glad to find something written about porn that's actually pretty lighthearted and reasonable for a change.  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-15-14 08:39pm - 3935 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Since our top two posters are Canadian I can't believe other members haven't mentioned it first, but apparently porn channels on cable in Canada have to broadcast at least 35% Canadian content and be close-captioned (admittedly there's usually not much dialogue to caption)! Three channels were issued a reprimand a couple of weeks ago for failing said regulations. (I tried to look up the specific regulations myself but I couldn't stop laughing.) I usually frown upon nationalism and patriotism but in the case of porn I like to keep it close to home, so no reason to send the tits and ass, I mean jobs, overseas! At the moment I can only think of one site that is Canadian, the orifice-obsessed InTheCrack, which has its record of compliance address in Alberta, Calgary. Though for all I know much of its content could be shot in space it's so closeup. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-03-14 02:28am - 3947 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Reading a recent Washington Post article about the FDA's continued rejection of a female sexual dysfunction drug--a "little pink pill"--raises the obvious question: what's the holdup? Viagra, that boner-building pharmaceutical wonder of countless jokes and old man smirks has been available for prescription since 1998, and eleven other male sexual dysfunction drugs have been FDA-approved as well. The number of female drugs is still zero, citing the need for further tests for flibanserin, the drug that was developed for women twelve years ago. Granted, I'm no chemist (I don't even understand chemistry of my own brain, much less that of woman's, or a pill to make her horny) but I'd suspect there are some underlying social and cultural issues here. Because despite the moral cesspool as some may view the U.S. we still seem to have a lot of hang-ups about sex, particularly female sexuality. And unlike Viagra, which is basically to get men hard, women's problems tend to be getting horny (apparently men are presumed to be horny for life, no medication necessary  ). This therefore means admitting publicly that women want to get their libido going, one way or another, and thus once again going against that whole procreative argument that some think is the sole purpose of sex. The same reason many social conservatives stupidly equate women's birth control with them conspiring to be out of control harlots hellbent on destroying the American family, or something (which I wouldn't object to, honestly). And I'm skeptical of the safety argument because the FDA has approved of some frightening stuff in the past. Like supplements that contained ephedra, which could help you lose weight. Oh, and your life as well. Or Alli, another weight loss drug (still available!) that helps remove fat from your diet, by way of your ass. Which I guess could scare you into eating a low fat diet lest you risk ruining every pair of pants you own. My bias is quite strong on this one, since I'd absolutely love to be able to give women a pill that would make them horny--rather than relying on my questionable combination of looks and personality--and I doubt I'm the only guy who thinks this way. (It might be good to change the drug company's name from Sprout though; a name that sounds like something a ten-year-old would come up with if you put him in charge of a pharmaceutical company that treats sexual dysfunction.) "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 12-19-13 11:37am - 4021 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Not porn, but I thought relevant because of how often we talk about credit card fraud. This is said to only affect shoppers in the U.S. and Canada, but the department store Target has admitted that a Black Friday hack attacked the credit card info of millions of customers, from roughly November 27 to December 15. And you thought paying for a porn site through a payment "company" headquartered in the People's Democratic Republic of Fuckyouistan was risky! Amazingly this was a hack of their POS (Point Of Sale/Piece Of Shit?) machines, not their website. One more reason to shop online, I guess? Shows you can never be too safe, though maybe a store with the name (and bright red logo) Target was a darkly ironic tip-off. I've always heard to be wary of in-store keypads that seemed to be loose and in somewhat shoddy shape...but that seems to describe the overwhelming majority of them, and this was a digital attack to make it unknown to victims. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 11-22-13 12:37am - 4049 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Though it's a bit off topic from porn--even with his storied sex addiction--this November 22nd is the fiftieth anniversary of the JFK assassination and by proxy the era to which it supposedly marked an end or beginning. Granted mainstream media loves to bookend eras to specific dates and single events as much as possible, but I'm still a skeptic as to what or how exactly his continued life and possible second term would have accomplished so much better than how history has actually played out. Just on the topic of the Vietnam war, an entire documentary takes the position that he was planning to redeploy all American advisors from Southeast Asia and thus would have peacefully avoided the next decade of bloodshed and ruin that actually occurred. But only a few months before his murder Kennedy told Walter Cronkite in a TV interview that he viewed anybody who believed in withdrawing from Vietnam as "wholly wrong," and spoke of his fear that if it fell to communism the neighboring countries would be next. Ultimately JFK's legacy is tied to his assassination because it was so unfinished during his life. Conveniently one can turn what he "would have done" into something quite positive simply because he was never able to fully address it in the thousand days he was president. However, since we have a number of older users here who were alive then (I'm not naming names! ) and possibly even remember him as president, I am curious as to what others think and/or remember. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 10-22-13 12:25am - 4080 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I originally thought of posting this a couple weeks back when the forum was a little more active. But now that it's quieted down... The Pew Research Center released a study earlier this month about online video viewing habits (a study they do every few years), and interestingly found that among the types of videos viewed, "Adult" content accounted for what only 12% of those polled admitted to watching. (Here's the full PDF, if you're interested.) Granted this study was conducted over the phone with about a thousand people, so how many were honestly answering that, yeah, they watched or downloaded porn videos from the web is unclear. The study hilariously says that such a low percentage "may reflect a reluctance to report the behavior among some adults."  No kidding. I'm betting way more than 12% view "Adult" videos online, because I seriously doubt their local cable access channel will ever show any! And this is the real draw of the Internet: the big, discreet, "anonymous," peep show that lets us indulge in our deep, dark fantasies--a point that the puritanical never quite understand, unless they truly do want to control our thoughts--and never, ever have tell anyone about it. I don't think we'll ever get an accurate picture of who's viewing what online, certainly not when it comes to "Adult" content (making the other categories childish?), and certainly not as we remain, at least in public, a nation of hung-up prudes who supposedly fantasize about nothing more than a safe, conservative marriage partner. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 10-11-13 03:08am - 4091 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Saw this short interview on Salon.com about Axel Braun declaring that he will now only work with performers 21 and over. He says he's not trying to change the industry but I doubt one director will have much of an effect anyway. There will always be countless people willing to shoot girls the second they become of legal age and no principled stand will ever change that. And frankly I don't think that most 18 year olds who were considering porn will necessarily "consider pursuing a higher education" instead. College has become insanely expensive and borrowing money for it is almost Kafkaesque in its absurdity. Hell, you could at least make some money in porn while being fucked in the ass, plus it would probably take less time to pay off porn's psychological wounds than it does to pay off college loans. I also don't buy the "three more years" argument of the greater maturity of 21 over 18. I was making plenty of bad decisions at 21 as I was at 18--and still am! --and arbitrarily declaring a slightly older age as superior seems pointless once someone hits 18. (By the way, I find the 21 year old federal drinking age in the US very stupid as well.) Is there any age that someone could make a decision without regretting it later in life? It may be an interesting thought experiment, but if I was Axel I would not actually try this in real life. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 09-16-13 03:40pm - 4115 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I know I've mentioned my issues with the Miss America pageant before--mainly, that it exploits women worse than porn--but there's been some controversy over its newest winner Nina Davuluri for being Indian-American. Yeah, she was born in Syracuse, New York, and there have been non-white winners before but that didn't stop the Internet from unleashing its inner David Duke. Granted, a competition that's about "beauty" ostensibly judges other things as well but deep down it's looks, and some people just don't want their sash-swathed missus being anything other than lily-white. Frankly she's looks pretty attractive considering that most beauty contestants usually look like permanently smiling transsexual androids. She at least looks remotely human. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 08-17-13 07:13pm - 4145 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
(I was going to originally just post this in Wittyguy's massive Upcoming Movie Thread, but since that's grown to some twenty-four pages and this particular movie is somewhat special to a site like PU I thought it deserved it's own thread.) The new Lovelace movie about Deep Throat's Linda Lovelace is out and I was wondering if any PU'ers have seen it and what their reactions are to it. I'm much too young to have seen Deep Throat in theaters, or to even believe that the 1970s really were a Golden Age of Porn, but I thought there were a few members here who had seen it in its original theatrical form in the early '70s or at least remember hearing about it then. Deep Throat probably approached the mainstream about as close as a legitimately hardcore movie could, and I doubt as many people would even think of going to a theater today to watch what so casually passes for hardcore--fisting, watersports, crazy anal, and other such hijinks. Sure the Jackass movies attracted audiences, but those are understood to be a joke for the most part, and it's probably not as entertaining for so many people to watch some twenty year old girl fart out her partner's load into a cup for what is implied to be some sort of sexual pleasure.  But the interesting thing is just how different today's industry is from the Deep Throat era. I read a recent Slate article about how Linda Lovelace wasn't a porn star by today's standards. Keep in mind that the article is written by a gay male performer who claims he wanted to be in porn since middle school, and then when he was of age he waited a decade. But outside of his skewed male perspective he still has a point. The tragedy of Lovelace's life in and after porn, and what makes the recent film sound so truly depressing, is that she really wasn't a willing partner in much of it. It's a far cry from the hundreds of girls who come in looking for fun and quick cash, find little of either, and leave within a few months--all on their own. And an even farther cry from the women who stay and make a career out of it, even if "porn star" means nothing outside the industry. For the look-at-Lovelace anti-pornistas, women like Jenna Jameson, Sasha Grey, Aurora Snow, and Nina Hartley don't fit their agenda. Even someone like Belladonna, who has had some traumatic experiences because of the industry, has not gone off and joined a convent or some special interest group. An interesting quote to take away from that article and to think about with the renewed interest in Lovelace, from performer Sovereign Syre: "It’s one of the few jobs where women are empowered to be financially and emotionally independent and that terrifies people." "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 07-20-13 05:58pm - 4173 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Yeah, I've posted about this topic in the forum before, but as a single guy with not much interest in actually getting involved with the whole marriage thing I just find it such an entertaining topic of discussion. Especially when you have the more socially conservative boors who can stand before an audience and say, without any irony apparently, "What we really have is a pagan sexuality, which is totally different from a Christian sexuality."  