| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
151
|
Preggolicious
(0)
|
Reply of
BostonPJR's Review
Hi, Boston PJR. I know this is a bit late but I've only just found it.
And you're right, this model is gorgeous, and I'm only judging by the tour pages! My pc has issues with HD video, so if I decide to join it won't be until I've addressed that problem.
Thanks for the review.
|
11-13-08 12:58pm
|
Reply
152
|
Suicide Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Mr Fountain's Reply
I just might join again soon, Mr Fountain.
I'm not generally a fan of tats or piercings, but I very clearly remember being impressed by many of the girls at SG. A good deal of them were so sexy I forgot about the tats and piercings.
Besides, in my experience, some of the girls who have that kind of SG fashion sense are flat-out sweethearts on the inside. And smart as all hell.
|
11-13-08 12:31am
|
Reply
153
|
Village Ladies
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Thanks for the reply, messmer.
I know you're a fan of mature women, as I am. As I said in my review, the premise of the site is good, and it's devoid of anything trashy, both of which are a plus. But if you're going to be a pictures-only site and steer clear of video, even in 2008, why not offer the best quality pictures you can? Why not offer zip-files? And why haul off a large percentage of the content to another site and charge extra for accessing it, when the content is not of premium quality to begin with? I'll admit, some of the newer pics are decent, but a lot of the older ones are smaller than 600x800. This move seems a bit stingy to me. Especially considering the 33.00 USD I paid for my month.
For a site like this, with small thumbs and no zips, not to mention generally slow-loading pages, it requires a good deal of patience and work to download each pic individually and hope to get some kind of genuine enjoyment out of the experience. Despite my low score, there are some very nice pictures here, as I said in my pros, but for 33 smackers I would rather not have to squint and hunt and click so much.
And like I said, seeing all those links to sets I can't access is sort of insulting, even though there's still a good deal of content I *can* get to. It's a bad idea, and without that the score might have been at least a 70. The spirited ladies themselves can be appreciated on their own merits, even though most of them are quite frankly not my cup of tea, and more or less transcend the whole scoring thing. The 63 is for Albert.
|
11-13-08 12:16am
|
Reply
154
|
Suicide Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Mr Fountain's Comment
I agree, Mr Fountain. I was a member here a few years back and even then it was a good site, and virtually a steal for the 10.00 USD it cost me at that time. Been meaning to re-join.
|
11-11-08 03:04pm
|
Review
155
|
Village Ladies
(0)
63.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- A fair amount of nice pictures.
- Site is mature and contains nothing sleezy or trashy.
- The basic premise of the site is good. |
| Cons: |
- A large percentage of the pics have been moved into a separate archive, which requires a separate membership.
- No videos.
- No zip-files.
- Small pictures (avg. 600x800 up to 749x1123), of fair to middling quality.
- Very small thumbnails.
- Pages load slowly.
- Sliding sidebar which moves as the scroll-button is moved. Very annoying.
- Some models in dire need of a dentist. |
| Bottom Line: |
Woody Allen opens one of his films with an old joke: Two women are at a restaurant and one says, "the food here is lousy.", and the other replies, "Yeah, and such small portions."
That joke applies pretty well to Village Ladies. For instance: I could complain that a considerably large percentage of the pictures have been moved to a separate archive which I can't access; but at the same time it would be silly to complain since ninety percent of those pics would do nothing for me anyway. But complain I will, hence the reference to Woody's joke.
As soon as I entered the member's section, disappointment and tedium ensued. First, no zips. Second, the thumbs loaded slowly and were so small I could hardly make out the image. Third, I clicked on one link in the model's index and was taken to a page which invites you to join a separate site where the older pics are now stored. On return to the model's index, that link was now yellow (visited) as were all the links to sets I would not be able to access. The sudden over-abundance of links to sets I could not access was somehow insulting, as if a joke had been pulled on me.
While beauty is certainly in the eye of the beholder, I found *very few* attractive models here. There's nothing wrong with being homely, but if you agree to being photographed, and to having those photos featured on a site where people are paying to obtain access to those photos, and if the intention of those photos is sexual titillation, then you should be prepared to hear some unflattering comments. Unflattering comment follows:
If you have broken teeth, missing teeth, gray teeth, or brown teeth, keep the smiling to a minimum, visit a dentist, or re-consider posing for adult pictures. This comment refers to some of the models, not all of them, of course.
