| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Comment
651
|
Straight Hell
(0)
|
|
08-28-11 07:18pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
652
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I'm happy to let the site pick for me, as I use just one computer and stay logged in anyway so I don't have to remember it. I tend not to stay on sites for ages so making up new passwords would be too much hassle anyway. I seem to be the minority on this though!
|
08-28-11 06:17pm
|
Reply
653
|
Double Teamed Teens
(0)
|
Reply of
dracken's Review
So many sites have excellent content but are let down on technical issues and/or poor customer support, it's so frustrating!
This in an excellent, in-depth review - well done.
|
08-27-11 05:32pm
|
Reply
654
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Nope, if I can't download it to keep, DRM free, I ain't interested!
|
08-26-11 08:02am
|
Reply
655
|
Redhead In Heat
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
Thanks for that, hope you didn't mind me pointing it out, just didn't want your review to be spoiled by a little mistake it's all too easy to make!
Curious though - what's an IR performer?
|
08-26-11 08:01am
|
Reply
656
|
Redhead In Heat
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
A good warning review, but you seem to have missed a chunk out - one of your sentences ends mid-sentence - "with multiple partners at the...."
Sounds an awful site of a good model which is always a pity - and pop-up hell is ALWAYS a bad sign.
Thanks for warning people off the site, this is what PU is really useful for.
|
08-25-11 11:53pm
|
Reply
657
|
Tara TS
(0)
|
Reply of
GCode's Review
Extremely thorough review. I love that she will read comments and talks to her fans as well as making her own costumes, but like you say it seems the technical side really lets the site down - and I couldn't cope with such sporadic updates. I think a site should give you a guaranteed number of updates per month at regular intervals so you know what to expect, though I appreciate that might be harder for a solo performer.
|
08-24-11 11:48pm
|
Reply
658
|
N/A
|
Reply of
BadMrFrosty's Poll
Just thought it was descriptive, suitable for the site and lets people know what kind of porn I'll be reviewing for them!
|
08-22-11 04:19pm
|
Reply
659
|
Teasers VOD
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Review
Another superb review - this seems a unique site, and as you said very unusual for a US site. Well done!
|
08-20-11 04:29pm
|
Reply
660
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
If they're broken once I'll try again later just in case the site is having temporary problems or if it's a problem with my internet connection - but if other sites are fine so I know it's not my computer or connection, and it's consistently down for a couple of days, I would forget it - if they can't get their tour pages right I don't trust their paid-for content either.
If I really liked the look of a site I'd bookmark it and try it a few days later, but if they haven't sorted it out in a week or so I wouldn't join. I'd never join from a page with broken pics - they'd have to be fixed first and I'd be extra careful checking reviews here and on TBP too.
|
08-20-11 09:19am
|
Reply
661
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
LewdyPig's Review
Welcome to Porn Users, well done on a decent first review.
|
08-19-11 02:39pm
|
Reply
662
|
CMNM.net
(0)
|
Reply of
manholelover's Reply
Really? Nope, CMNM includes nothing else - sounds typical of this network of studios, they break everything up into as many different websites as possible and they know how to charge. I actually e-mailed them once and suggested a discount if you joined more than one of their sites - got a swift negative response on that little idea!
I think they're doing themselves out of money personally. If I had the cash I'd keep a continuous subscription going to several of their sites, but as it is I rarely join more than one and never more than two at once.
|
08-19-11 02:36pm
|
Reply
663
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
elephant's Review
Sounds like excellent value but I agree with you that it's outrageous to charge UK viewers more. The pound is stronger than the US dollar so it should actually makes things cheaper for us, so to actually charge us more makes my blood boil.
Very thorough review which mentions pitfalls you wouldn't know about until you join which is the beauty of this site.
Well done.
|
08-18-11 12:08pm
|
Reply
664
|
Christina Skye XXX
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
Sounds like it's a pity she decided to give up! I was going to say the review should be longer but on reflection with such a site I think it covers everything a user could need to know - sounds like there isn't so much content to review.
I guess I can understand changing your mind about being in the adult industry but my feeling is that as she's out there on the web already and can't undo that, she may as well continue and make some money - but I am sure she had her own good reasons.
|
08-18-11 12:05pm
|
Reply
665
|
Evil Angel
(0)
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Review
Very throrough review - well done! Pity us Europeans end up paying more yet again - despite paying in stronger currencies which should make sites cheaper, not more expensive.
|
08-18-11 12:01pm
|
Reply
666
|
Chimera Bondage
(0)
|
Reply of
Mort's Review
Excellent review - sounds like they know they have a pretty unique niche so they're exploiting that which is sadly quite common. The price isn't outrageous but the "rotating content" model is - I wouldn't mind it so much but they seem to be using it as an excuse not to offer as many updates, which I don't think is fair.
I've certainly never come across this type policy before and it looks a pretty blatant attempt to keep you subscribing - if only sites would realise that treating customers well and providing regular fresh material is the best way to do that!