I first read about this in an article last week and it just about made my day. It goes to the guy's greater point about monogamy, including this gem of wisdom: "Those who are monogamous have the best sex they’ll ever know, because they don’t know anything else." Which I guess is true, but it could suck if all you "ever know" included, say, an abusive partner, or one who always insisted on coming his wife's face, or one who just didn't really give a shit about the other ever enjoying sex. Ignorance is not always bliss, especially when it comes to sex. I know, just like this guy, I'm preaching to the choir here on PU, but it is interesting, and in this case hilarious, to every so often read what the other side thinks of us porn-addicted sinners. Never mind that many of the members here are happily married, do not identify as pagans, or even seem to think as much about porn as these "researchers" do. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 02-27-13 11:51pm - 4316 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Sad news from the bizarre world of beauty pageantry: The Miss Delaware Teen USA 2013 has resigned, handing over her crown (or sash, or whatever) for allegedly starring in a porn scene from the unimaginatively named site GirlsDoPorn. It doesn't seem to be confirmed that King is the girl in the video (here are the screen grabs), but the actress claims to compete in beauty pageants--from an unnamed state, of course--and had just turned 18, in the same month as King apparently. Either way I get a kick out of the notion that a beauty pageant contestant could feel tainted by a single Internet porn video. The Miss USA pageants are in fact run by the billionaire combover that is Donald Trump, and seem to treat their contestants as little more than anthropomorphized Barbie dolls. Is any of this surprising in a society that watches the televised child abuse of Toddlers & Tiaras, and cared deeply that the Miss USA 2009 runner-up had about as progressive a view on gay marriage as the Westboro Baptist Church? Still, if you look good enough to wear a shimmery dress and maintain a frozen smile, all for the honor and glory of a crown and meaningless title, I say you should at least be allowed to do porn as well. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 02-19-13 08:40pm - 4324 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I read an article on Salon today about the "Labia Pride" movement. This movement is basically an Internet trend to help women, through photo-rich blogs like this one, feel good and proud about the utter uniqueness and normality of their labia and bodies more generally. There's no real equivalent of this for guys, since I assume that's what team sports and Chatroulette are for, but anything that makes women feel better about who they are while also posting pictures of themselves sounds good to me. Still, it blames part of the problem of labiaplasty surgery and big lip embarrassment on Internet porn because it's become such an easy way for young women to see a lot of other women's bodies, particularly those damned pussy lips. The blog I linked points toward mainstream American porn as mostly to blame, though also allowing that "it depends on the porn you look at," mentioning some sites that seem to "break that mold" of small labia (Met-Art, MPL, Hegre, FTV). Which I'm not buying. Plenty of porn starlets have fake tits and Botoxed mugs, but just as many have small, natural breasts and lovely, uncut labia. And this is in mainstream porn. Hell, the guys seem to trend towards hairlessness, steroid-fueled muscles, and perpetually hard third-arm-sized erections, but are male viewers so insecure that they think this is the norm or that they need surgery? I blame the gilded assholes who offer such surgery as cosmetic "enhancement" (hey, it's not done for free) and the class of narcissists who willingly go in for such things, even offering such nuggets of wisdom as "I think she [her labia] looks better in a jar than hanging down there." Yes, someone really said that, and then it was put on TV. Am I alone in being perfectly happy whenever I get access to a woman's labia, regardless of their size, shape, or color?  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 11-11-11 09:11pm - 4790 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I'm sure most PU'ers have heard of the Penn State scandal involving the rape and molestation--not sex--of several kids over a 15 year period by the school's assistant football coach, and the subsequent covering up by people both below and above him as they found out. A number of firings have occurred, though there's still the glaring absence of any serious police action. Still, despite the natural disgust and rage that these rapes evoke, what I find even worse is a number of the responses to the firings. Most shockingly, some 10,000 students at Penn State, apparently so madly in love with the sport or at least their beloved team, rioted after the firing of Joe Paterno, one of the school's coaches who helped keep the child fucking under wraps.  I admit I have some pretty strong bias here, mostly in that I think not only are most sports a waste of time but the religiosity of their fandom is even worse. (The always quotable and contrarian Christopher Hitchens seems to share my feelings on the subject, quite elegantly in an essay from 2010.) Granted, sports riots are sort of a tradition of the fanbase of popular teams, regardless of whether it's over a victory, defeat, or even a forfeited game. But rioting over the much deserved if long overdue termination of a coach who knew and failed to report a serially pederastic coworker? Sorry, if any of this sounds harsh, but I'm sick and tired of reading and hearing about this as a "sex scandal," with apologists calling for the team to simply continue playing. I'm not a big fan of kids but I certainly don't condone anything that allows them to becoming easy prey for a fucked up adult, whether it's a priest, a parent, or some deified coach. So, am I missing something here? I know there are legitimate sports fans here at PU, including one who may have even played college football, if I'm not mistaken. But what makes people so delusional that they feel the strength of their team is more important than, say, a coach who does not buttfuck 12 year-olds in his free time? Please, if possible, explain what makes people (the fans) so crazy in love with sports? Was the riot just a fluke, or part of a greater disconnect between the fans and the decade and a half of child rape by the coach?  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 06-11-11 11:32pm - 4943 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
