I joined In The Crack at $35 -- but I felt it was well worth the price for one great month of downloading. : ) They are the kind of site I join no more than once a year, so one month at that price is not too bad.
Normally I max out around $25 or $30 for a month's membership, and usually do not have the urge to rejoin either, even with lower offers.
"Community standards" can be an extremely dangerous defense, and it can also be blamed for making a lot of American porn only come from one or two places in the entire country (southern Florida being one of them).
These sacred "standards" -- if that even means anything -- could vary greatly from community to community, and could apply to all sorts of material in porn. What if interracial is frowned upon? How about MILF porn, or anything that involves models that vary greatly in age? Hell, why not ban material if the producers don't use energy efficient lighting or recycle properly? If anything might possibly offend anyone at anytime for any reason whatsoever just make it illegal!
Lol. Yeah, I am not exactly sure why they are singled out, but there are probably a few offended members.
I would love to visit Australia; warm weather and lots to see, plus being a dumb monolingual American I would not have to learn another language, though I am sure I would stick out like a sore thumb regardless. Maybe I should join Abbywinters a few times and learn about their women?
After Australia I would visit the Scandinavian countries just to see the natural beauty of the land. They seem to be one of the last places on Earth where humans are not coexisting with the land simply by destroying it.
I was checking out the price of those premium channels -- $18! Considering a regular membership, with its access to so many DVDs, starts at $10, I cannot believe that people would really want an extra channel for that much cash. Does Evil Angel = evil price?
Normal movies because they keep re-releasing them in infinite editions, plus all the times they show them on TV, whereas porn seems to be too often limited; miss something and you might never see it again!
I spent 3 1/2 years in the military and saying that they have some antiquated and intolerant policies is a considerable understatement.
Because of my job, I was in a combat unit (all male), and, yes, you could say being straight was a requirement. In fact, being outright homophobic, misogynistic, racist, and just generally intolerant were all pretty standard. I understand people when they say "well, that's just the culture" or "it's to be expected," but there is simply no excuse for intolerant policies in what we so loudly like to tout as a "free" country.
I think part of the problem is people confuse sexual identity for sexual aggression; that is, someone who is gay is supposedly more sexual than someone who is straight. It is sort of like how some fear Islam is more violent than Christianity, but today many of the barriers to religious tolerance have come down, or are at least much lower than, say, during WWII or even Vietnam.
I am afraid I don't know what the best solution is, though getting rid of the stopgap non-solution of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is a good start. The military has been ahead of civilian changes in social policy in the U.S. in the past -- like starting desegregation before civilian institutions did -- but sexuality, and our obsession with it, has a long way to go.
I have to say Europe after having lived there for a few years...the porn is not just the "hottest," but some of the most different as well. It is not just the depth, but the breadth of material that is amazing, and how relatively equally distributed it is compared to North America. We have loads of "mainstream" mass-produced porn available here in the U.S., much of which is professionally shot and captured, but not necessarily the hottest.
I would say Asia (or just Japan) is second only because it is a single country and it is censored.
Though they don't really offer a lot to sample, I love how you can browse through their whole collection for free and read the video descriptions. I still check their site to see which videos have certain material when I am about to watch them. I just wish they would say what is also included in the photoshoot section (might entice me to join again, since I do love their photography).
Yes, you definitely get your money's worth for the first month, but after that it seems like a small discount or something would be in order if you were to continue as a member.
Their content does seem like a pretty good investment though, because even as HD video and hi-res photos become the standard, their older stuff is still unique enough and decently shot to be worth saving.
Thanks to PU, as well as the fact that I am still going to the bigger reputable sites with lots of good reviews, I have an average score of 84.6.
As others have said, we all have our own tastes and I try to steer clear of the sites that just don't interest me, no matter how high their average score is.
Yes, I was surprised mbaya did not mention price in his review -- $35 is not exactly cheap, despite how beautiful their content is. Even if they had better search functions, I would still give them a score in the 80s with their current price.
Yes, and I have, though the majority of models at most sites seem to be white American or European.
My question: is anyone really concerned whether their porn is interracial or not, because I only really want to see the girl, I don't care if she and the guy are "mixed."
That sucks, I get looks for some of the shirts I wear too, and they are only related to music, not porn.
I am still more on the anonymous side of wearing a PU shirt, as American culture is still way too hung up on fashion. I really do not care what people wear, as long as they are comfortable, but if I was to be offended by something, it would be a logo of a large corporation (pretty much any would do) or even a government organization, long before any band or porn site.
Justification for a high score, as well as lots of exclamation points, is what reviews should be about. We are all biased in some way or another, but I think a 100 or 99 can be validated, especially with the higher character counts that are allowed for reviews.
These reviews barely even read as advertisements, they just come across like every spam subject line we have had to read as we empty out the junk mail folder.
Is there a way to temporarily block reviews for this site until the flood of enthusiasm recedes some?
Hmm...this is the third review in just as many days for the same site, and the scores from these three range from 99 to 100. They are also all by three brand new users who have joined PU in the last few days and only reviewed this site.
If it wasn't for the newbie ratings, super high scores, and countless exclamation points, I might consider these to be at least somewhat legitimate.
Maybe I am wrong, and this site has gotten really popular in the last few days.
A beautiful setting can help, but sometimes it can be distracting because it is so overwhelming visually. For example, almost every beach scene I was taken in by the setting well before the girl or action. It definitely helps to have a nice set, but it has to complement, not compete with, the main action.
This also applies to more amateur looking settings; if there is a lot in the background it could draw people's attention away from the subject. Ever look at photos or watch a video, but you kept focusing on something in the background instead? (This is part of the reason why I don't enjoy public nudity or sex, too much going on in the background.)
I like simple, clean, but not overly luxurious settings. Seeing mansion after mansion, or paradise after paradise, emphasizes the fantasy aspect too much for my tastes. I also don't like the studio backdrops that a lot of photographers use -- too boring. Somewhere in the middle are the good settings.
Yeah, I am really lost as to what he or she is referring to. Maybe it is someone who works for the site (but I doubt it) or a really enthusiastic fan...either way I still hate the anonymous ratings, even with comments.
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.