Oh well, good review.
|
08-18-11 11:51am
|
Comment
667
|
CMNM.net
(0)
|
|
08-18-11 11:42am
Replies (2)
|
Comment
668
|
First Auditions
(0)
|
|
08-18-11 09:45am
Replies (1)
|
Reply
669
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I've known a couple of people who've told me they've done porno in the past, but I haven't actually seen their stuff - maybe one day I will though! Might be odd!
|
08-18-11 06:28am
|
Review
670
|
Reluctant Young Men
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Realistic, pretty hardcore spanking
+ The straight guys seem genuinely straight to me
+ Fair amount of verbal in the videos, which I love
+ No DRM used
+ Sleazy, amateur feel unusual in a US site
+ Uses CCBill
+ Generally sexy models
+ Lives up to basic theme/promise of site |
| Cons: |
- Expensive
- Recurring billing
- Seems to use regional billing - see below
- Updates only once a week
- Updates may only be part-scenes
- Video quality variable, average at best
- Audio quality also variable and average at best
- Not everything promised in the description
actually happens in the videos
- Very little sexual action - some masturbation only and that's in a minority of scenes
- Fussy, intrusive log-in system
- Streaming seems slow with lots of buffering. |
| Bottom Line: |
The theme behind Reluctant Young Men is in the title - the men are there purely to earn money, do not enjoy being spanked, and have reluctantly agreed to do it for cash only. This in general seems to hold true - many of the models are belivably straight, and even the gay ones sometimes seem reluctant to do it. A minority of the videos do seem to show guys who are perhaps a bit more into it, but the spankings are hard and real and there's no acting here.
The video quality is variable and never goes above average - you can see it's an "amateur" site. The downloads are WMV, but I found the streamingly frustratingly slow - constant buffering meant long waits and gaps between scenes. Videos are 720x480 in WMV format. Photos are just sets of videocaps, with no zip files to download. The audio is only average too - audible but a bit muffled which is a shame as audio is important on a spanking site. Very much amateur production values here - sexy, but there's a trade off in quality.
The theme rarely changes - the majority of spankings are over-the-knee though a good range of implements are used. There's usually a reason given in the description as to why the guy is being spanked - turned up late for a shoot, didn't return calls etc. and sometimes other guys are brought in as witnesses.
The spanker is usually one older, chunky guy who isn't conventionally gorgeous but suits the role of a firm disciplining older male figure. He remains clothed throughout and is good at verbally humiliating the guys and reminding them that they are being paid by the viewers so to ensure we get a good look at his spanked ass etc. Sometimes if the guys cry and get remorseful he rubs some cream on their butts and gives them a hug to comfort them. Very occasionally he wanks them off too - but sadly this is rare.
I'd have preferred more of the comforting and and masturbating and maybe some more sexual contact at the end too. The site is very focused on spanking and it does it well, but sometimes you feel you'd like more variety in the guys both spanked and spanking, and maybe some costumes, different outfits and sceanrios to spice things up - the same format can quickly get a little repetitive.
The site is a pricey $34.95 a month on recurring billing - and when I paid it converted it straight to £25.83 which according to xe.com is actually $42.71 in US dollars, meaning they added several dollars on to an already price subscription for me in the UK. Thankfully it's CCBill so it was easy for me to cancel the recurring subscription.
The log-in system is frustrating - you have to log in with your username and password every time, it won't allow you to stay logged in - and you have to re-login before you watch or download each video - and if you forget to check the "remember me" box each and every time, it will forget you on the next video, even in the same session.
Most frustrating about the site was the lack of some things promised in the description - sometime it promised a guy would be rubbed and hugged at the end but he wasn't, and one guy was supposed to have been kept in a chastity device and was about to be masturbated for the first time in a month - but they didn't even show the chastity device or it coming off, which ruined the whole point of the scene.
This is a pretty hardcore spanking site and it does show real, fairly serious spanking with no acting so if you're a spanking purist, you'll probably like it. The verbal descriptions are sexy and there are some horny little twists, but overall for me there was too much promised and not delivered on, the quality wasn't good enough, the variety wasn't there and it wasn't sexy enough. For the very expensive price, these failings were a little too much to forgive. If you adore hardcore, pure spanking it might just be worth it, but personally I won't be re-joining. |
|
08-17-11 05:10pm
Replies (1)
|
Reply
671
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Can't say it occurred to me but I suppose it might be interesting to see if they're a generous scorer or not to put their scores into context. If their average score rating is 70 and they give a site 95, it's gotta be special!
|
08-16-11 12:41am
|
Reply
672
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Review
Wow excellent review as usual rear, very impressive - I don't think you could know the site better!
|
08-07-11 02:11pm
|
Reply
673
|
Homo Punk
(0)
|
Reply of
manholelover's Review
Excellent review - I was very curious about this site and waiting for your review of it since you mentioned it a while ago. Sounds like a typically British amateur production - hot concept badly executed.
The mainly non-downloadable videos is the main deal-breaker for me, and the way you can't tell if it's video or pics until you click, then seemingly only getting a slideshow if they felt like doing it for that particular set - so typical of this type of site!
Another great concept ruined by lazy webmasters I guess!
Was curious you mentioned regional billing as a plus - I thought it was generally seen as a bad thing on this site, a way of charging one region more - have I got that wrong?
|
08-06-11 02:07pm
|
Reply
674
|
CFNM.net
(0)
|
Reply of
manholelover's Reply
Yeah this network of sites is really annoying and disappointing me. They make some of the best porn in the business and then ruin it with crappy service and stupid site policies.
I think if they improved the service they could afford things - I'd love to know what their site turnover rate is - must be the highest in the industry!
Not surprised Straighthell didn't get back to you - they probably won't. Whatever the real reason, and the "anonymity of models" excuse is so patently ludicruous it's insulting - they're not going to change it any time soon.
I've just cancelled my subscription to another of their sites - First Auditions - updates too erractic, no new Groping Hands, expensive - it's just not worth staying a member - just go in and out every few months.
|
08-06-11 02:02pm
|
Reply
675
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I would if it offered a good reducation in price per month and I knew and trusted the site to keep updating and keep the quality up. There's very few sites that I would trust to that extent, sadly.
|
08-06-11 12:03am
|
