| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
101
|
Facial Abuse
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Review
Judging only by your review, it seems to me that this material is NOT about sex, but is about violence and abuse.
None for me, thanks.
|
10-14-09 09:40pm
|
Reply
102
|
Fame Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
graymane's Review
Wonderful review, graymane! I agree with you about the attractiveness of these three young beauties. Legs! Legs up to their earlobes!
The non-nude approach is MORE stimulating than nude for me. Once you've seen The Prize in all its glory, it gets a bit old seeing it pulled and yanked and twisted and gaping every which way. I much prefer the subtle, barely concealed suggestion of The Prize, the bittersweet agony of the known unknown.
Great review. The models are drop-dead gorgeous and the preview pics alone make me feel like I just got an injection of testosterone.
WWW.
|
09-25-11 04:59pm
|
Reply
103
|
Flower Panties
(0)
|
Reply of
ace of aces's Review
Thanks for the review, ace. I'm hard-wired to respond to the word "panties" like one of Pavlov's dogs, and I've been semi-tempted to try this place out. I'll probably ignore it for a good while now, before the word "panties" brings me salivating back...
WWW
**by the way, it's what's in the panties that counts, not the panties all by themselves. I don't huff them or wear them (OK, one time, when I was very drunk). Men in panties is a travesty! Nor do I hang around playgrounds in Highgate looking for Cross-eyed Mary! ;)
18+ please.
|
04-24-08 10:40pm
|
Comment
104
|
Freaky Panty
(0)
|
|
11-04-07 01:11am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
105
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
I know, lk2fireone, I was grinding my own particular axe at your expense (pun intended).
Believe me, I understand having to budget one's self for this kind of entertainment.
This is a BIG issue for me, and I think I might start a thread in our forum about it: the concept of value in light of the Internet, and how ideas of value have changed dramatically in the last few decades.
Sorry, mate! You're right, and I was just being an (_!_)
|
09-19-15 08:01pm
|
Reply
106
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
And, lest I be accused of not having to care about money - in my current job I make 19 cents above Arizona's minimum wage, and I have to share digs with my brother to make ends meet.
Also should note: I'm aware that works in the public domain can be downloaded for free on any number of sites in any number of file types.
Sorry, this is an obvious sore spot for me.
|
09-18-15 02:32am
|
Reply
107
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
The idea that 30 dollars is considered "expensive" for a month's access to a HUGE amount of adult entertainment - that would have cost you thousands and thousands of dollars a relatively short time ago (say twenty years - if they even had content this good then, which they obviously didn't) - is proof to me of just how jaded people are becoming, and how upside down the concept of value has become in these modern times.
Another example is, and this is just one - Amazon Kindle. I can download enough classic literature to last me a hundred lifetimes for FREE. Or, if I want tables of contents and other nifty things, I can pony up a dollar, or two dollars, for the complete works of Thomas Hardy, Charles Dickens, Aquinas, Chaucer, Shakespeare, etc. BUT - if I want to download a modern-day piece of literary ephemera - any one of a thousand crime novels, romance novels, fantasy/sci-fi novels, self-help books, etc, I will pay at least ten to fifteen dollars. The worst part is, the more useless the book, the more expensive it is - say for instance some university-educated simpleton's book-length navel-gazing excreta about the poetry of Derek Walcott (one of the greatest living English-language poets) sells on Amazon for upwards of two hundred dollars - if you want the "prestigious" cheaply-printed hard or soft cover - while the actual poetry of Derek Walcott sells for the price of your average crappy dimestore-quality "best-seller".
Not to single you out, like2fireone, but 30 dollars for ANY high quality content of this nature is highway robbery, and it's YOU robbing THEM, not the other way 'round.
|
09-18-15 02:23am
|
Reply
108
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
sorry - double posted.
|
09-18-15 02:22am
|
Review
109
|
Full Bush
(0)
65.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- A lot of content on offer.
- Several good pic sets.
- Zips, but see cons. |
| Cons: |
- No browse features, zero, nada (see BL).
- Small pics: 684x1024 is about the largest.
- Site is still updated, but with sets dating from 2004. This is bullshit.
- Zips for each page within sets instead of all in one. As these sets are dinky in size this is also bullshit.
- Vids look lousy in mpeg or in wmv format, and are sliced into three minute bits. Can't tell you the bitrate since my Realplayer program died and Windows media player doesn't indicate it.
- Some sets are also from Aunt Judy's. |
| Bottom Line: |
Here's the kicker, folks: On the tour you get search options: you can look at the list of models, and/or search by letter. On the member's page, however, you get nothing of the sort. All the member's area offers is a single page with a giant list of text links for both pics and vids. Good luck if, like me, you were planning on searching for the work of a few photographers whose work you admire, or for a few particular models you've always liked.
What possible reason could there be to include search options in a guest tour and leave them out in the site proper? This is just plain stupid. Stupid or lazy. Or both. Okay, both.
To add insult to injury, the site is updating with material that is at least four years old, as far as I can see, and the material is NOT high quality. Some sets have been imported from Aunt Judy's and, I would guess, from other company sites as well. Not much effort has been put into this site and it is far too expensive.
Some of the material is good enough that I would recommend a membership IF:
The welcome page sold the site as an unsearchable and dead-plain archive of older and sub-par material, and if the price were cut in half. Short of these two things, Full Bush is pretty much a waste of time and money. |
|
05-30-08 09:44pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
110
|
G Queen
(0)
|
Reply of
lurifax's Reply
This may be a bit late, but:
I never noticed the DL limit. I would have mentioned it, had I been aware of it.
|
07-03-09 12:42am
|
Review
111
|
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)
|
Comment
112
|
G Queen
(0)
|
|
11-05-08 09:25pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
113
|
Gagging Whores
(0)
|
Reply of
Lionheart's Review
I retract what I said above. I sometimes forget that some women are actually into this kind of thing. As long as everyone's an adult and it's all consensual than my "sickening" comment doesn't apply. Thanks for the review, Lionheart, and apologies.