...the recent Anthony Weiner scandal has got me thinking about something. (No, not whether I should start shaving my chest again!) What I'm curious about is, since we are all online and seem to prefer our dirty pictures and video in digital format, what do PU'ers think about sending a loved one, or just a most recent flirt, photos of one's cock-a-doodle? I would really like to hear from the female members here, what few there are, because I have yet to hear a woman tell me, under any circumstances, "Don't forget to send my a photo of your cock." The demand just isn't there like it is for pussy portraits. I know it's a double standard, but I think most of us guys here love the equivalent girl shots, whether it's an enticing cameltoe photo or it's unsheathed equivalent. Hell, in my opinion certain parts of the female body are like a Georgia O'Keeffe painting come to life, but with even more artistic value!  So I say bring on the hot lady crotch shots! But really, who thinks that an equal number of women are clamoring for full-on shots of guy's equipment, much less in a poorly lit, cellphone-quality rendering? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 04-17-11 06:09pm - 4998 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
This may not be of much interest to non-U.S. PU'ers, but apparently the Obama administration has quietly put the Dept. of Justice's Obscenity Prosecution Task Force to sleep. Or at least hasn't done enough with it that 41 senators were concerned enough to write attorney general Eric Holder a letter urging him and the DOJ "to combat the growing scourge of obscenity in America." I know this may seem strange to the international PU'ers, especially considering how southern California produces porn by the truckload (a badandy400 unit of measure, I believe), but you have to remember that our elected officials absolutely hate porn, or pretty much anything having to do with sex--birth control, sex ed., film, music, the Internet (apparently as a whole), TV, you name it. It's all sexualizing our innocent citizens and destroying society before our very eyes!  Okay, I'm getting on my free speech soapbox here, but porn is big business because a lot of people like it, and regularly (if privately) enjoy it in a perfectly healthy manner that doesn't mysteriously lead to child rape and spousal abuse (that's what organized religion is for! ...just kidding.). But I wonder if a career in American politics leads you to be a prudish asshole or all these people just assholes by birth?Supposedly last summer's Stagliano trial and then subsequent dismissal was a sign that this task force was of no interest to the Obama administration. I may dislike him for being so irritatingly centrist but at least he's adult enough to give up on this ridiculous federal boner patrol the Bush II people set up in 2005. I'm just hoping the next republican president doesn't try and bring it back to life. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 10-20-10 10:16pm - 5177 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
The founder of Penthouse magazine, Bob Guccione, died yesterday, October 20, at age 79. Not quite Hustler and definitely not Playboy, Penthouse nonetheless made Guccione millions of dollars and made millions of men quite happy on a monthly basis for many years. A legacy that probably won't be repeated in the current age of the 'net. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 10-11-10 03:34pm - 5186 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Reading through Denner's recent "STUPID PORN" thread, and in particular Toadsith's post about porn actors going mainstream and mainstream ones doing porn, I was wondering which mainstream or non-adult actresses would be best in porn? I was curious what other PU'ers thought about this too, though the question is just for fun, I'm not implying that they have nothing more to offer than their bodies just who you would most like to see do porn that isn't known to have already. (We've talked about celebrities before in PinkPanther's thread Non Porn Babes That Drive You Wild - Celebs, Actresses,... from last year but it wasn't quite the same.) My personal favorite choices so far: Hilary Swank: she's got the body, acting ability, and even the name to do porn. In fact she may want to consider suing the porn magazine over using her last name. She's also done some physically demanding roles so I think she could really shine in an intense girl-girl or boy-girl scene. Anne Hathaway: okay, I'm including her just because I think she's hot but that works too. She's done quite a few teen/family films so it's a stretch but she happens to have the same name as Shakespeare's wife which is sort of like how some porn stars adopt names similar to real actresses. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 08-16-10 11:42pm - 5242 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Knowing cultural view of virginity, Chinese women try surgical restoration This is a pretty interesting article I just found about the growing popularity of hymen restoration surgery among sexually active women in China who want to please their husbands' fantasies of marrying a virgin. It raises quite a few questions about culture and self-image, not to mention what one might interpret as a slavish devotion to pleasing a partner--in this case male ones--when it comes to marriage. A gynecologist interviewed for the article, who they say, "restores as many as 20 hymens a month," illustrates what I think is the big problem with resorting to plastic surgery, saying that " 'I don't agree with this value' placed on virginity, [the doctor] said. 'It's unfair to the women. The men are not virgins. But we can't change this male-privileged society.' " Not with that attitude you can't, and certainly not by contributing to the problem by performing the surgeries that women apparently feel are necessary to please their new husbands on their wedding nights. Call me old fashioned, but whatever happened to accepting and loving someone for who he or she is, not the 'status' of one's virginity? Oh wait, this is marriage we're talking about, love has nothing to do with it, certainly not when the unquestionable bedrock of 'tradition' is at stake. Okay, so I'm not exactly the most idealistic person with whom to discuss marriage or 'love' (interestingly, the word love is never used in the article), but I do not think grown women need to bend over backwards, much less get hymenally 'rejuvenated,' for the purposes of pleasing others, especially hypocritical fiancés and husbands obsessed with outdated myths of marital purity. One guy even compares women to cell phones, saying "If you go to buy a cellphone, of course you'd want to buy a new cellphone. Who would spend the same amount of money to buy an old cellphone that's been used for two years?" And just like buying a cell phone, one should compare rates and plans for the best deal, remembering to always pay the monthly bill of course. Or would that be a divorce settlement?  