***
This site has been online for a number of years and now costs more than a lot of premium sites. If you have a yen for less-than-glamorous mature amateurs, Aunt Judy's is a much safer bet than this.
Read Duke's review (TBP reviewer). He does a lot less pussy-footing than me, and his five year old review needs precious little updating. |
|
11-11-08 03:01am
Replies (7)
|
Reply
156
|
Panty Amateur
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Reply
Hi Denner,
I'm glad my review helped in causing at least one person to join this site, and I'm even more glad that you are not regreting your choice.
As I said somewhere, I think this is the best panty-video site on the net, easily. A new vid every single day, and in hi-def. No music tracks, intimate settings, good camera work, good looking models, great undies. I am always watching and re-watching these videos.
I am not currently subscribed because the newest vids are of such high quality my pc can't play them. I get a choppy picture that halts and pauses and sometimes freezes up my machine. RATS!
Must upgrade video-card, or something.
I was really happy to see your comment, Denner.
|
11-07-08 05:15pm
|
Review
157
|
G Queen
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- High volume of videos.
- Vids good quality.
- Frequent updates.
- All models are shaved (this could be a con for some).
- Pics are very nice, what few there are, though not big: 900x1350 on the high end. Many are much smaller.
- Masturbation vids are some of the best I've seen, if you're into that. |
| Cons: |
- If you access the English version of the site only, there are approximately 370 pictures. If available pics are rotated, as happens on some Asian sites, I will update review.
- Music tracks on many videos are a definite negative.
- Site frequently caters to what I will call the "girl unwilling/uncomfortable" fetish, which I find disturbing and offensive at times. |
| Bottom Line: |
The Japanese version of g-Queen, which you can access by manipulating the URL in the address bar and re-entering username and password, contains roughly 60 full picture sets (almost all NOT zipped), while the English version contains less than 400 pictures altogether.
The videos available seem to be the same in both versions. There are about 100 models with three to five vids each, and these are each separate episodes, often with different costumes and settings, rather than one long vid broken into bits.
These are not hi-def vids, but are nice enough. They come in at an average of 2000k, 640x480. The videos are lengthy, sometimes up to fifteen minutes. Music spoils most of the videos wherein a particular model is being introduced; but masturbation vids do not seem to have the music track - though I've only downloaded about a dozen of these.
There is one video featuring a beautiful model getting herself off on the edge of a glass table. This is hands-down the most erotic masturbation vid I've ever seen. Other masturbation vids seem genuine and quite graphic. Bear in mind I am no afficianado when it comes to masturbation videos.
I'v seen a few vids where the model is being poked, caressed, and digitally stimulated by an off-screen male. The models often feign discomfort and unwillingness, sometimes in a histrionic fashion, sometimes more subtly and convincingly. In either case it does nothing but bother me.
One video features a girl giving head to and then riding on a clear plastic dildo protruding from a male's open fly. This was erotic and strange, in a mostly good way. I have yet to see a straight girl-boy sex scene, though if I do I will update this review. There are 45 lesbian videos on offer.
The main thing to remember is that g-Queen is all about shaved girls, and these girls are made to appear almost uncomfortably young and naive. Also remember this is mainly a video site.
I would* recommend this site to video lovers who like Asians and are into tease/masturbation scenarios which take a long time to unfold and are DEVOID of anything street-oriented. Innocence and cute-ness are the order of the day.
Decidedly NOT recommended for picture lovers.
*The above recommendation applies only if you are willing to shell out about twice the price of the average adult site subscription. The truth is, g-Queen is way over-priced for what is on offer. |
|
11-07-08 11:25am
Replies (2)
|
Reply
158
|
Teen Stars Magazine
(0)
|
Reply of
Jeffrey99's Comment
Agreed. The vids are useless but the pictures are top-notch, and the girls are beautiful. A good pic archive.
|
11-05-08 09:32pm
|
Comment
159
|
G Queen
(0)
|
|
11-05-08 09:25pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
160
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
Reply of
Karup's Reply
Hi Jeff,
I went through my first folder and didn't find any. Bear in mind, I have hundreds of zips, so this might take a while. I know I only downloaded a few since I generally peruse the set before taking the zip and when I found one of those, by and large I opted not to DL.