WWW
|
04-23-08 09:09pm
|
Reply
114
|
Gagging Whores
(0)
|
Reply of
Lionheart's Review
Sounds sickening to me. But each to his own.
|
04-22-08 06:55pm
|
Reply
115
|
Gapeland
(0)
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Comment
Where the fuck do they find these beefed up thugs? How the fuck can a man with an endowment like that brutalize a woman in such a way? These thugs are like animals. Is this the only way these poor girls can make a living? Fuck these gorillas and their sickening, psychotic energy. Disgusting.
|
11-18-10 07:20pm
|
Reply
116
|
Gapeland
(0)
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Comment
This shit is worrisome. What the fuck is going on in a man's mind who gets turned on watching shit like this?
|
11-18-10 07:13pm
|
Reply
117
|
Girls Out West
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Review
Good review. I might check it out in the future.
|
05-08-08 05:55pm
|
Reply
118
|
Girls Planet
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
I asked admins to delete my review, and I deleted my comment here myself.
|
12-12-08 05:46pm
|
Reply
119
|
Graphis
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
No, I haven't joined. I won't be joining any sites for the indefinite future, as my interest in sex and even self-pleasure as waned considerably over the past year.
|
06-18-10 03:51pm
|
Reply
120
|
Graphis
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
Okay, thanks, jd.
|
11-14-09 09:08pm
|
Reply
121
|
Graphis
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Comment
Hi jd,
Thanks for the heads up, as this site is the next one I will sign up with, and probably soon. The headshots alone show me the girls are drop-dead gorgeous here. For me, the face is of prime importance.
TBP site facts state a higher rez for video, but I realize they list the highest offered. I can't watch 1280 vids because my PC can't handle them. Is each vid offered in multiple formats, or is it just that some are larger, some smaller? I will be happy if enough vids are offered at 640x480.
I'm not too crazy about their point system, but I'm sure it's not as bad as one particular site I joined where they rotated content and kept only a tiny amount of material available per month (we're talking about twenty pic sets and a handful of videos, and for 40 USD a month, no less).
|
11-08-09 02:26pm
|
Reply
122
|
Hegre Art
(0)
|
Reply of
JBDICK's Review
I agree with Denner. These are excellent reviews.
I've avoided these artsy sites like the plague though I suppose I might join one at some point. I appreciate the difference between art and dirty pictures, but while I like art, I'd rather spend my money on dirty pictures. The former has the greater virtue, but I'm addicted to the latter. Ah well...
|
04-11-08 06:50pm
|
Review
123
|
Idols 69
(0)
90.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Overall, the most beautiful models I've seen on any site, bar none.
- Virtually no tats or fake breasts (I have seen none thus far).
- Tons of video content, and plenty of picture content, all excellent quality. Pics avg. at 850x1215, some smaller, some larger; HQ vids are usually 720x480, various bitrates.
- All pics zipped. Even vidcap-sets from videos are zipped.
- Three video DL formats: low, medium, high. |
| Cons: |
- Pics are named by number, same for each set, causing the need to re-name if you are not just taking the zipfiles.
-Pics open in new window, causing the need to contantly close it out. No nav features to avoid this as far as I can see.
- Vids dwell too much on groping, molesting, and too many vibrators, toys.
- Categories sometimes useless. I clicked "handjobs" for instance, and saw no handjob related pics or vids in what came up.
- Video is censored, though there is an uncensored section. The vagina is blurred out in the pictures also, as is all penis/penetration. Anus is okay (pictures of, not penetration), however. Hmm. I guess because we've all got one. But mine's not nearly as cute as the ones on these ladies, and I bet yours aint either.
- Pics are not being updated. If they were, I would remain a member indefinitely. |
| Bottom Line: |
I don't have enough characters to do justice to the jaw-dropping beauty of these models. I know it's a subjective thing, but I find myself just totally blown away by these girls, devastated sometimes. Part of this is due to the excellence of the photographers. The Japanese are the best at this, hands down.
Pic sets are non-linear and keep interest by showng the girl in various dress, settings. By and large the over-all atmosphere is sophisticated and decidedly non-trashy. This is NOT trailer-park porn, and these are not amateurs.
I've only downloaded a handful of videos, but if you are into a woman being brought to orgasm, especially by a plethora of vibrators and gadgets, then you might want to give this site a go. The girls are either very good actresses or they are genuinely getting off. It seems like the latter to me, though since these are pros, anything is possible. I haven't seen enough vids to give a comprehensive assessment of them, and please take my comments in that light.
After having surfed the adult web for eight years, and having looked at thousands of different types of models, I can safely state at this time that my dream girl is Japanese. I can't say enough about how beautiful the models here are.
Apologies for this mostly subjective review. |
|
10-22-09 06:16pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
124
|
Idols 69
(0)
|
Reply of
alexmedia's Review
Thanks for the review, axel. BUT, all of the photo sets (that I've seen thus far) are zipped at this point.
And yes, the models! Hot and sexy just doesn't cover it for some of these girls. Many of them are so beautiful I just shake my head and say "My God" over and over...
|
09-29-09 10:23pm
|
Comment
125
|
Idols 69
(0)
|
|
09-29-09 10:14pm
Replies (1)
|
|