Maybe I'm just way out of line with this thread; I'm not a doctor (boy, I hope that's obvious to regular members by now), Chinese, a virgin, nor am I interested in getting married anytime soon, or even going near a wedding for that matter, what with my cheery outlook and all. Maybe I'm ignorant of another society, but I don't think cultures should be subject to the whims of elective surgical technology. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 05-08-10 12:57pm - 5342 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
As I am sure some have already heard, the birth control pill turns 50 this weekend, ironically enough on this year's Mother's Day. I'm not sure what PU'ers think, since we're still mostly guys, but I know this definitely gets reaction from women, because it is what finally put reliable contraception in their hands (bodies?), and helped to level the playing field as far as sex and who can control at least one of its major consequences. I'm sure it's helped the industry a lot too--where would the entire creampie genre be without this pharmaceutical wonder? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 04-27-10 11:39pm - 5353 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I'm sure some American PUers have already heard about this story, but apparently some of the employees at the SEC (Securities and Exchanges Commission), which is a part of the U.S. government that's supposed to watch Wall Street, were spending a lot of time downloading porn. Like up to eight hours a day--sounds like badandy numbers to me  --and in some cases even burning to DVD and CD after they filled up hard drives! This story was first reported by the Washington Times back in February, but since they are a conservative newspaper owned by a church it sounded way too good of a story to be true coming from them--"The evil of porn and the failure of government regulation?! Yes! We were right all along!"--but apparently they were telling the truth. Now I am all for government regulation of the free market--especially for the assholes running/ruining Wall Street--but I don't think you can be very good at your job if you're downloading porn for eight hours of the work day, even if you're a site reviewer (because you're eventually going to have to stop downloading and write a review). This story does make me laugh though and even makes me rethink my earlier claims of swearing off all government related jobs for life. Though knowing my luck they would probably make me sign a 'no-porn' contract or something...bastards. This story sounds like every sexophobic conservative's wet dream but it would probably help things at least a little if the SEC employees kept their collection building hobbies at home. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 04-22-10 02:03am - 5359 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
As I was reading through some of the thousand or so of Cyber/ZombieToad's threads he has been digging up from the forum graveyard, his new one, Porn "Fun" Facts, got me thinking about what countries are the most friendly or at least legally lenient towards our favorite pastime. Since we have members from some pretty far flung corners of the planet as well as many continents I thought it would be interesting to hear some of various opinions about who might have it best. Now just judging from the map on 'Toad's above mentioned thread (it's at the bottom of the image), the Middle East and much of central and western Asia look to be stuck in the doldrums of adult entertainment, as well as Indonesia, Cuba, and parts of Africa, so if you live in one of these places, what the hell are you doing on PU?! Just kidding, we feel for you and hope your country can wake up one day. Now not to bash the U.S. too much (I've done my fair share throughout the forum) but even if we produce the most in terms of quantity we don't exactly have the most lenient stance when it comes to actually selling and distributing it, much less allowing all sorts of Max Hardcore-style acts to take place. Don't get me wrong, we've got plenty to choose from, but what gets companies and individuals in trouble here would in much of Europe get no response except which aisle to shelve the material for sale. I mean this literally; I have been in shops in both the Netherlands and Germany and have seen that his videos were not the most extreme, maybe the most extreme American, but not the most extreme overall. So I would put Germany and the Netherlands up towards the top, along with Denmark as I have heard they are quite open as long as the performers are at least 18 (Denner can probably enlighten me here). I put the U.S. in the top 10, but definitely not number one or even in the top five. What are PU'ers takes? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 10:57pm - 5403 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
This is somewhat related to a thread Denner did in late 2008 ("'Girls of the night' - prostitutes" if your curious) but purely theoretical--I'm not encouraging anything illegal here, just asking about fantasy. I was reading a blog on a site I recently joined and it mentioned one of their former models working at a, um, 'ranch' out in Nevada (where this is mostly legal anyway). It got me thinking; if given the chance to meet up and have your way with favorite model, would you? We've all talked plenty of fantasy, but this does happen since the porn girls keep doing it plus it sounds like the kind of thing at least a few PU'ers would do. My personal stance (and something I fear with non-porn girls as well) is you risk being her worst partner ever. Not just that day, not just that week, or month, or year, but ever! Next thing you know you're watching a BTS and she's in it and she's telling about why she does not do private 'modeling' anymore and your crying in front of your computer. Okay that example is a little extreme but the opposite could also be true as well; she ends up being no more memorable than anyone else you've ever worked your Don Juan magic on and could even be worse. So do you keep your fantasies pure fantasy or would anybody really want to live out meeting their #1 model (or #2, or #3...) in the flesh? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-05-10 03:00pm - 5406 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
