Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Forum Our new user message board where users talk porn!
Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History

Post History: hodayathink (18)

Filtering Options Select Option
Keyword Search
     Find within...  
View Options All Posts (312)  |   Threads Started (3)

1-50 of 312 Posts Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page >

08-25-13  01:18am - 480 days Pay Pal Porn now approved for use ?? (15 Posts) - #9
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by RagingBuddhist:


More hypocrisy from the United States. Porn is big business here - we just don't want to appear to condone it. I wouldn't expect PayPal/eBay to roll over any time soon, if at all.


That's not the main reason Paypal doesn't allow you adult content. Paypal doesn't allow people to use it to pay for porn because porn has pretty much the highest chargeback rate (i.e. people asking banks/credit card companies to reverse the charges) of any other online transaction. And those chargebacks cost Paypal money each time. So they'd just rather not deal with it.

08-15-13  06:43pm - 490 days Another syphilis outbreak. (40 Posts) - #15
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by pat362:


Although you are correct on all front. You are basing your info on your average person who does not have sex with strangers on a regular basis and more importantly has not contacted multiple std's in their life. This last part is why Hep C is more dangerous for porn performers because this is the dark secret that is never spoken about. Most of them have had more than one std in their career and they are therefore more susceptible to catching something like Hep C.


Actually, I would argue that a performer is more likely to catch something like Hep C because tearing (vaginal or anal) is much more likely to happen during a porn scene than it is during regular sex due to various things like the size of the average porn penis, the length of the sex, and the style of sex being had (generally speaking, as deep and as fast as possible). Though previous STD might increase the likelihood somewhat, it wouldn't be as much as those factors.

08-14-13  08:09pm - 491 days Another syphilis outbreak. (40 Posts) - #12
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by RagingBuddhist:


"...I don't trust Mike South to present any news in a way that is unbiased."

He doesn't work for Fox news, does he?


He does get legitimate inside news, but he will always present it with his own little spin, making sure that it furthers his ideas of what is going on, or what needs to happen.

And Hepatitis C is not an STD. It can be passed by sex in some instances, and you probably shouldn't be performing with, but it is not, by definition, a sexually transmitted disease. To me, calling it an STD would be like calling the flu an STD.

08-06-13  09:56pm - 499 days Another syphilis outbreak. (40 Posts) - #2
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
I don't care how "inside" he is, I don't trust Mike South to present any news in a way that is unbiased.

05-24-13  06:16pm - 573 days Fake and Shaved (23 Posts) - #20
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by Cybertoad:


Anyone every look at nudes from the pre-1800 painints?
Men were over weight often and women are by todays standards overweight. Back then it was a sign of sexuality and power to be over weight. IT was a turn on to men and women. It meant you had wealth and power and land, all are attractive today. but slimming down is also sign of health and strong genes for children.



It was attractive because poor people couldn't afford to eat. They were skinny not by choice, but by force. Nowadays, the majority of people in first world countries don't have to worry about that, so it isn't attractive anymore. So it was never attractive aesthetically, it was just a symbol for something else attractive.

05-03-13  04:34pm - 594 days Impressive Male Porn Stars? (9 Posts) - #7
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by messmer:


James Deen is one of the few male porn stars I can tolerate. And to satisfy the original poster, I have also seen him do some rough porn, either at Kink.com or at Brazzers (Porn Stars Punishment .. now deleted from the site.)

I seem to recollect reading somewhere that he is doing some crossing over into "main stream," either TV or movies, I can't remember which.


Movies, mostly. Specifically one movie with Lindsay Lohan called "The Canyons". That's lead to other, smaller things like speaking appearances and music videos and stuff.

Edit: And a person that I would add to the discussion is Manuel Ferrara. IIRC, he worked with Rocco in the late 90s, then came to the US and has been here ever since.

04-02-13  04:26pm - 625 days A Note from Khan (50 Posts) - #8
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Best wishes.

03-31-13  04:13pm - 627 days Pay for previewing? (28 Posts) - #21
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by Ed2009:


I suspect you're going to see more sites keeping all hardcore content strictly inside pay areas. Law changes in several parts of the world are making adult sites more and more wary. I know some sites are talking about no longer allowing bank cards and limiting to credit cards only to comply with new age verification requirements. Free trials will have to go too.


You mean this isn't just about nickel and diming people? Who would have thought.

03-22-13  12:28am - 637 days 'Deep Throat' star Harry Reems dies at 65 (14 Posts) - #8
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


""Deep Throat" was the first porn film widely shown in theatres and made an estimated $600 million at the box office -- although Reems claimed he only received $800 for his role."

Only received? Isn't this standard for any performer?


Porn performer, yes. But in real acting, there's this thing called residuals, where you get a cut of the money that a movie makes. There's a base amount negotiated by the Screen Actors Guild, but if you're a big star you can negotiate it yourself.