Until I rummage a few up, it might help if I tell you that these doubled sets - at least the ones I saw - ALL occurred in the old pages. I spent almost all my time in the regular amatuers section and athletic amateurs. I worked my way from oldest to newer since I prefer the style of the old sets (I'm an old-school undies fan). I don't recall any in exotics, and I never looked at outdoors, nor any hardcore.
Bear in mind, I wrote the initial comment in regard to this out of curiosity mainly and as a heads-up to you. It wasn't that big of a deal. As you can see by my review, basically your site is tops and I will be rejoining again in a few months to go through the newer stuff.
I will email with info when I can. Hopefully fairly soon.
|
10-29-08 10:07pm
|
Reply
161
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
Reply of
Karup's Reply
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the quick reply. I will send you some of the set-names after I've located them, but I won't be able to send an URL because my sub has run out. **NOT fishing for any freebies here, either, nor would I accept any if offered. I'm weird about that sort of thing. Not that you would do that any way. I mention it just as an FYI.
|
10-28-08 01:45pm
|
Comment
162
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
|
10-28-08 10:23am
Replies (8)
|
Review
163
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
94.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Huge amount of content, both pics and vids.
- Zips for photosets.
- Search engine
- Model rating system, plus section for highest rated models and sets.
- Pics viewable in two sizes.
- Hard and softcore content separated.
- Several updates per week.
- Navigation is good. |
| Cons: |
- High-res pics offered but at 1500x1000 they are still a tad behind some high-end sites.
- Most softcore vids seem to begin with an interview/chat session, which is a negative for me. Would rather have interview sessions separate. This is a minor nit, of course. |
| Bottom Line: |
Karups HA is undoubtedly one of the best sites going, with amount of content vying with just about anyone at this point. To give you an idea of how much material there is here: in the softcore video section alone there are twenty-four vids per page, and there are seventy-one pages. The photo sections are just as impressive.
That aside, the site has all the bells & whistles one might expect at a premium site, which I listed in the cons. The drawing point for me is the photo archive. Though I could be wrong, it looks to me like a few well-known photographers had sets here in the old days: Toby from ATK, and Donovan Philips from DonnysGirls, to name two. If I'm wrong on this I'd be very surprised.
The newest vid I downloaded is 640x480 and shows a bitrate of 2683k. Newest pics come in at 1500x1000, which is nice, but 1600x1200 would be even better. Once again, a minor nit.
This is one of a small handful of sites which I have stayed with for a second month. Even with a fast connection it would take a long time to collect it all, and then you'd be very busy indeed.
Anyone interested in adult media would be remiss not to sign up here at least once. I seriously doubt that many people would find it terribly disappointing. |
|
10-20-08 09:54am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
164
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
Reply of
Toadsith's Reply
Wow, Toadsith, you sure made an excellent case for your point of view. I would reply by saying first that I don't find a pregnant woman sexy necessarily: rather, I find a woman who is sexy already *even more* sexy when she is pregnant. Case in point: my little ex-wife. She was busty for such a slight little thing anyway (four foot eight inches, 85 lbs when I married her), and when she became pregnant...DAMN! It wasn't just the size, it was the texture, the density, the color of the areolae, everything. I was in hog heaven. The rest of her perfect little body became more exciting to me as well. Even her hair. Her skin and her face were more lustrous, rich, supple, smooth, choose your modifier. Sex was hot. And I mean literally hot.
My attraction to pregnant women has nothing to do with the "miracle of child birth" or anything like that. I'm not green, I'm not politically correct, and I detest the nuttier elements of the feminist movement as much as the next guy. That being said I don't find anything grotesque about reproduction or the physical changes women undergo when they are with child. Of course I speak from the male perspective, which is an easy one. I can sympathize as best I can, however, and I completely and without reservation support and commend any woman who refuses to become a mother, for whatever reason. I'm pretty much a libertarian and believe quite forcefully that a person holds sovereignty over their own body and that the demands of society, culture, and invisible deities can go fly a kite.
The beauty of the feminine form, for me, is about a particular concert of curves, contours, and convexities: the breasts, the hips, you know what I mean. In a pregnant woman, and by that I mean one who takes care of herself, those curves, contours, and convexities are accentuated in a dramatic and often breathtaking manner. The big belly, far from being a gravid lump of shapeless fat, is round and hard and smooth and sexy as hell. Once again, this is strictly from an onlooker's point of view and I don't mean for one second to underestimate the physical and emotional strain a pregnancy puts upon a woman.