We all have our favorite models here at PU (just come clean and admit it) but is there something that your favorite model or models could do to themselves or to their 'act' that would permanently turn you off to them? What brought this to my mind was I recently watched a YouTube video of Julia Bond being interviewed on the Tyra Banks Show from a few years back. I'm not a fan of Julia Bond but she seemed like a nice woman with a good defense of being a teenage porn pro and was pretty hot to boot, but I then clicked on a link to a more recent video of her...I was not very happy. Unless there are two Julia Bonds running around Southern California she had transformed herself dramatically over the years--absolutely covered in tattoos and dyed hair with blond streaks and a noticeably different attitude. What gives, I thought? A few years and a sweet young star can transmogrify herself into some kind of gangster girl wannabe queen bee. I know I'm being incredibly judgmental here (my personal talent) but I wonder what a longtime fan of hers would feel like after she had changed that much--I know I would be upset. Normally it's the ruinous trifecta of husband, kids, and church that turn me off to once naughty favorites but what would make other PU'ers cast off their favorite models? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove Edited on Mar 05, 2010, 03:54pm | |
|
||
| 02-12-10 07:37pm - 5427 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Okay, I know this thread title sounds weird, but come on what did you expect from me? ;) Partial credit of this idea has to go to Wittyguy for digging up his old thread "The Next Big Thing in Porn?" from the forum grave. His recent response about "Avatar" got me thinking: if, instead of a loin-clothed ten foot tall blue Na'vi, you could be made into the avatar of your porn star of choice, who would it be and why? I would pick squirt-goddess Cytherea first and foremost. Not my favorite model of all time, but her squirting powers are insane and possibly supernatural. The way her body shakes during and after a particularly forceful 'shoot' makes me think either a.) where does one find the drugs that would make someone act like that?, or b.) what is she feeling? Thus, to answer my second question I climb in the chamber and get uploaded via mental-link to my very own Cytherea avatar! I'm sure changing genders and bodies (not physically, of course) in order to experience 'her world' would be a steep learning curve but still better than dodging falling trees, riding dragons, and fighting mech-warriors on an alien planet in 2154. Oh, and if this thread has got you thinking "I believe it's about time we put turboshaft in a home," then I am sorry. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 02-04-10 03:05pm - 5435 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
From the Washington Post, February 4, 2010: "Google to enlist NSA to help it ward off cyberattacks." This thread is somewhat related to Wittguy's excellent "Does Google in/out of China Matter?" thread from last month, but it is really a separate issue and a scary one at that. It seems the search engine masterminds at Google have decided to team up with the NSA--as in the U.S. government's National Security Agency--to "help Google analyze a major corporate espionage attack" and "to better defend Google -- and its users -- from future attack." No, this is not a joke as I don't like joking about things that churn my stomach. Google, arguably the best known of Internet search engines, and the NSA, one of the lesser known arms of the Department of Defense, are teaming up to (I really hope) only beef up security. I don't need to rant and foam at the mouth too much but I do have a Gmail account (non-porn, I swear!) and I do use Google constantly for searching so to say I am unconcerned would be a lie. A quote from an author of a book on the NSA sums it up best for me: "I'm a little uncomfortable with Google cooperating this closely with the nation's largest intelligence agency, even if it's strictly for defensive purposes." Gulp. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 12-08-09 09:45am - 5493 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Swiss Ban Building of Minarets on Mosques I am sure most of us have heard about this, especially our European members. I know it's off topic, but we have discussed religion here before (a little, but still discussed it) and I was wondering what people's thoughts were. Regular members are probably aware of my overall distaste for religion, but I have an even bigger distaste for limits on civil rights, like religious freedom -- and I don't just mean freedom from religion for people like me, but freedom for others to worship as well. Having said that, I usually think of western Europe as a very progressive and liberal part of the world, arguably made up of some of the freest countries on earth. I also understand immigration, particularly from Muslim countries, is a big issue; when I was living in Germany a few years ago there were debates over the growing Turkish population there, but people were still tolerant overall. Even though Switzerland is neutral, given the Europe's history in the last century it seems this would have not passed, but it did, so what's next? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 11-12-09 01:45pm - 5519 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I read a funny article this morning in the Washington Post, "Publicly, a whole new lewdness," about the increasing prevalence of porn viewing going on in public areas. I mean as public as public transportation, airports, airplanes, sporting events (take me out to that ballgame!), and just about anywhere you can fire up your laptop or iPod and offend the strangers around you (mostly women it seems). Now I am all for more porn all the time, but this does seem a little much. For starters, all these people around you did not pay for the content in question and are essentially being entertained for free. That's ridiculous! Okay, so the article was more about etiquette in public spaces, or at least how "gross" all the "yuckiness" is to prudish women, but it still seems taking it one step too far. One hilarious quote that has kept me laughing all day was from a airline stewardess: "I have never had anyone say, 'I refuse to stop. I must watch this dirty movie.' " Classic quote! In fact I think I am making it my new sig, I find it so funny. (Note: this article was in the Style section of the paper, which means it is not much better than a cross between a tabloid and a blog. The article is pretty lighthearted and funny though.) "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove Edited on Nov 12, 2009, 05:52pm | |