03-17-13  08:21pm - 641 days Plastic Surgery: Ruined Pornstars? (25 Posts) - #19
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by RagingBuddhist:



I find this transformation disgusting



That picture is exactly my point with Jenna. Her sunken-in face isn't the result of plastic surgery. It's the result of the loss of a lot of weight. If you can ever find pictures from around the same time as that after picture, look at her arms in them.

Edit: And that's completely ignoring the fact that one of those pictures is heavily touched up and the other one isn't. Edited on Mar 17, 2013, 08:29pm

03-17-13  10:42am - 641 days Plastic Surgery: Ruined Pornstars? (25 Posts) - #12
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by pat362:


Are you saying that Aletta looks better after the surgery or is it the opposite?


I'm saying Aletta looks better before surgery than after.

Even with someone like Jenna, it's not like she'd never had plastic surgery before she became big (I might be wrong, but either he breasts have never been natural, or she got her first implants right when she started before anyone knew who she was). I liked the way she looked though most of her career, and even when it got less than appealing, I would argue it was more because of the weight that she had lost making all of her features look odd than it was purely the result of plastic surgery.

The point I was trying to make with my examples is that to me, ruined implies hideous, implies deformed, implies people don't like looking at you when they walk past because it makes them uncomfortable. That's why I brought up things like burns and reconstructive surgery. I don't mean that you shouldn't be able to not find a girl attractive because she changed herself in some way that you don't like. It's just that they're not deformed, they're not hideous, they're just less attractive (possibly to the point of unattractiveness).

03-17-13  01:18am - 641 days Plastic Surgery: Ruined Pornstars? (25 Posts) - #5
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
I absolutely hate it when people use the word ruined to describe a girl that got plastic surgery. It's entirely too strong a word to be used to describe a girl whom you find less attractive than you used to. People get ruined by getting burns over the majority of their body, by going through so much trauma that they need to have reconstructive surgery done. Breast implants? Lip injections? Nose jobs? Those are just inconveniences at worst.

And in case you're wondering, no I've never seen a girl ruined by surgery, and there are very few that I think looked definitively better before the surgery as opposed to after (Aletta Ocean is the only one I can think of at the moment).

03-12-13  03:26pm - 646 days UltraHD porn (9 Posts) - #7
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Almost no one shoots porn with 4K capable cameras at this point (you may have a feature or two shot with RED cameras, but that's it), and even if they did, you'd be looking at 4GB for a 20-30 minute scene, and no monitor that costs less than 5,000 (and no TV less than 10K) to play it on. It's entirely too much of a niche market for anyone to actually be using anytime soon.

As an aside, truthfully, what I'm looking forward to for 4K cameras is better image stabilization for 1080p POV videos.

03-11-13  08:56pm - 647 days I hate tattoos, but maybe I will get one myself. Why? Am I crazy? (8 Posts) - #3
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by Capn:


Surely, to be effective, it would have to be in a place where you could see it?

Unlike the photo in the article.

Cap'n.


Nope. Hook the sensors up to a small amount of storage and a wireless module, be able to see the information they spit out on any wireless device.

Edit: For example, have it connect to a special wrist watch that can show you the reading and throw some kind of alert if anything gets to a dangerous level (i.e. blood sugar for diabetics). Edited on Mar 11, 2013, 09:02pm

02-16-13  02:19pm - 670 days The Truth About Pornstars? (5 Posts) - #2
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
The biggest problem with IAFD as a data source for all porn scenes, especially when it comes to the last 5-10 years, is that they don't include any internet scene that hasn't come out on DVD. Which can make it thoroughly incomplete when it comes to things like number of scenes shot, and number of partners.

02-14-13  10:46pm - 672 days Porn Influencing Main Stream (11 Posts) - #11
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


Don't forget the longer term commitments that have influences from porn; the nipple and genital piercings, the tramp stamps, and all those crazy (i.e., unnecessary bullshit) genital cosmetic surgeries. I don't think all this came from girls just sitting around and seeing who could come up with the most creative things to do with the female body.


I disagree primarily because I think that when it comes to body modifications, I don't think porn influences mainstream as much as it is influenced (or steered) by it. Tramp stamps (or, honestly, all tattoos on women), for example, didn't become popular in the real world because they became popular in porn. The truth is that they became popular in the real world first for the type of woman most likely to get into porn (young, rebellious, from lower income households, with the propensity for rash decisions), and therefore became prevalent in the industry. Same thing with body piercings.

02-11-13  12:23am - 675 days Real college boys with pro girls? (3 Posts) - #3
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by BabyGetReal:


Can anyone tell me a site that has videos of real college guys with pro girls? I like the sometimes flustered innocence of the college guys. There were a few a while back on ShanesWorld, very nice. Especially a few where college guys won a fuck with a pro girl. But most of the stuff on that site is typical boring stuff. I found a couple of free clips but they don't identify the site. Thanks for any suggestions!


