Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Review A review of the site and any replies from other users.

Visit ATK Natural & Hairy

ATK Natural & Hairy (1)

graymane (33) 01-21-13  04:02pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (30), NO (0)
Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
Pros: 1) Hair is paramount. If'un you like hair on broads, then here you won't be disappointed.
2) Site boast of having millions of pictures. Well, bully for them. I'd have to say that might be a bit of a stretch.
3) Claims to be 12 times the size of any other hairy site. Does it also mean 12 times the cost?
4) zip files for downloads. Small watermarks on pics, larger on videos. No DRM.
5) Promotion touts of having 1577 models.
Well, I guess if they say so .....
6) 5,549 videos. Could be, but the 30 days I was there they musta been in hiding.
7) Updates appear to roll in as promoted.
8) HD on more recent shoots.
9) Some very pretty gals are in the lineup, European, Asian, Latina and American; predictably, a lotta plain-Jane's are there, too. Then there are those who're are just plain ugly.
10) You have solo, soft core, toy, boy/girl hardcore, and lesbian.
Cons: 1) Sometimes I'd corralled a beauty only to suddenly see her wander off somewhere.
2) Poor selection of medias, having WMV pitted against two other unknowns.
3) Streaming went smoothly, however, Buffering was unceasingly long and tedious.
4) From my viewpoint, I thought the video-shoots and directing sorely lacked the quality subscribers deserved.
5)Same-'olé-same-'olé .....what with too many and long closeups, and particularly ones that dwell on the genitalia. I can only assume The guy shooting just falls asleep at his camera. The man must belong to a damed good union.
6) Small watermarks on pics, bigger ones but none obtrusive on videos
7) Maybe it's my lack of electronic wizardry, but I simply couldn't find the combination to opening pics on a full screen.
Bottom Line: Prepare to stare at a lot of hair.
Hair here, hair there, hair everywhere.
Nary model dare to be hair-bare, and that's fair

(jus' thought I'd throw that in)

I went for this $21 deal because I strongly favor seeing natural hair where it's supposed to be on women. It's sexier, more erotic, and adds that important element of realism to the scenes.

This site does a very good job of giving us that, but sadly, eroticism falls woefully short. For one thing, the girls move around too much. No sooner than I get into a clip than the model jumps up and leaps onto something else. Another erotic spoiler is the over-use of smiles ....I know readers don't share or agree to that, but when a gal is in the throes of sexual release, smiles ought to be minimal.! They're necessary I know, but porn isn't Comedy Central and I just don't find them compatible with serious porn.
Cameramen and directors here tend to follow the same old trend that shooting genital closeups are gold. When, for crying out loud, will these numb-nuts wise up and give us a break, already?..... Thanks to vaginal over-exposure I think I now know more about the female pussies than my x-wife's gynecologist.
In my judgment, I'd recommend this site for all who wants to see hair. Otherwise, it's just plain-old generic porn.
Admittedly, I got a bang-for-my-buck for what I paid, but I don't think I'd opt for thirty.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (16)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date


TheSquirrel (53) Thanks for the entertaining review Gray one. You happened to pick out a couple of big irritants as far as I'm concerned. First of all the ever present genitalia closeups. Then there's the constant moving about. You get to the point where they finally show the whole girl in all her glory, then they have to change her position and it's back to the closeups.

The cameraman goes to sleep on the closeups, but the minute they finally focus on the whole body they have to move. You just cannot get to experience the glory of the whole body. It's like they do it deliberately just to piss off porn viewers. "Ner ner ner, you paid for this, but you're not going to see anything stimulating, oh no, we can do this all the time to the end of the video you know." And they do.

01-21-13  06:11pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) Hey, graymane, I always enjoy your reviews. How did you like all the hairy legs?

Us old timers tend to wax sentimental over the good old days before the models shaved but we think mostly of the pubic bush, while this site has evolved into a true fetishists dream.

As you stated "hair, hair everywhere" - hair on the nipples, hair in the pits, hair on the legs, hair in the cracks. However, one thing in their favor I do believe that their statistics might very well be right on.

This site has been around for a long, long time, therefore between 8 - 10 picture updates a day, with most sets containing at least a hundred pictures, it is not beyond belief that they have as many sets and models as they say they have.

I recently quit with two months to go, not because they lied to me, but because I found most updates either too hairy for my taste (the legs) or too bland or for the "vaginal over exposure" as you put it so nicely. But you know me, looking at a set without the girl at least wearing some sort of erotic lingerie, is the epitome of boredom.

