| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
276
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Yes, many--I know I definitely use too much brainpower thinking about it.
|
01-31-11 07:32pm
|
Reply
277
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
Do you ever wonder why so many people seem to find human breast milk weird or gross but cow milk and cheese (most likely from a cow you'll never even meet!) as perfectly normal?
Though come to think of it I haven't met a woman who likes being milked--go figure. Damn, is it really this hard to just get some calcium in my diet?! : - (
|
01-26-11 09:44pm
|
Reply
278
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
Over-eating, because it's the only vice or "addiction" that we celebrate so universally, and along with gambling it's the only one listed here that you can really dive into so deeply as a form of recreation.
Frankly, I think it's hypocritical the way we demonize some things as purely evil--weed, coke, porn, sex--while we shovel bioengineered garbage down our throats and call it lunch. I don't think we should outlaw junk food (how else would we know our medical marijuana is working?) but don't turn around and tell me it's perfectly harmless or somehow morally superior to whatever substance makes someone else's body feel good.
|
01-14-11 03:07am
|
Reply
279
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Reply
If porn wins it's probably not a "hands-down" win. ; - )
|
01-14-11 02:56am
|
Reply
280
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Not really, because unless they are backed up with specifics it makes reviewers sound like they're parroting market terms for the site.
And even if something really is in HD is it even interesting or shot well enough for me to care? Kinda like Michael Bay being one of the early supporters of Blu-Ray--if it's his movies I'm watching no format is going to be able to improve it.
|
01-02-11 09:05pm
|
Reply
281
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I should be finishing school this year...so hopefully I'll be joining less (if it was more it might mean that I have too much time on my hands).
|
12-31-10 12:16pm
|
Reply
282
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
I don't consider myself "old" (or "'ol") though definitely dirty, so it's only a minor putdown. But pretty much all older males are dirty ol' men so it's not much of a putdown.
|
12-27-10 11:52am
|
Reply
283
|
N/A
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
Lol! Also, see the 40-Year-Old Virgin.
"break your jaw" Hmm...I feel sorry for your girlfriend. : - (
|
12-21-10 04:22pm
|
Reply
284
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Whatever cup size I can fit in my hands! ; - )
I'd say a C would be a pretty good size though--not spine-straining huge, but not so small that she might end up feeling inadequate if I ever grow man-boobs (or "muscles"...).
|
12-14-10 02:28am
|
Reply
285
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
I think I missed the point of the poll as I don't find food sexy. : - (
|
12-07-10 05:45pm
|
Reply
286
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
I wouldn't force anyone to do anything with anyone that they weren't comfortable with...but I doubt I'd be married, engaged, or celibate if I was running such a site (plus I'd assume I wouldn't have time for such outside-of-work relationships).
|
12-03-10 01:39pm
|
Reply
287
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
I'm sure for some that's the criterion. Most Playboy centerfolds could be considered fully nude even the photos are not explicit (and as long as jewelry doesn't count).
I believe R-rated films can show 100% naked fully nude but not "good parts" fully nude--no boners, no pink, no stink--and I'm sure the vast majority of directors don't even think of challenging that.
And it's also the difference between the artsy nude sites that so many like here at PU and the harder girls-only "good parts" ones.
|
12-01-10 11:54am
|
Reply
288
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Hey, it's only self-abuse if it's done properly! ; - )
And in my view it's wrong if women don't masturbate. I mean how can you look at a beautiful woman and not think "She's just gotta touch that body--it's a temple!"
Of course I would also argue that if a person thinks masturbation or homosexuality--or simply "being" a certain sexual orientation--is abnormal or abusive then they are the ones with the mental disease. In fact both masturbation and homosexuality are found throughout the animal kingdom, and I'm not talking just primates either. Probably makes living life as an animal a little easier to stand--and all with no parent or religious figure to castigate them for it.
Plus, if there's a god, why would he (or she) frown upon masturbation when he made it so easy for so many humans to do? Not to mention why did he let humans create so much porn and sex toys to assist in said sin?
|
11-30-10 04:00pm
|
Reply
289
|
N/A
|
Reply of
jberryl69's Reply
I think solo porn can be pretty respectful, though that pretty much leaves the women to masturbate and play with themselves--that's not disrespectful is it? Girl-girl/lesbian porn can be pretty respectful too, though that can easily devolve into what can be considered degrading and objectifying.
|
11-30-10 01:04am
|
Reply
290
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
I say "Hair-pulling and choking" because they sound the most painful and certainly the most dangerous to me (I don't know what exactly was meant by "Roughneck and jerking around," though they could be worse). I've never been into the whole choking thing, especially when it's being done to a smaller partner by some creepy He-Man with a boner.
Seriously, of all the "abuse" on this list what else can go too far and fucking kill someone?! Can you curse someone to death, or spit them into an early grave? I'm sure one day some rough handling will cause a serious injury when someone on a set slips in a puddle of some mysterious body fluid and drops the other actor onto a nearby coffee table or tile floor. Maybe they will then drop the whole wrestling act.