The closest you'll find is probably something like Fuck Team Five from Bangbros. While they will sometimes bring in ringers (pro guys), I know from the girls that many of their scenes actually feature amateur male talent.

02-07-13  03:25pm - 679 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #121
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


^ sorry dude, every example fits the definition.

1. The act or practice of engaging in sex acts for hire.

That's pretty clear I think. Now, if you want to debate what a "sex act" is, talk to Brandon Iron, who when he sucks toes is having a sex act.


I had this long drawn out reply typed, but I'm just going to leave it at this:

The law disagrees with you. Which is why creating pornography is legal in some areas even though prostitution is not legal in those same areas.

02-07-13  01:10pm - 679 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #118
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:




Cybertoad says, �A Porn Star gets Paid for having Intercourse in front of the Camera and a Prostitute gets paid for having Intercourse in front of the Client.�

According to Jodi Taylor, a relatively newcomer, she's not a whore cause she enjoys it.
See her interview here - http://youtu.be/9PzPTCmcBHw -

At the 6 min mark she explains her reality. It never ceases to amaze me how people justify their actions by tilting the world to suit them.

Oh, and I'm glad she enjoys having sex on camera but it makes her no less delusional.


It not that simple. And I'll give you a couple examples.

If a girl only has sex on camera with her significant other, does that make her a prostitute? She's getting paid for it, but generally speaking it's something she was doing anyway.

If a girl shoots porn, but only for her own website, is she still a prostitute? She's not getting paid directly for the act, but people are paying for the recordings she's making of it.

Basically, does the simple act of making money off of people watching you have sex make you a prostitute? Whether that's directly (being paid for the scene) or indirectly (people buying copies of your performance)? And don't get me started on movies that aren't porn. Do those not count because the actors are supposed to be pretending? What about sexual contact that doesn't actually include intercourse (because people pay for that, too)? What about the times when they aren't pretending? Is Chloe Sevigny a prostitute because of her scene in Brown Bunny?

02-07-13  02:08am - 679 days Connecting With Porn Insiders (7 Posts) - #2
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Have I talked to some? Yes. Have I even gotten girls casted and/or even a scene or two made based off of a scenario I wrote? Yes. Do I feel like if I were to have an idea for an entire movie, I could go to someone who would actually make it? Not really (although it technically happened once, it was for a compilation, not a movie of new scenes).

02-05-13  08:23am - 681 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #105
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:




Little? I'm not sure what you mean by "little". If you mean do I think they exert on the models changes in certain physical attributes then yes, I believe that could be the case, but I don't think by asking the question I'm belittling them. Why do you?


I meant do you really think some director looked at Angelina Valentine and said "Hey, why don't you get 1000cc breast implants and get your lips injected so many times it looks like you can't fully close your mouth anymore?"

Also, you give the directors way too much credit when it comes to plastic surgery. From listening to and reading, literally, hundreds of girls, they get these surgeries because they want to have them. Many of them wanted to have them since before they even got into the industry, they just didn't have the resources to do so. If a girl does it because she wants more work, it's generally not because a specific person (or people) told her that she should get it, but a general idea she gets when she looks around the industry and sees places like Brazzers.

02-04-13  09:06pm - 682 days ROKU (10 Posts) - #10
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by Dracula:


Slow motion would sure be nice, but no, it's the basic play/rewind/fast forward(3 speeds), pause and stop. It is a great porn viewer though. For me being able to watch porn on TV sure beats the PC and a whole lot cheaper than Cable TV.

We need more porn sites to offer Roku.

How do you manage internet streaming using the PC? Can you hook the PC up to your TV? Do you have to use a mouse to manage the controls? What if you don't have a laptop?


Keyboard shortcuts with the occasional mouse input. And many current graphics cards have an HDMI port (for desktops) and many laptops do as well. I actually have my PC hooked up to a monitor and TV at the same time, so I can decide what I want to watch it on.

02-04-13  07:34pm - 682 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #103
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


^ Do you think it is porn directors that tell the they HAVE to it?


You really think that little of porn directors?

02-04-13  03:28pm - 682 days Porn Star gone political activist? (49 Posts) - #17
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


That still won't change her date of birth, unless she's been lying about her age (a career-killing risk in the post-Traci Lords world of porn), which her IAFD page lists as August 8, 1993.


IAFD isn't a perfect way to find out the age of a performer. They've been wrong before, and will be wrong again. It's not actually filled out by anyone who would have actually seen her ID with her date of birth on it.

02-04-13  12:49pm - 682 days Porn Star gone political activist? (49 Posts) - #14
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Entertainers are people. People have political opinions. People express those political opinions. None of these things should be strange or weird. Or discouraged either, but that's another discussion for another day (the discussion being the objectification of adult performers to the point where it's a strange thing that they act like normal people).