|
||
| 09-22-09 11:01pm - 5570 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I read an article in Time magazine recently that talked about the decline in popularity of Wikipedia -- mainly in the number of contributors -- and it reminded me of some of the concerns regular members have voiced here. Okay, "Where Wikipedia Ends" is not an uplifting title, but it mentioned how "Over time [...] a class system emerged; now revisions made by infrequent contributors are much likelier to be undone by élite Wikipedians." I am kind of worried this is part of the problem for attracting some new members here; lots of regulars doing most of the contributions, and, as a result, scaring off some potential newbies. Don't get me wrong: the regular and frequent PU'ers are great people; funny, insightful, tolerant, opinionated, and above all civil. They write great reviews, helpful comments, and add lots of laughs to the forum (despite his avatar having its head up its own ass, I would nominate Wittyguy as one of the funnier members on the forum, but he is on somewhat of a leave of absence at the moment). But I still think that this site could be even better with more members. I certainly do not want PU to become like Wikipedia, which has a considerably elite not-in-my-backyard/website feel to it, which sort of ruins the whole wiki concept with an execution of pretty limited scope. I first contributed to Wikipedia for a school assignment a few years ago; it was interesting, but the demanding rules and style guidelines made me stop contributing once the assignment was over. Just read some of the discussion pages for longer articles -- you can hear more intelligent thought from a group of five year olds than a lot of the stylistic arguments "discussed" on these pages. Granted, they may have a point, as there are plenty of Wikipedia articles that are about as well written as a collection of tweets. But their site gives the feel that it is open to anyone -- as long as he or she agrees to follow the thousands of rules and style guides This is something in which I think PU has a great advantage over other sites; a few simple rules with lots of tolerance. I also don't want to attract more spammers, which Raging Buddhist addressed in his recent thread on reducing forum spam. There are a few new members who have had good intentions and have contributed quite a bit to the site in just the last few months, so obviously we do attract new members, just not very many it seems. About a year and a half ago Denner wondered what we could do to attract more members, in his thread The more, the merrier, but I was wondering if people thought there is maybe something we should not do in order to attract more members, or are we always going to revel in our own little niche of porn lovers...uh, I mean users? I would love to hear from new members about what brought them here, and (hopefully) why they are staying. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 07-03-09 08:34pm - 5651 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I know it's a little early, but to all my fellow American members here at PU, and of course to the great staff, happy Independence Day! As I am sure many of us are aware, the sage old advice of "Be careful where you point that thing," and "It could go off at any second" take on a new, more important meaning when handling fireworks and explosives, so be careful! Maybe take some time and watch a video with an all-American cast, or think of your favorite American model(s)... :) "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 05-03-09 12:55pm - 5712 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I realize that we are a pretty diverse group here -- with the common love of porn of course -- but it seems that most users do their surfing and collecting on PCs. I was wondering, does anyone use an Apple? A user has mentioned that ALS Scan uses Apples for their content, as I am sure plenty of other sites do if they are serious about quality porn, but it seems to be pretty rare for PU members. Given our priorities with cost this makes sense, but I would like to hear what people's setups are if they use a Mac. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 04-02-09 11:28pm - 5743 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Avast! I should have started this thread a few days ago, but like a lot of porn-in-the-mainstream stories, this quickly took on a life of its own. The University of Maryland was planning to have a screening this Thursday, 2 April, of the multimillion dollar porno blockbuster Pirates 2 -- but of course they did not. Fortunately the state's legislators got involved and drafted an amendment that would hold state funds from any school that screened such "shocking" material. For the UMD, that is more than 400 million dollars, so the screening in question was canceled almost instantaneously. I first heard about the screening, or at least the planning of it, on Tuesday and was pretty happy; believe it or not, college students are adults who can legally view such things, and they had shown "Deep Throat" in 2004. But a part of me also had that nagging feeling that this just would not fly in our country, not outside the handful of places where porn can be produced, and definitely not on a college campus, where "free speech" is only alluded to in history and law classes. My experience in school has led me to believe that for all the tolerance and free speech talk, there is always an opposing viewpoint that, more often than not, is not tolerated, and the single threat of screening a porn film is a good example. And they were not going to simply show it, but preface it with a standard safe sex/anti-porn message from Planned Parenthood. With the uproar I was hearing, the cancellation is pretty par for the course of how our culture overreacts to porn and all the warriors for family values and decency come out and arm themselves to do battle in their next culture war. All problems we now face and the state's politicians saw blocking this as a priority? Sad. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove Edited on Apr 02, 2009, 11:33pm | |
|
||