I really hate spitting too, but only when it's in the face and then it's just being rude. If it's not in the face I don't find it abusive.
|
11-30-10 12:54am
|
Reply
291
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
You know, about ten years ago I would have said "Red please," then a few years later "anything but blonde!" but now I really do not care. Because every time I think I have settled on a favorite hair color I see a new angel with a different color and I realize it doesn't really matter.
All I really prefer is they don't shave their head à la Sigourney Weaver in Alien 3, but she even looked good with hair that short while battling monsters in some futuristic hellscape. Or Natalie Portman in V for Vendetta, or Belladonna, or...okay, apparently super short hair turns me on too!
|
11-28-10 08:28pm
|
Reply
292
|
N/A
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Reply
Yeah, it's usually the blood in your veins that knocks you off your feet--otherwise you need to ask your doctor whether Viagra or Cialis is right for you. ; - )
|
11-28-10 08:13pm
|
Reply
293
|
N/A
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
You're right there are decades of 1.85:1 and similarly wide aspect ratios of films, but there are some 4:3 films (silent era) or 1.33:1. Later films widened a bit to 1.37:1 which looks very close to a SD fullscreen 4:3 TV so it gets confusing (1.37:1 should have a little bit of letterboxing).
Interestingly I remember a few widescreen "standard" definition TVs back in the 1990s before most consumers ever got wind of the coming HD formats. I guess the point of those sets were for the letterboxed VHS and DVD movies though TV signals and video games of the time would be boxed in with vertical bars--not much of an advantage if you ask me.
The number of different film formats is really crazy, though given a century of film it's understandable. Makes the number of formats in only a few recent decades of porn seem not so bad after all...until one won't play on your computer!
|
11-27-10 12:49pm
|
Reply
294
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
I would answer "other" if it was an option but I say "I prefer it a bit more" since widescreen today usually means a true HD video or at least coming from an HD source (or in the ultra rare case, actual film).
Bottom line is I want to watch my videos in whatever aspect ratio they were originally shot in, even if that's whatever the cameraman or whoever happened to switch it to that day. Yes, even if I owned some ridiculously panoramic widescreen monitor I would still want to watch my SD/4:3 videos in their non-widescreen glory.
There are still a lot of great non-porn films in 4:3 that I would hate to see blown-up just so they could appear "fullscreen" on an HD display. Give me the black vertical bars if a film is 4:3 or the video is SD, please!
|
11-25-10 08:14pm
|
Reply
295
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Reply
"Smaller" is a relative term, as widescreen can look smaller on a standard definition monitor, i.e. 4:3 aspect ratio. However a standard definition video can look smaller on a widescreen monitor (most likely an HD monitor), whereas a widescreen video would be full screen on this monitor.
Yeah it's confusing (especially when I explain it), but it really depends on the aspect ratios of the video and the display. A 60 inch standard definition TV from the '90s would make any 4:3 video look huge, even if it's not technically as large pixel-wise as an HD 1080p video, which would be a 16:9 widescreen ratio.
And people insist size doesn't matter! : - O
|
11-25-10 07:55pm
|
Reply
296
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Reply
Then it can't be done on a company computer, or probably even on company property--using your own laptop you would likely still rely on their Internet connection.
I think it's a good rule of thumb to be overly paranoid anytime your on a public computer or using a computer in a public area. Yes, even in the privacy of your own office/cubicle/wherever you should assume something or someone is tracking your browser history and therefore your at-work porn appetite.
The intention is sound; people are at work to work, not goof off on 'tube sites or take care of their morning wood. Save for a few jobs your work probably doesn't involve going through porn videos or pics and it's best such activities remain at home.
|
11-23-10 07:20pm
|
Reply
297
|
N/A
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
Have you ever checked the link on my signature? Secondhand smut is apparently a growing problem (insert erection joke here). Though I don't if people will be in the mood to check out a [ignore]Hustler[/ignore] after experiencing one of the new fingerbangin' TSA security pat downs. : - O
|
11-23-10 07:11pm
|
Reply
298
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
But I don't have a daughter--what do I do?
I guess if this sort of situation ever did ever arise in real life I would first have to ask the most pressing question: is her dad big enough to beat me up?
|
11-19-10 06:34pm
|
Reply
299
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
Yeah, I agree here, and I'd probably throw a tantrum while I'm at it.
"Unavoidably" better mean the police have arrived at my doorstep just to "look around," but I tell them to come back when they have a search warrant. Like any responsible citizen I patiently wait for them to return--while wiping the hell out of my hard drives as fast as I can click my mouse. I can only hope a police officer thinking "I smell porn in these here parts" is not considered an exigent circumstance...though they'd probably have busted down my door a long time ago if it was. (Gee, am I paranoid or what?)
Knowing my luck they'd return with a warrant that doesn't include going through my computers--d'oh! : - (
|
11-13-10 05:08pm
|
Reply
300
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
I would go get me some real girls...and make my own porn! ; - )
I would also probably join more sites just to help the economy though.
|
11-03-10 01:56pm
|