In fact, it would make sense for her to share her political beliefs after she retires, because she doesn't need to worry about upsetting fans anymore.

02-03-13  11:11pm - 683 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #99
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by pat362:


Now girls can hope to make 20,000$ to maybe 30,000$ but they will have to be open to almost anything to make that kind of money. The old glamour, solo. g/g and basic b/g stuff isn't enough anymore to make decent money.


20 to 30 thousand a year? I don't think so, not for a new girl who is attractive. With going rates for scenes, it would only take about 35-45 b/g scenes (using the Kink.com rate of 700-900 per scene minus the 10-20% cut your agent takes) to get into that range, and a new girl can generally get that many scenes in about 3-4 months (at 4 months, that's only a little above two scenes a week), not to mention any other solo or photoshoot work they might get. And, if you are, say, Mia Malkova, you can probably make a good 100-150K in your first year if you play your cards right. The truth of that matter is that while it isn't a high paying job (or as much of a high paying job as it used to be), for many of the girls it pays better than most jobs they would have gotten with their level of education and prior work history (especially the younger ones).

02-02-13  12:02am - 685 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #92
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
As long as we're sharing great breasts in this thread, I'm gonna share April O'Neil:


01-31-13  11:47pm - 686 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #85
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


I've seen several models with shaved heads recently - I figure it's one of two things - they donated it to charity or they have nits they needed to treat.

Lily might have done it to remove this color:




She said that was one of the reasons, too. Actually, she said she did the blue knowing that she was going to cut if off afterwards.

01-31-13  07:49pm - 686 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #83
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by pat362:


I also like Lily's breast but they are all natural so she doesn't really belong in a thread dedicated to fake ones but thanks for the pics. It helps us go through the bad ones.

P.S: Have any of you guys seen Lily's more recent hair cut?


She shaved her head. Honestly, it's just hair, it will grow back, and as far as I know she actually hasn't even shot a scene since she cut it.

01-30-13  11:57pm - 687 days 3D porn? (19 Posts) - #10
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Glasses free 3D (that isn't head mounted) will not be here for at least another 5 years, and when it does, I hope you don't want to move anywhere in the room while you're watching it. The technology technically exists, but not in any way that's actually ready to sell to consumers.

01-28-13  11:39pm - 689 days I wish (********) was a porn star. (95 Posts) - #62
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


Okay, I'm going to add a couple to the list. They're not my top ones, but just mainstream actresses who I find pretty attractive and have not, at least as far as I know, done nude scenes.

- Jill Hennessy Former Law & Order girl, probably best known for her titular role on Crossing Jordan. Also, has an identical twin sister, who played a small part with her in the truly weird Dead Ringers as twin escorts, (where Jeremy Irons played a dual role as twin brother gynecologists!), though don't ask me who is who in that clip.

- Carey Lowell Also former Law & Order girl, and a brunette. Oh, and she was Bond girl Pam Bouvier in Licence to Kill. What's not to like?


I'd take Angie Harmon over both of them.

01-28-13  07:27pm - 689 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #35
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by pat362:


^The question is how much of the porn you watch on Tube Sites or download from Torrent sites do you try and find so that you can pay for it? Or do you not bother.


Most of the stuff that I find that isn't obviously amateur content, I do try to figure out where it came from so that I can attempt to purchase it. And not even necessarily out of guilt. It's because if I already know that they produced a couple scenes that I liked, there's a good chance that if I figure out the original source, there will be even more content there that I like as well, that isn't up on whatever site I'm getting it from, and is probably available in a higher quality as well (especially since I almost never use torrents anymore). Also, with a tube site, there's always a chance that whatever clip is it that I like will be taken down by the content owner. If I can find the original source and download/purchase from there, I don't have to worry about that anymore.

Truthfully, nowadays a lot of what I watch there is either obviously amateur content, or content from 80s and 90s movies that may not be up on subscription sites (and even then I try to find out what movie it's from and see if I can find it on VOD sites). I don't go looking for specific content, I just browse around the site and click on whatever looks interesting. But while that makes it better, it doesn't necessarily make it justified. What grinds my gears, for lack of a better term, is people that believe that they are entitled to content just because it exists, and if they can't purchase it in exactly the way they want it, that makes it okay for them to take it.

01-28-13  09:36am - 689 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #56
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


Whatever happened to different strokes for different folks, regardless of whether or not it happens to be really popular at the moment?


I find this quote really, really funny in the fact that it's used in response to saying anyone who likes fake breasts must be "stuck in their infantile stage". If that's really what you think, you should preach it all the time, not just when you think it's convenient.

01-27-13  10:32pm - 690 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #33
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by bibo:


And conscientious anti-pirates like to think that it isn't the case. Guess that's a draw then?