| 03-19-09 03:01pm - 5757 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I am definitely a fan of the shaved look, but every so often I will see a hot girl with a hot little patch -- but even then it is barely more than just a patch. My question was does anyone have any favorite models who are trimmed, that is not shaved bare? I don't mean the "hairier than thou" natural look that seems to have been reduced to a fetish, but the nicely trimmed look. Off the top of my head I can only think of Flower Tucci, but I think she is not performing anymore, plus she frequently had a thick bush that was more about shape than thinness. I know there are plenty of girls who seem to be half and half; that is, half the time they are shaved, the other half they have a bush of varying shape and size. I was more curious about the always trimmed ones, if any even exist. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-13-09 11:10am - 5763 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Watching a few videos recently made me realize something: that editing is very much a lost art in much of modern day porn, particularly American. I don't know if it is the rush to shoot and upload/release as much material as possible, or maybe a feeling that viewers don't want a lot of cuts in their videos, but editing seems to be out of style. Editing can actually serve some purpose, even in porn: Tell a story: Yes, the girl is naked, and she is very horny, but editing can add to the story, especially when it's "I just happened to have my camera and..." It is a fantasy, but it is not created solely within the act or the setting, but in how the video is put together. Increase or change the pace: I cannot remember the amount of times I have been bored by videos that seemed so promising, and only a few minutes long, but were just so sloooow. In glamour, striptease, and solo content this can work, but it seems to frequently not. A few minor edits can really inject the pacing with some energy, or at least... Make the video shorter: Please, no more 20 - 30 minute takes! This comes off as incredibly amateur, no matter how high-def, well lit, or hot the models are. Cut out all the extra angle changing, model repositioning, ass scratching, toy and girl relubing, and just leave the meat of the action. Most behind the scenes could probably keep all this junk, but the normal videos need it cut out. I know I am ranting and asking a lot here, but I would love to see porn return to a form of perverted storytelling, not just a free-for-all presentation of raw footage. With the availability, and relative affordability, of video editing software out there today, nonlinear editing should be within a lot of studios' and sites' reach. At the very least, this could make for some very creative and memorable videos, a welcome change from the wham-bam-repeat formula seen too often today. Okay, I have said a lot, but am I crazy and just haven't seen a lot of well edited work? Or are there members here who would like to see this begin to change too? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 02-05-09 08:22pm - 5799 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I have seen nowhere near the amount of porn that other users here have, and nowhere near the amount of classic porn either. Any of the classic porn I have seen (say, made 20 or more years ago as a rough guide) is sort of out of context since I saw it years after it was shot. So I was wondering: what porn, if any, do users consider timeless? That is, what has aged well, and is still as good, nearly as good, or even better than the first time they saw it? I am asking this as a question of what users think should be preserved for future generations of perverts, a sort of Global Porn Vault (like the Svalbard Global Seed Vault in Norway) in the event of some horrible electronic apocalypse, or a large scale disaster that depleted our current porn stocks. It seems to make sense to start with what classics we should preserve, then work our way up to more contemporary material, but any suggestions on work that could withstand the sands of time is welcome. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 02-02-09 10:17pm - 5802 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Wittyguy touched on this subject somewhat with a past thread about infidelity and porn, but I was wondering if marriage and porn can coexist -- practically and peacefully, and I mean more than it being just a little secret from a spouse. I am not married myself, so I cannot really answer the question, and I was wondering what users thought, but the prospect of having to give up porn for a marriage would make me look for a new partner. Therefore, at least in my case, the two would have to coexist, otherwise there would simply be no marriage. I also think that that porn could help as much as it could hurt a marriage. I will make a guess and say people would probably rather catch a spouse with some porn than with some stranger; but on the other hand I could see it being the cause for some divide in, or even the end of, a relationship. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 12-28-08 02:25pm - 5838 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Any resolutions for the New Year -- porn-related or otherwise? I am not much for them myself, but I will try and seek out better porn (though honestly this is more of a daily resolution, and I am sure why everyone is here anyway), and maybe write more on PU. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 12-26-08 12:14pm - 5840 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
We have mentioned fisting in other threads and in a few polls, but I don't think anybody has really talked about it too much. I was wondering what members' thoughts are about it. If you like or love it, then do you think there should be more of it, or that others are really missing out? If you dislike it, or just plain hate it, then what are your thoughts as well? I admit I have quite a bit of bias here; I prefer solo girl, and girl-girl porn, and there can be quite a bit of good fisting in those categories. My personal problem is that there is very little, if any, in more mainstream U.S. porn. I remember a few years back when Seymore Butts got in some trouble over a girl-girl fisting scene, sort of reinforcing a no fisting rule in American porn movies. The scene was as consensual as they get, but I doubt any producer or director wanted to be in the hot water that Butts was in. Personally, I view solo and girl-girl fisting as far less "obscene" -- and certainly less degrading -- than a lot of boy-girl content in U.S. hardcore porn. People have no problem regularly slapping, beating, choking, and generally disrespecting female performers, but if a model masturbates with her fist then all hell breaks loose. Obviously a Max Hardcore-level of content is not respectful either, but it seems to be a stupid double standard. Thoughts? Comments? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 1-40 of 40 Posts | Page 1 |
|
