Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : BubbaGump (18)  

Feedback:   All (62)  |   Reviews (11)  |   Comments (4)  |   Replies (47)

Other:   Replies Received (61)  |   Trust Ratings (28)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 51-62 of 62 Page :    < Previous Page

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy
Reply of monty4321's Review

I just signed up recently, as well. I didn't pay much attention to the video content as that is not my area of interest.

As far as photo quality, I definately have seen examples where focus issues are present. I don't recall seeing any glaring exposure problems, however, and I am pretty anal about things like that. Then again, I ddin't go through every set.

For me, I don't really find the girls unattractive, I think it's just that they are not over-glamorized and elements such as makeup are kept in check so as not to detract from the natural theme of the site.I certainly wouldn't meet any of these girls on the street in person and think they were ugly. Most men would find them pretty if they walked by them on the street and passed them, IMO. I think we are just so used to seeing the heavily airbrushed and post-processed porn with heavy makeup and lipstick, lingerie, and heavy facial cake powder, that when we do come across models in porn that are not made up in this way, we tend to rate them as less attractive when compared to the pro studio standard of perfection. As an example, have you ever seen a news-babe off the set, without being under the soft, flattering lighting and without the professional broadcast studio makeup? The results are quite dramatic. They can look like totally different people and much more 'average.'

Sites like this are the anti-thesis of high fashioin nude glamour and are more about bare natural beauty, IMO. Seeing a glamorized model with fancy lingerie and makeup, sporting a full bush and underarm hair would be totally out of place, IMO.

Anyways, I am not arguing and don't mean to negate any opinions. Just offering a different perspective. Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. However, if you come from a site like DDF or other glam sites to a site like this, I can see how one might be inclined to equate the lack of polish to a lack of beauty.

02-06-12  08:07pm

Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy
Reply of Capn's Reply

So far, I have no complaints. Questions are answered almost immediately on the forum at the site.

Regarding the focus issue with some image sets, after having looked around more, I found the issue does appear more often in older sets. Newer sets only have this issue sporadically. When these issues do appear, however, they are only usually a major distraction when viewing the image at full resolution. I think it is definitley a gear-related issue and not technique. Sometimes, the focus will be on the wall behind the model or its locking onto the models jewelry or some high contrast object in the scene. This is almost always due to the camera body being a limited point autofocus DSLR or a subpar lense with a squirelly focus drive, or the point bias not set correctly. The lenses also seem to not always be the sharpest. Something like a Canon L series lens will fix that up in a hurry. They are expensive but produce superb results. I have a 300 2.8 L series lens I use for wildlife and the lens is so sharp that you can pick out a fly on the back of a moose at 50 yards. They are that good.

02-05-12  04:49pm

Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy
Reply of Capn's Reply

Yes. I do like it. It is definately an excellant site. If there was more diversity in ethnic and model variety, I would categorize it as a truly exceptional site that would score a 100 in my eyes. I think that's the only thing it is lacking.

Obviously, this all depends on whether or not the content is for you. If someone isn't into this niche, they may rate it a 50.

I think the biggest problem is finding models. With the shift away from any hair in the 80's, not too many models are going to be willing to get into this niche and let things 'grow.'

Unfortunately, sometime in the 80's, the US Porn Industry decided it would define for everyone what represents attractive on the female body. At first, my thought as to why the shave craze took hold was that people suddenly decided that any hair on a female was just too masucline. However,this doesn't explain why even the guys in porn started shaving too--their crotch, their legs, even their pits. Somehow, for some reason, hair became contraband in the North American porn industry. After about 1990, Those of us who feel public hair(or, god forbid, an unshaved armpit) on a female can be erotic, were pushed out onto a fringe into the 'odd fetish niche ' category. Look at some porn review sites and see how something like Hairy Bush would be filed in the bizarre fetish category.

02-05-12  01:38pm

Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy
Reply of BubbaGump's Review

Ran out of space...