Fact of the matter is, you don't know the figures, I don't know the figures and in fact: nobody knows the REAL figures, not even the companies. We just hear companies complaining and mourning their losses. It's the same game wherever you look, music, gaming, they have all been there, pretending to be the victims and - magically - they all managed to survive by finding alternative ways of distribution.



The crucial word here is "otherwise". What is otherwise? Otherwise as in "if copying data wasn't possible"? Or otherwise as in "if pirates would be punished harder"? Piracy is a fact, people do it and those people don't pay, there is no otheriwse. That's reality. Everything else is theory. Find a way to stop them and we might see prospering porn companies, but as long as you can't, we're discussing phantoms.


I know it took me a long time to answer this, but it's because I kinda forgot about it until today. I read some stuff about Mega (a new site from the creator of MegaUpload), and it reminded me of this thread.

The answer isn't to wipe out piracy, because there will always be ways to transmit large files over the internet. That's one of the biggest good things about the internet. And many times, those large files will be content covered by a copyright. The "otherwise" is to make it more difficult to pirate. Tube sites literally make it easy to the point of being trivial to pirate content. You literally just type what you're looking for and bam, it's right there, and you start playing it immediately.

I've been pirating content for well over a decade now. I go back to the days of LimeWire and KaZaa and WinMX and Direct Connect, when you had to download specific clients and then configure them and then search, and then you had to wait for your download to finish, and then you had to hope that the download was actually what it was supposed to be, because if it wasn't, you were going to have to download a whole 'nother copy and then check and see if that copy was correct. Not to mention people embedding any number of types of malware into the files. Torrenting made it easier, but you still generally had to wait for a download, there was still the chance that it wasn't what it said it was and the chance of downloading malware in addition to the file. Tube sites took all of those extra steps away and made it just as easy as going to the paysite itself, especially if you are the type of person that doesn't need to have the best quality video.

And in case you missed this in the rest of the paragraph, yes, I was, and still am, a pirate. Yes, I do occasionally still use tube sites. I generally do consider myself one of those "conscientious pirates". I just don't pretend that what I'm doing is okay, or justifiable. It's wrong, and I know it's wrong, but I choose to do it anyway.

01-23-13  08:50am - 694 days Fake breasts ... again! (129 Posts) - #40
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


I came across this person in a Yahoo article about Katherine Webb to compete on 'Celebrity Diving' - the article mentions Playboy model Kendra Wilkinson whom I'd never heard of, but being the curious soul I am, did a Google and found photos of her and then looked at Google's video's and found a 2003 home-made sex tape. She is of the vein of the Hilton & Richie "personalities".

Which brings me to WTF was she thinking that blowing those breasts up makes her more appealing?



Not having any hips, she looks .... bloated.


It worked enough to get her into Playboy, which in turn led to her becoming a full-fledged celebrity, so they made their money back many times over. Sometimes it's mainly a financial decision, and not a cosmetic one.

01-20-13  09:22pm - 697 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #32
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


Your response seems so counter intuitive to what happens in other industries. If Steve Jobs took that approach there would be no Apple. There were knockoffs but his ability to keep innovation up kept Apple in the forefront and they stayed on top of the cutting edge of technology. If porn producers want to stay on top then they need to do the same. It will be stale seaman if they don't, tube sites not withstanding. Tube sites will not kill porn, dull porn producers will.

At least in my humble opinion.


I disagree. If you really pay attention, it's not that no one is taking risks in porn. Risks are still being taken all the time. It's just that it's not up to the larger companies to do it anymore. Smaller companies take the risks, and if those risks prove successful, then the bigger companies copy the ideas and make them mainstream. I look at a company like Evil Angel and see a perfect example of that. I could even argue that that is actually what Apple does that keeps them successful. That what they do isn't necessarily innovate, but polish the heck out of other people's innovations and put a user-friendly UI on top of it.

Edit: Now that I've thought about this a little more, I'm going to caveat it with something. One of the other things I've noticed is that companies seem nearly incapable of playing the long game. If given the choice of definite short term profits or probable long term success, it seems like the large majority of them will choose the short-term option. Some of this is shown in practices that are thoroughly despised here (i.e. pre-checked cross selling, not allowing downloads immediately after joining), but it manifests even in their business deals with each other. Edited on Jan 20, 2013, 10:05pm

01-20-13  07:58pm - 697 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #29
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:




Pat - just curious if you think that some of the reduction in the number of studios and releases are because they (as a industry) over saturated the market with the same old crap? In following a jonni darkko thread, he asks a lot about what kind of movie to do next, like he doesn't really know what will sell.

I read where Messmer has money to spend on porn but doesn't know where to spend it. That points to the fact that producers can't figure out how to make "new" types of movies or scenes. It's like a formula and it's boring, even if it is gonzo.

It's just like when you watch a European scene, you can expect most of it to be anal with the multiple male talent into their usual hiss and awe mode - same thing with the females - god that gets old fast cause it's just as fake as breasts can be.