Parasite may be a technically apt term as you use it, but as a father of two I can say that I am now as dependent on my children for my well-being as they are on me. If one of them died I would want to die too, and so the host/parasite relationship doesn't fly with me. Naturally it does apply to many a parent and child in this world, and our species as a whole would most certainly benefit greatly from a concerted effort to significantly reduce the number of childbirths worldwide.
Edited to add: I think this might call for a forum thread. I'm interested to hear what others think. I think I'll go start one.
|
10-17-08 10:33pm
|
Reply
165
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
The watermark is pretty big. I actually never heard of the site until a few weeks ago. Oh, and I should say, while Cel uses landscape more than the average site, on going through the pics I'd say he still uses it much less than half the time.
|
10-17-08 08:07pm
|
Review
166
|
XX Cel
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Fair collection of very natural busty models.
- Zip files for pics.
- Total fidelity to niche. The site is about breasts and nothing but breasts.
- Excellent picture quality.
- Excellent editing of photo-sets.
- A few beautiful pregnant models. This could be a con for some but why simply baffles me. |
| Cons: |
- Several models are much too large (all around, not just breasts) for my tastes. This is a purely subjective con and for some it will be a pro.
- Breast-sucking videos are useless. This is also a subjective con. No hairy faces in the way of the good stuff, please.
- Videos are hit and miss as far as quality both physically and esthetically.
- Amount of content, and number of models, needs to grow. |
| Bottom Line: |
This is one instance where one's subjective tastes will certainly factor in to how one responds to the site and how one rates it.
For instance I would rather not see so many large women, but some guys will want more of them. Some men will love the inclusion of pregnant women, as I do, but some men will find this a turn-off. And finally, some guys might actually like to see another man suckle away at a big pair of breasts, but to my mind unless this occurs during an actual sex scene it's less than useless. It's obnoxiously useless.
And once again we have a website wherein the vid section is not up to par with the photo section. As for specs, these vids are all over the map. For some reason I am seeing higher bitrates in vids with smaller dimensions. For instance, one vid is 720x576, 764k; another is 640x480, 1339k; and a third is 320x240, 1519k. Could it be that the VLC media player is innacurate, or is this a normal thing? In my experience it is not normal.
Be that as it may, the content of the vids is also all over the map. There are far too many tit-sucking vids; some vids have cheesy music set to them; some are tediously long and some are dreadfully short; and still others are dynamite, as is one featuring a young pregnant model named Lucie. There are a few lactation vids. One I looked at showed nothing but the model squirting milk. That got boring after about ten seconds.
As for the photo-sets, I believe they are some of the best in the genre, or any genre. The pics are mostly 1600x1064, though some are smaller, and Cel has a definite skill in this area. The sets often contain more than a hundred pics and yet they are nicely edited so that you don't get fifty shots from the same angle. Even though it's a breast-fixated site there is total nudity and plenty of spread shots as well as awesome booty shots. I would put Cel in the top 5 percentile in regard to pictures. And for those of us who like our monitors crammed full with beautiful female goodness, Cel makes optimal use of the landscape format.
Bottom line: if you are primarily a pic collector and like big breasts in a softcore format, I believe you will find this site a decent value, although there is not a huge amount of content up.
If you are into hardcore, forget it. And if you are coming here mainly for the videos, you might want to save your money this time around. |
|
10-17-08 05:47pm
Replies (5)
|
Reply
167
|
The Hand Job Site
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Review
Thanks for the great review.
The HJ niche seems to be growing, which is odd given that most guys seem to regard a hand-job as something less than sex. To my mind, a good HJ is one of the damn nicest things a girl can do for a guy, and when you get a girl who knows how to do it, it can really be something.
Wifey from Wifey's World is the reigning queen of the HJ, in my opinion, and everyone else pales by comparison. I've been to several HJ sites and most of them are useless. Brandi Belle is pretty good, but she seems too detatched.
And, dang it, if there's a mouth or even a tongue involved, it ain't a handjob!
Anyway, just my .02$
|
10-17-08 04:42pm
|
Review
168
|
My Cute Teens
(0)
73.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- A lot of content up.
- Decent mix of cute European models.