I also wanted to add that this is the first time I have been to a site where I can see myself staying around as a long-term subscriber, instead of downloading intersiting content during a one-month subscription period. The amount of updates and the web cam shows are incentive to stay. IMO, more sites should offer up such ammenities to give a cosnumer the incentive to continue on.

02-05-12  12:53pm

Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + A good range of hirsute content to suit most tastes in this niche,.
+ Wholesome, pretty, amateur models.
+ Large Database of Photosets and videos.
+ Clean and efficient site design and layout.
+ Customizable user settings and search features provide a nice user experience
+ Custom zip files for downloads
+ Multiple Daily Video/Photo updates
+ Free Cam Shows
+ Good customer service
Cons: - Older photo content can have issues with soft-focus and stray focus.
- Lack of any substantial ethnic diversity in models.
- Web cam show scheduling conflicts with most schedules in north America.
Bottom Line: I found myself really hard-pressed to come up with any specific negatives beyond those listed above. This is one of the best sites--if not the best--I have come across in terms of the user experience and range of content available to a subscriber. There are extensive photo sets, videos, free interactive web shows, all for a single subscription price. The user experience I can only classify as top-notch, at least relative to the sites I have subscribed to in the past. There are utilities for just about any feature at the site. There are customizable search tools, gallery tools, favorite lists, and custom zip downloads where you are free to choose to select(or deselect) which images go into a zip. There is also a user forum and web masters are very quick to respond to any questions.

The content here is traditional solo softcore posing with some dildo and masturbation action. There is the occasional girl-girl scene as well. If your preference is softcore erotica, the content will meet your demands. If you demand hardcore action, this is not the place to find it and you will be disappointed.

If you are looking for the traditional airbrushed porn star look, this site will likewise not meet your needs. Makeup is used in moderation--it is of the kind you will see on any girl on the street-- and there is no attempt tot hide any blemish or mole with post-processing. The models are pretty and wholesome amateurs but they are not over-glamorized. That is not the look that this site aims for and it would detract from the natural theme. Most of the models appear to be in their mid-twenties, with a few MILF and a few of the just-turned-legal variety.

There is an abundance pf photo and video content and updates happen daily. Galleries are nicely done with semi-pro level photography. Super-high resolution images bring out every subtle detail and nuance on the models. Some of the older sets, however, do suffer at times from stray focus or a soft focus. This issue does not appear in most of the photosets posted after 2010, however. The videos are of high quality and they are clips of roughly 10 minutes in length. The main attraction here, however, is the photography. I found the DL speeds to be more than adequate.

Beyond the occasional image quality issue of older sets, the only other negative that stands out is the lack of diversity in the ethnicity of the models. Most are from Eastern Europe, the UK, or California. It would be nice to see the site expand this range a bit and offer more Latin and ethnic models in the galleries.

There are interactive web cam shows that happen a few times a week. These last an hour Unfortunately, the scheduled times appear to be centered around European time zones. Outside of the 4 PM Saturday show, if you are in North America, you will likely find it hard to attend during the week, out of personal work schedules. Never having attended a cam show in the past, I wasn't sure what to expect as I have no experience with cam media. I did sit in on the Saturday show with the model Raven. One can type questions or comments--or requests--and the model seemed willing to oblige(within reason). The feed quality was decent. The flow could be easily interrupted, however, when users ask questions(or act like toolbags)' Once you find the ignore user option, however, it is less distracting. If you are into cam shows, this is certainly a nice bonus, especially given that it is free of charge and from what I can tell, most fees for cam shows can be ridiculously expensive. Being able to interact with the models adds a personal touch to the site experience.