Of course this doesn't have anything to do with tube sites or intellectual property (if you can call it that) ripoffs, but just the general malaise of the industry.

I found it interesting that Jay Sin brought us Milk products, like it or not, to change up the scene, but he's kind of dropped out of site for awhile (though I saw where he might be back). I mean, there is only so much one can do to a human body (that's legal) that falls into the realm of erotic or sexual.

About the only real thing of interest is new models doing the same old things, which I have to admit, can be entertaining.

Just a side note, when jonni asked for new ideas I suggested some money shots up the nose. I mean, what more sexy than cum running out of a nostril?


People say this a lot (that porn isn't selling as much because it lost it's individuality and became too homogenized), but I think people have the order of events backwards. To me, the truth of what has happened/is happening is that the piracy + the economy took a lot of the money out of porn first, and then because of that the producers companies had to cut corners and stop taking risks in their content. What you're seeing now is, for the most part, the type of content that still sells well and/or the type of content that is cheapest to produce. The types of content you used to see but don't anymore, that's because that type of stuff just wasn't generating the same profit as what's currently "mainstream". Niche content starts disappearing because it's no cheaper than mainstream content, and by definition of it being niche, it appeals to a smaller audience, meaning that there's less potential customers to sell it to.

01-18-13  12:36pm - 699 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #18
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by bibo:


First, I'd like to mention that I don't visit tube sites, I do not share or download illegal copies of porn and I'm paying for all sites I join (and that's not just a few).

BUT!
Whenever that topic is being discussed, it's inevitable, that the anti-copy fraction is playing the copy kills card at some point, even to the extend of claiming, that downloading pirate copies is responsible for the death of the entire industry.

This is wrong! Simply and utterly wrong. Of course, the myth is catered by the industry itself, who likes to be portrayed in the role of the suffering victim. Doesn't make it better.

The vast majority of people who are sharing pirated material wouldn't buy that material anyways. The simple equation each copy = 1 lost sale doesn't work. It's not a 1:1 loss, not even close.
In fact, tube sites and torrent sites have a positive impact on the sales figures of sites, because they're an advertising/marketing instrument. It's the same with music. People may be downloading one song from a filesharing site, listen to it, then decide to buy the entire album... legally and officially. Same effect here, people are watching a blurry low res scene on a tube site and then decide to join the site to get the full content in higher quality and without the risk of gettin a virus or trojan. If it wasn't the case, why do you think are so many tube sites run by big porn companies?


Conscientious pirates like to think that's the case. The truth is that it isn't. While you're right in saying that it isn't a 1:1 direct correlation, it's not a net positive impact either. While not everyone who pirates would have bought, to pretend like there's no one that pirates that would have bought otherwise is disingenuous at best and completely dishonest at worst.

And as to your last statement. It's one porn company that owns many of the tube sites. They're called Manwin. And the reason they do is besides the fact that they're profitable on their own (Manwin makes more money from their tube sites than they do from all their subscription sites put together. Think about that for a second. They make more money off the free porn than they do the paid stuff.), is because it destabilizes the industry, making other companies worth less, making them easier to buy out (which is another of Manwin's stated goals, to buy as many companies as they can).

01-18-13  12:00am - 700 days 3D porn? (19 Posts) - #6
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by BubbaGump:


Not only do you look silly, it also is uncomfortable and a nuisance to have to wear the heavy goggles to watch TV. I also think 3D movies are not really that great.

We would also look a bit odd choking the chicken to a 3D Porn movie while wearing the goggles:




I don't know about anyone else, but I really don't care what I look like when I'm watching a movie, porn or otherwise.

01-16-13  02:50pm - 701 days 3D porn? (19 Posts) - #2
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Not until I can afford head-mounted 3D. Everything else would just be a distraction.

01-16-13  02:51am - 701 days I wish (********) was a porn star. (95 Posts) - #57
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


I actually like 9 Songs though the reviews seemed to have been pretty scathing when it came out (but what do critics know anyway? ). And frankly I found it far less offensive than many other films that depict intimate relationships, whether they are implied or actually sexual. Seriously, what makes some syrupy "romantic" movie or some fart-and-stoner joke-saturated comedy any better?

I liked Shortbus too, though it seemed to be all over the place plot-wise, but again if the nudity offended viewers, they should need to just grow the hell up. (And to be fair, the director is gay, and even included himself as background in an orgy scene.)


I liked 9 Songs well enough, it was just a little bit too boring for me. And the acting could have been a little better, but I can forgive that given how hard it would have been to find actors. Shortbus, I keep meaning to see but not actually seeing. I think I remember seeing it on Netflix, I'll have to check again some time to see if it's still there.

Originally Posted by turboshaft:


Lars Von Trier has already done something like this. His 1998 experimental film The Idiots has plenty of controversial unsimulated nude and sex scenes.