01-21-13  07:01pm

Reply To Message


graymane (33) REPLY TO #1 - TheSquirrel :

Thanks, Squirrel. Appreciate the time out you took to pass on this thoughtful message. Happy I could be of some help.
I notice just recently your forum activity had dropped off some.
We miss your stuff when you ain't around, champ. I hope all is well, and, as always, wishing you the best.

01-22-13  08:24am

Reply To Message


TheSquirrel (53) REPLY TO #3 - graymane :

Thanks Graymane, it's reciprocated. Your contributions are always entertaining, as well as informative.

I guess like most of us, I look in but don't contribute as much nowadays, unless there's something I just have to get off my chest. There's not enough time at the moment to post here, or view porn, but at least I don't get jaded as some do.

Been a porn fan since I was 8, so I suppose I'm never going off it, but I could do with some more customer oriented networks. There's only a limited influence PU can have, and currently the mainstream market is very homogeneous, for a number of reasons. All we can do is register our opinion.

Happily today is a day and night off, so I can spend some time putting together a review.

01-22-13  08:50am

Reply To Message


graymane (33) REPLY TO #2 - messmer :

Thanks, Mess .....As you well know, your thoughts are very much appreciated. maybe your kind words will inspire me to step up my activity with reviews. Might interest you to know, despite the slings-an-arrows you rained down on this site in your past, excellent review, It was instrumental in my decision to go with them.
How did I like the leg-hair, you asked?........ Well, they were delicious, of course. Gotta let your imagination run wild, like pulling out the leg hairs with my teeth...... lotta proteins there, big guy!

01-22-13  08:50am

Reply To Message


otoh (54) Great review, GM, thanks for all the useful info. I far prefer unshaven models, so keep an eye on reviews for the hairy sites - but I guess the search continues for one which isn't a) leaning toward scary hairy; and b) is actually erotic!
01-22-13  08:50am

Reply To Message


graymane (33) REPLY TO #6 - otoh :

Many thanks, Otoh. Appreciate you taking the time to pass on your valued thoughts. But hey! you're one of PU's major torchbearers of late.
You're all over the place around here. .... an' we love-it!

01-22-13  09:09am

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #5 - graymane :

Ooooh, gross! That picture is going to stay with me all day now. But your answer also gave me a bit of insight as to why the site is doing well despite the leg hair. I was honestly convinced that it was despised by the vast majority of subscribers. As I said only yesterday, learn something new every day. :-) Enjoy the hair, gm!!
01-22-13  09:56am

Reply To Message


marcdc1 (174) REPLY TO #5 - graymane :


Thank you again for an excellent review. I particularly like the Shakespeare reference in the reply section :)

The Bard would be proud, know if you could only have it all in iambic pentameter and include a pun :)

Hope too see more reviews from you again soon-

01-22-13  06:47pm

Reply To Message


graymane (33) REPLY TO #9 - marcdc1 :

Ditto, my good friend. Always better the second time around.
Wish I could express the enormity of appreciation I'd prefer to get over to you and the others who respond so positively to my stuff.
When Webster finally releases a few more good adjectives, you'll be the first to know.

01-22-13  07:54pm

Reply To Message


graymane (33) REPLY TO #8 - messmer :

Of course, you do know I was only kidding about dining solely on leg hair........ gross indeed.

let me clarify by saying, after the strands are extracted, you put them on salads .... you know, where a dressing of some sort would set off the flavor.

01-22-13  08:06pm

Reply To Message


Capn (28) Always interesting to see your take, G. :0)

I have to agree with a lot of your points, but for me it is the only subscription I have at the moment.

That says volumes for the lack of choice in our favoured genres.

Cap'n. :0/

01-23-13  09:15am

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #11 - graymane :

You are a sick, sick man, graymane!!! :-)
01-23-13  11:07am

Reply To Message


marcdc1 (174) REPLY TO #10 - graymane :

lol. Very good sir.
01-23-13  01:40pm

Reply To Message


graymane (33) REPLY TO #9 - marcdc1 :

With due consideration directed to, and distance of respect I've garnered for, in the sheer joy of following your extraordinary writing skills, I have to say compliments coming from one so learned as you simply amplifies that joy that much more.

I have to say, though, the terms associated with Shakespeare you used having to do with the words "iambic pentameter" has me stumped.
Even Google can't come up with a comprehensively sensible meaning.

Again .... your reply to this review is appreciated.

01-25-13  07:12am

Reply To Message


marcdc1 (174) REPLY TO #15 - graymane :

Ah sir, the fault most likely results from my ever poor spelling. I've included a useful link for what I was trying to reference. It's the line structure that Shakespeare used in most of his writing. (if I'm not mistaken it's also called blank verse).


Thank you as always for the discussion-

01-25-13  04:43pm

Reply To Message

*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

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 0.01 seconds.