I chose to join this site as I prefer natural femininity over the glossed-over and heavily-toned airbrushed look of the majority of porn available today. What many people interested in this niche probably want to hear most about is the actual hirsute content available. Based on comments I have read here and elsewhere, it seems that what people find attractive in this niche is all over the board, which one would epect, given the broad scope and relative meaning that the word 'hairy' invokes. There is probably not a niche that has more diversity of tastes and opinions. When reading the review comments for various sites in this niche, I see complaints about models being too hairy or not hairy enough, or not having hair in the right place. What is hairy enough? What is too hairy? What is the right place? The answers are so relative to an individual that I cannot tell you if the content here meets your criteria. What I can say is that this site appears to cater to the middle of the road and it avoids extremes as a predominant feature. This is the way it should be, IMO, as there are so many tastes. No preference is given to any fetish and the content strikes a good balance. You will find just about anything here for most users in terms of hair. However, its unrealistic to expect to see every model always conform to your ideals.

02-05-12  12:42pm

Replies (6)
Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy

Signed Up--Looks Nice

I had signed up for this site last week along with juggmaster but didn't spend a whole lot of time browsing around. Have been busy and just got around to checking out in detail today. Looks pretty decent. As I am a fan of the natural look, it is quite appealing. The only thing I see negative so far is that the photographs, although well-composed, aren't always the sharpest images when viewed at Super-High Res. The detail is there, it's just that the focus can sometimes be soft. Then again, as an amateur photgrapher myself, I know how viewing images at high res can bring out the slightest imperfections. Other than that, it looks very well done and many of the images will certainly make nice additions to my erotic art collection. Haven't toyed with videos as I am not much of a video person. Will get around to checking them out after a while so I can write a review with all my thoughts.

02-01-12  03:20pm

Replies (2)
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
Reply of RagingBuddhist's Reply

Hello Buddhist. Thanks for the feedback. I only have two other sites I belong to so only a couple more reviews to do.

01-17-12  03:28pm

Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
Reply of messmer's Reply

hmm..Interesting. I read the reply from the Customer Service rep in that thread.

Not sure what to make of that. Piracy certainly would be a top concern on my mind if I owned a site. However, the 7 week cutoff seems rather arbitrary. Why 7 and not 12, for instance?

My hunch on this is that the explanation is partially true--my opinion only and not to be taken as fact. There are concerns about piracy, but I also suspect this might just be a good business move in terms of bandwidth. I say this as they do not employ this date restriction with photo gallery downloads. I downloaded galleries from stuff dated way back to 2005. There are no restrictions. I assume pirates will go after the photos as well.

So, my guess is that this limit also serves as a practical bandwidth decision that keeps the server from slowing down with folks downloading older videos.

01-16-12  01:23pm

Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
Reply of messmer's Reply


I don't see anything at Scoreland indicating a limit on downloads. There is no info in the signup screen indicating a limit but it doesn't say 'Unlimited Downloads' either. I do not download much in the way of videos so I didn't even think about this when signing up. If there is a lmit, it's probably snuck in on the fine-print on those user aggreements we always click yes to.

On this subject, something wierd I discovered at XL girls was that some videos did not have a download option at all, while others did. It makes no sense as to why certain videos could not be downloaded. It doesn't appear to be based on when the video was added or any specific content. For instance, a recent XXX action video can be downloaded, whereas a solo video one-month old cannot and vice-versa at places.

01-16-12  12:36pm

Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
Reply of otoh's Reply

Hi. Thanks, guys.

I try to offer the kind of info I like to see. I try not to overdo a review, but considering we spend money on this stuff, it is certainly worth it to give the straight poop.

I always thought of porn review sites as simply fronts for studios, as a lot do seem to be heavily biased. This site seems pretty objective and fair so far and the members giving reviews are not just someone from the company in disguise.

01-16-12  09:12am

Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
Reply of Monahan's Reply

They do that at scoreland, too. I was offered XLGirls for $19.99 and the Scoreland sub was $39.99.

As I mentioned in my other review, the price is on the high side.

IMO, XL girls should be a subsite to Scoreland. The sites that are offered at Scoreland as subsites are really not that great--basically just older content of some of the classic scoreland models.