And then a few years ago he released his equally controversial Antichrist. I loved it just for all of its what-the-fuck! moments and overall insanity but the nudity and sex is hardly, uh, sexy by the time you get to it. I would have even considered adding its female lead Charlotte Gainsbourg to this thread if she hadn't scared the hell out of me in it (lets just say you wouldn't want to vacation alone with her in a cabin deep in the woods after seeing the film ).


The film I was specifically talking about is Nymphomaniac, which according to IMDB is already in post-production.

01-15-13  11:18am - 702 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #8
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by TheSquirrel:


A large part of this forum will always disagree with me on this one. I have no problem at all with this. "Rights" is an abstract concept. They are not real, they are created by human beings, unless you believe in some sort of god. You can then say, "god says this is right, or this is wrong, you do not have the right to do that." Fair enough if you believe in that.

Just because a company doesn't offer their content in a way that I want, doesn't mean I have the right to steal/pirate/consume it, but it doesn't mean I don't have the right either. I could say if I can do it, I have the right. "Rights" is an abstract idea. I have the right to do anything I am able to do. I am my own god, and my own arbitor of what is right or wrong.

This is what most people do anyway. They do what they want then try to justify it. I don't. I don't think it's right or wrong, I do it because I am able, and also because it gives me a nice warm feeling to rip off some organisations. It makes me feel good. If this makes me totally selfish, I am totally selfish, pretty much like 99.9 per cent of human beings.

Whether you download or view for free I will say one thing: It is in all our interests to support those who do not try to rip us off or have dodgy practices. It is in all our interests to support those who do present their work in a way the majority here want, but not give money and support to those who don't. I suppose I could say it is selfish to support and give money to those who have those dodgy practices, but it's for everyone to decide on what is right for them.

I don't much care whether it's the nice or nasty version. You obviously have a strong opinion on this (as do many), and I would not consider it to be flaming, as this is the way you feel. It is good that you express that opinion. We merely disagree, but it makes the forum more interesting. We can't have everyone here loving one another: Well I suppose we can, but it would be a lot more boring.


Well, ignoring the argument about what "rights" are, which is an interesting one, there's the simple fact that what you're doing is illegal. It's copyright infringement (you have to be careful not to call it theft, or people will jump on you). You're more than likely never going to get caught or charged with anything, but it is still illegal.

For my completely honest opinion, I know that people don't like to equate digital media to physical goods when it comes to things like this, but I do. If I were to buy all the ingredients and bake a cake, but I decide to sell that cake only to people willing to buy the milk from me, too, and to charge $20 per piece, that doesn't mean that it's okay for you to come in and steal some of my cake because you don't like how I sell it. The companies pay to produce/acquire the content, so they get to control how the content is sold. You don't like it, either find someone you do like or create your own content. Anything else, in my opinion, shows a sense of entitlement.

01-14-13  10:02pm - 703 days In defense of Tube sites (36 Posts) - #3
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by TheSquirrel:


You wont be getting any flak from me. I agree with what you are saying on this one, although the heavy artillery is probably being loaded at this very moment. Like you I look on tube sites and free download sites. It helps me decide which sites or networks I am going to subscribe to. It also makes me feel good to view or download material from those who practice pre checked cross selling, regional discrimination, or have a bad reputation for ripping people off.


The first part of what you said, I'm generally okay with. The second part is an attitude that really, really gets on my nerves.

Just because a company doesn't offer their content in a way that you want them to doesn't mean you have the right to steal/pirate/consume it anyway. If you don't like what they do, then don't consume their content. It's that easy. Anything else is being, at absolute best, completely and totally selfish (that's the nice version of how I really feel about it).

01-12-13  12:36pm - 705 days I wish (********) was a porn star. (95 Posts) - #50
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by messmer:


Thanks for the two names above, hodayathink. I must look them up. And you are absolutely right in your observations when it comes to selling a movie like the one I crave to see. That's why I call it the impossible dream: to see a non-sex-centered, story driven movie, except that the sex is left in ... IF the context calls for it.


There's also a few porn movies that have gotten rave reviews in the past couple years for the story and acting in them. They're probably a bit more sex-centered than you're looking for, but you might find them pretty close to your ideal as well. Wasteland and Portrait of a Call Girl by Elegant Angel are probably the two most acclaimed ones. Both are available from the Elegant Angel website and on many VOD sites, if you want to check those out as well.

01-12-13  11:22am - 705 days I wish (********) was a porn star. (95 Posts) - #48
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
There are hardcore movies directed by mainstream directors out there. Not very many, but they exist. The problem is two-fold. The first is that generally speaking, they have to use unknown actors because very few "name" actors are willing to unsimulated sex on camera (Chloe Sevigny did an unsimulated blow job for a movie called Brown Bunny, but I can't think of that many others). The second is that because of the explicit nature, they don't have any place to show it besides film festivals. Theaters won't show it, most places that sell DVDs won't stock it, so there's not many ways to sell the movie, so there aren't many ways for the people that made it to make their money back.