- Seems to update regularly. |
| Cons: |
- No zips.
- Majority of pics in photo sets are named identically: "DSCN0001- etc.", causing extra work re-naming.
- Many vids are not high quality, some very low quality.
- Site has a very "generic" feel to it. |
| Bottom Line: |
I guess somebody ought to do a review for sites like this, though it's easy to see why no-one here has ventured to do one thus far.
I have no complaints about the amount of material on offer here. There are loads of pic sets (60+ pages with app. 10 sets per page), and app. 120 vids. Some of the vids are broken up into sections.
There are some very good photo sets here, if one is willing to look for them. Pic size varies: 1200x1600 on the high end, 1000x750 on the medium, plus many sets with smaller pics. There are also some high quality vids, 2000+k, 640x480, but the bitrates go as low as 359k in the older vids.
The problem here is organization. While the pic and vid sections are separate, hard and softcore content is mixed together in both, and there are no search options. Pictures are divided in two sections, "exclusive" and "other". Sets come ten per page with a thumbnail link and a brief description. The vid section offers a long list of text links, each link being a brief description which takes you to a thumbnail giving some idea of the content, and there is only one option available for DL. The content of the videos left no impression on me. Same old-same old.
By and large this site will induce boredom almost instantly. It has a strong generic stamp and possesses no real personality or any defining characterisic apart from its "teeny-ness" which is strongly reminiscent of Club Seventeen and other euro sites. It comes with the usual plethora of bonus feeds which add nothing to its value.
Spend your money elsewhere. |
|
10-13-08 09:52pm
Replies (0)
|
Comment
169
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
|
10-10-08 04:52pm
Replies (1)
|
Comment
170
|
Busty Amateurss
(0)
|
|
09-10-08 01:44am
Replies (1)
|
Review
171
|
Sonia Dane
(0)
79.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Very faithful to the lingerie niche.
- Very classy, adult site.
- Lots of content with Lingerie Pass membership.
- Sonia is a classy, elegant, attractive, mature lady who obviously enjoys what she does.
- Many pics will make old-school undy lovers happy. |
| Cons: |
- Video section is a mess in many ways, see bottom line.
- Pics are small: 480x640 to 1024x737.
- Downloads speeds were consistently slow, averaging 160k per sec.
- Pic sets are arranged all on one page, and it takes a while to load. |
| Bottom Line: |
I have mixed feelings about this site. One one hand, it's extremely classy and mature all around, with nothing tacky or sleezy about it, and for an old-school panty/lingerie fan like me, it is sometimes the best in that genre; on the other hand, I can't help wondering why the physical quality of the content is not up to 2008 standards, why, in fact, it is barely up to 2003 standards; and why, after being online so long, are there all of 16 video clips available, and why, oh why, is the quality of these clips so dismal?
Sonia has a hair over 200 sets up, and with older sets you are looking at pics as small as 480x640, Newer sets offer bigger pics, but still not great, at 1024x737. These people are obviously not hard-up for money, so why continue to sell low-to-moderate quality content when upgrades are almost certainly possible?
Vids: I counted 16 video clips, ranging from 2 to 8 minutes in length, on Sonia's site proper. The newer clips are stream-only and cannot be downloaded. Older clips can be downloaded, but there is no reason why you should bother. One vid I checked was WMV 320x240, 889k; another was a Quick Time vid which was absolutely unwatchable because the quality was so bad. Additionally, I had many problems waiting for the vid page to load. I have a fast connection and all other sites hum along fine, but Sonia's site is slow in general, and excruciantingly slow in regard to the vid page.
A definite plus here is Sonia's guest model section, which now includes 46 models, each with her own little sub-site. Some of these models have upwards of 70 sets, but a good deal have only a handful. By and large there is some excellent, tasteful stuff on offer, but, as with Sonia's site, the pics are small, small, small. Some of the guest models have vids, but these are relatively few.
This site, meaning Sonia's in particular, has the potential to be one of the very best in the panty/lingerie niche, and in fact it's quite ubiquitous in the lingerie/panty newsgroups and is generally highly regarded; but the site itself doesn't live up to its implicit reputation. To go from merely average to exceptional, all this place needs is some serious improvement in the *physical* quality of its content. The strictly aesthetic quality of the content, mind you, is absolutely tops.