01-15-12  05:00pm

Visit XL Girls

XL Girls

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -- Large number of models.
-- Easier to naviagte and find content than Scoreland master site.
-- Photography and xxx videos are not over-the-top and the style is classic (think Playboy or Penthouse.) This is either a pro or con, depending on perspective. Will appeal to more classic consumers of erotica.
-- Galleries and vidoes do not jump right into the action. Plenty of tease photos and slow undressing.
-- Images are of high-quality, although sometimes can apper a bit plastic.
Cons: -- Photoshoots sometimes seem to be heavily air-brushed. Can sometimes appear 'plastic'.
-- Might not be as explicit in terms of xxx content as some would prefer. Either a pro or con, see above.
-- For some reason, the DL speed and streaming was slower than at Scoreland.
-- Probably not enough updates to keep long-term subscribers used to large volume. Best for one-month subscriptions.
-- Should be part of Scoreland main subscription.
Bottom Line: Background:

My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.

I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
-- The photography and video presentations are sexy and alluring without being too in-your-face. If you are into things like ass-to-mouth, pile drivers, and things like that, you are not going to find it here. This is either good or bad, depending on your own preferences. About 80% of the photo and video content is softcore posing, either solo or girl-girl. hardcore content is typical fare-classic oral, missionary, doggy, etc., although the scenes usually end with popshots on the breasts rather than face--it's a breast site.

--Navigatiuon and menus are a bit simplified from the information-overload present at Scoreland.

-- Photography could use a little diversification in poses and sets. The photosets often to seem to follow the same script. The photographers could also tone down the airbrushing a bit. Sometimes this pervades the images.

-- Streaming and DL speeds are not as quick as at the master site Scoreland.
-- The site will likely not keep long-term interest. Site should probably be included with a Scoreland subscription and not exist as a seperate pay-site.
I added this site when signing up for a one-month subscription to Scoreland. The cost was $19.99 for one month, non-recurring.

BBW stands for Big Beautful Women.

The first two two terms here are relative. I have had an erotic interest in this genre over the years.. I have discovered that 'Big' can mean anything from slightly plump to to morbidly obese. The women shown at XL girls generally falls somewhere in the middle. One characteristic all the models have is that that they all sport large, natural-looking breasts. Most appear to be young, twenty-somethings, althought there are a few MILF models. Pretty faces are the norm.

Beauty is also in the eye of the beholder and this genre won't be for everyone. It is refreshing, however, to see more natural-looking women in this industry--the kind you are likely to encounter on the street. Also, in the photosets, the models will actually smile and don't look irritated or annoyed.

The photos at the site are much more profresinal-looking than most BBW images I have come accross in the past, The photographers could tone down the airburhsing a bit, however.

I guess this genre is defined by anything that does not fit the cookie cutter mold of what the average man would find appealing in terms of physcique. The women at XLGirls look like natural women on the plump side, all with motherly figures.Silicone appears to be used sparingly.

This is definately a niche site that will appeal to fans of plump, rubenesque women one would find in classic paintings, albeit with large chests.

The site is a mix of photos and videos. There is not a large amount of XX action here and most videos are solo or girl-girl.

IMO, who would like this site:

Photo lovers and those with a fetish for plump, rubenesque, motherly women or those who have a breast fetish. Also, this site will appeal to those who enjoy a more classic, conservative style in their photos and explicit videos.

IMO, who won't like this site:

Those who are looking for the cookie-cutter, well-toned models who spend most of their days in the gym and count their calories. Also, those who rarely view photosets or solo video action or those who enjoy more extreme hardcore action.
Grades(obviously subjective):

Site Navgigation: B
Video Presentation Style: A
Video Quality: A
Photo Presentations: B
Photo Content and Quality: A
The Models Themselves: A
Streaming and DL Speeds: C
Quantity: B
XXX Action: D
Suggestions for improvement:

Addf this site to the standard Scoreland subscription.

More creativity in photos. Diversify the photosets to include more angles and perspectives. Photosets tend to stick to a classic script.

01-15-12  03:12pm

Replies (11)

Shown : 51-62 of 62 Page :    < Previous 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.


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 1.56 seconds.