If you want to see a couple, check out 9 Songs by Michael Winterbottom and Shortbus by John Cameron Mitchell (fair warning: There's gay as well as straight sex in that movie). And I hear that Lars Von Trier is about to make a movie like that as well, but I don't know if it has actually gone into production yet.

01-09-13  11:33pm - 708 days I wish (********) was a porn star. (95 Posts) - #38
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by jberryl69:


^^ Ho - stop dashing our fantasies dude.


A peace offering:

http://straight.fleshbot.com/5677100/a-c...val-guide-with-boobs

01-09-13  06:50pm - 708 days I wish (********) was a porn star. (95 Posts) - #36
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
I've never really been into wishing anyone was a porn star. Mainly because I don't believe any of them would look any better having sex than they do normally, and I don't at all believe they'd be better "performers" than the women we already have in porn. I'll generally wish that some of them will do nude scenes and/or photoshoots, and the majority of women already listed in this thread have, but once it gets to that point I could honestly care less about how much further they go, because I've gotten what I want already.

01-06-13  10:54pm - 711 days Question for all the Photography fans (54 Posts) - #52
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by Claypaws:


A few comments here. I have honestly tried to force more shots into a landscape orientation but it does not really work.

Consider a model who is standing. You put her head at the top and her feet at the bottom. Her body occupies the screen height regardless of the orientation. Her body then necessarily occupies the same screen width regardless of the orientation. The only thing that differs between the portrait and landscape versions of this standing shot is what occupies the space on either side of the model. In the portrait format, it is blank screen; in landscape format, it is the furniture or background or scenery next to the model.

So to insist on landscape in this instance is to insist on more of the image being devoted to something other than the model.

This is even more strange when you consider the pixel area devoted to the model in each case, assuming a 3000x2000 pixel image. In the portrait format, if the body's width is half its height, the model's body occupies an area which is, say, 3000 pixels high and perhaps 1500 pixels wide. In the landscape format, her body is 2000 pixels high and 1000 pixels wide.

In fact, the portrait format provides more resolution for zooming in with a standing model than does the landscape format, for any given value of the image dimensions.

We could argue that the better fit of landscape format to the monitor aspect ratio should constrain the shots towards a greater dominance of lying down full length images and also mid range crops which show the model from waist up or other poses which fill the landscape orientation. And we would reduce the number of standing shots.

However, standing shots are very popular with members and these offer the maximum available resolution when shot in portrait orientation.

I have found that trying to reduce the proportion of portrait oriented shots is not consistent with also maintaining in each set a variety of poses to cater for all tastes.

Try viewing portrait format images in a viewer such as ACDSee, set to "fit image width". It provides a good increase in resolution when compared to the landscape version of the same standing pose.

The only compromise I can come up with is to mix landscape and portrait orientation within each set but where the format is driven by the pose, rather than driving the pose by the format.


You said what I've been trying to say better than I ever could. Thank you.

01-05-13  08:34pm - 712 days Question for all the Photography fans (54 Posts) - #48
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by messmer:


I don't think my preference for landscape has anything to do with OCD. It's simply a personal preference, same as I no longer watch 4:3 TV but only 16:9 HD. There is simply MORE to the picture and it is esthetically more pleasing.




That's my thing: I'm spending all my time focusing on what is there, so I'm not really bothered by what isn't there. I'm looking at the picture that is on my screen, so I'm pretty oblivious to the sections of the screen that don't contain the picture. I've been known to completely ignore the letterboxing of movies on a 4:3 TV before (and there are many movies that aren't actually shot at 16:9).

And technically, your example isn't actually applicable in this instance, because there isn't "more" to the picture when it switches between landscape and portrait. It's generally the exact same amount of pixels in each shot, just composed differently. I could make the argument that the portrait picture will generally contain more pixels dedicated to the model as opposed to the background, so it would have "more to the picture" than the landscape one.

01-05-13  10:44am - 712 days Question for all the Photography fans (54 Posts) - #45
hodayathink (18)
Active User

Posts: 312
Registered: Mar 27, '09
Location: Illinois
Originally Posted by Capn:


It still won't fit your monitor.

Cap'n.


I'm not so OCD that I care about whether the picture completely fills my monitor. If body parts get clipped, nine times out of ten that's the result of a bad photographer/bad cropping, not something inherently wrong with the portrait format.

Also, even though most people here don't, I occasionally view pictures on my phone/tablet, which has a screen that is taller than it is wide in its most comfortable orientation. Edited on Jan 05, 2013, 10:47am

1-50 of 312 Posts Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page >


Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

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.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.11 seconds.