Final thought on the vids: either offer something worthwhile or drop them entirely, please. There's nothing wrong with being a picture site. |
|
08-29-08 08:17pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
172
|
Abigail 18
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- Abigail is bee-yoootiful.
- 5 bonus sites, yielding a good amount of content for price over-all.
- Abigail's tush.
- Good pic size (1700x1200 in newer sets)
- Abigail's breasts.
- Abigail's knee-caps, ankles, and spinal column. |
| Cons: |
- No zips.
- Videos are negligible.
- Sets are dreadfully monotonous.
- Most of the best pics are available at various TGPs for free.
- The site is anemic and seems to be strictly a commercial endeavor. |
| Bottom Line: |
My falling for this site was the result of developing a hopeless crush on Abigail and hoping - against all reason and totally contrary to experience - that I would be delighted and swept away once I got inside. This did not happen. I was mainly interested in seeing her videos, which, unfortunately, are nearly useless. Note: if you read a review of Abi's site at Porn Inspector you'll see that they claim the vids come in at 2620k and are 720x480! This is totally untrue. I didn't save any vids but I believe they are about 1100k tops and are not as big as PI claims. Not only that, the vids I checked are set to cheesy "music" and if there is any other audio it is drowned out by this semi-organized series of sounds which is sometimes, and purely for the sake of convenience, refered to as "music".
The pics, at least in newer sets, are decent (1700x1200 app.) and with 80 or so sets there are plenty of them. Unfortunately, not much effort was put into making the sets varied or interesting beyond the fact that a beautiful girl is in them. Cutesy is the order of the day, and the sets follow a predictable pattern: fully clothed, lift shirt, remove shirt, take off shorts, kneel, tug panties and show crack, show more crack, show full tush, fully naked.
The pics are soft and only rarely do you get a decent glimpse of Abi's precious peach, but that's alright since we all know what it looks like anyway, and besides, soft is what I was expecting.
There are five bonus sites on offer, all nearly identical to Abigail's: Lovely Anne, Lovely Irene, Erica's Fantasies, Jenny Reid, and Lovely Tera. All these girls are knock-outs, particularly Jenny Reid, but I simply couldn't get too excited over any of the material, for the simple reason that a good portion of it is available for free all over Netville, and the videos are mostly short, mid-quality yawnfests.
This, folks, is pure product with little or no personality. This network of sites is a money-making enterprise and while I have no problem at all with capitalism, I would like a wee bit more originality, more character, for my money, more high-end content, and less cookie-cutter material. Thanks.
P.S: Abigail is truly gorgeous. She deserves better. |
|
08-29-08 07:30pm
Replies (1)
|
Reply
173
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Yes, but not a lot.
Melissa Joan Hart has a beautiful ass.
|
08-03-08 11:04pm
|
Reply
174
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Poll
I got tired of hardcore porn years ago, but I still try once in a while to rekindle the interest I had as a strapping young buck. I recently got a sub at VideoBox and downloaded a video featuring one of my dreamgirls, Alexis Love, being monotonously drilled for about ten minutes. It looked mechanical, visceral, purely physical. There was no spark, no passion, no eroticism at all. It was like watching an oil-rig. What's worse: it didn't look like it FELT GOOD. How can I explain that? it looked like an oil-rig. I didn't think to myself, wow, this dude is one lucky bastard! I was simply bored silly.
I could give myself blueballs watching porn twenty years ago. At my present age, and after a lot more actual experience in the field, there has to be some kind of mental relationship going on between characters in a story or performers in a film. It can't simply rely on the physical. There has to be some context, some backdrop, some REASON these two so and so's are bumping uglies. There has to be some desire for the other, not just a desire to get off. I guess for this reason I am much more into erotic literature at this point in my life than adult film or video. I'm currently reading Kate Chopin's "The Awakening" and there was more stimulation for me in one scene describing a single kiss than there was in watching an hour of VideoBox downloads.
That being said, I'm sure there's a lot of good porn out there that I've simply missed and/or can't seem to find. I'll keep looking.
PS: If by "porn" we mean looking at beautiful women naked, then I have never gotten sick of that. A bit bored at times, but never sick.
|
07-31-08 12:26am
|
Reply
175
|
Wifey's World
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Thanks, Khan, I'll do that. roseman, you're welcome.
|
07-30-08 01:19am
|
|
