goes2fast Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 4 hours ago, datzenmike said: Mike only expressed an opinion no demands. I have hidden the picture in question because POST-tits and added a warning to the title. I'm hoping Ratpatrol and Mike know each other for such a comment to pass without any offense. Now I'm wondering which photo this was? 1 Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 7 hours ago, datzenmike said: Mike only expressed an opinion no demands. I have hidden the picture in question because POST-tits and added a warning to the title. I'm hoping Ratpatrol and Mike know each other for such a comment to pass without any offense. Quote Link to comment
a.d._510_n_ok Posted September 25, 2020 Report Share Posted September 25, 2020 2 Quote Link to comment
tr8er Posted September 26, 2020 Report Share Posted September 26, 2020 On 9/20/2020 at 7:26 AM, datzenmike said: Most dictionaries include it being erotic or sexually stimulating by viewing but where's the threshold??? Yet we keep the Coupe pic threads. So... Quote Link to comment
Rat-a-tat-Dat Posted September 26, 2020 Report Share Posted September 26, 2020 Nudity vs Porn: The distinction is made in terms of the context in which the subject is presented. If the material is created with the sole specific intention to sexually excite, then one could argue that it is pornographic. If it has other aims beyond that singular goal, one could argue that it is not. Take, for example, a nude image of a person displayed in a medical textbook designed to give instruction - definitely nudity, definitely not pornographic. Take works of erotic fiction, which although designed to excite, also hold literary and artistic value beyond that sole purpose. That being said, the lines of distinction aren't so clearly drawn, and a lot relies on individual response - something can be pornographic yet still have artistic merit. Some (myself included) would argue that this is almost always the case. And something which isn't designed to be arousing might nevertheless provoke arousal in somebody - that doesn't makeit pornographic. My position on it is that nudity is not inherently pornographic, and that the label of pornography can only be legitimately applied if that is at least one of the deliberate aims of the creator of that work. But it is a characteristic, not a singular defining generic label which overrides all others. Anything more than that is speculative, idiosyncratic and subjective on the part of the individual viewing it, and tells us more about them than any property held by the work itself. 3 Quote Link to comment
a.d._510_n_ok Posted September 26, 2020 Report Share Posted September 26, 2020 3 Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted September 26, 2020 Report Share Posted September 26, 2020 My stand is that pornography is the only thing that is pornographic. 1 2 Quote Link to comment
grannyknot Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 On 9/26/2020 at 12:28 AM, goes2fast said: 12-13 yrs old maybe? I think this has crossed the line into Pedophilia. Even if this girl is 20 yrs old she appears to be a child and we all know we shouldn't be looking at it. I have no problem with pornography but this is something else. I'm not jumping on you @goes2fast you mange to find some of the most amazing looking women I've ever seen so please keep up the good work but anything coming close to Pedophilia is abhorrent and disgusting. Quote Link to comment
VFR800 Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 (edited) Definitely time to move on from this site if this is where it's at. NOT referring to @goes2fast asian photo of a 18+ model that it is fine to look at. I will be looking @ it many many times and do not give a fuck what some random "thinks" here it is AGAIN so it can be looked @ AGAIN Edited September 27, 2020 by VFR800 1 1 Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 Asian men and women are generally smaller and slight of build as adults. Pornography in in the eye of the beholder. 2 Quote Link to comment
KELMO Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 3 minutes ago, VFR800 said: Definitely time to move on from this site if this is where it's at. NOT referring to @goes2fast asian photo of a 18+ model that it is fine to look at. I will be looking @ it many many times and do not give a fuck what some random "thinks" Exactly what he said. 1 2 Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 Well lets not get carried away with youthful looking. 1 1 Quote Link to comment
VFR800 Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 If it's stored with the US govt the models ID and name then the morality police can stick it. 1 Quote Link to comment
KELMO Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 It has been said that men never mature past the 6th or 7th grade mentality so I think that adds some justification. Oops, I think my sarcasm just surfaced. 1 Quote Link to comment
VFR800 Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 Janessa here is over 18 but maybe not over 20 better clutch ya pearls!!!!!!!!!! 1 Quote Link to comment
a.d._510_n_ok Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 2 Quote Link to comment
grannyknot Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 8 hours ago, VFR800 said: I will be looking @ it many many times and do not give a fuck what some random "thinks" How do you know she is 18+, or do you just want to believe that? Regardless of what I think, the fact is your disgusting fucking pig, go jerk off on that. 1 Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted September 27, 2020 Report Share Posted September 27, 2020 9 hours ago, grannyknot said: 12-13 yrs old maybe? I think this has crossed the line into Pedophilia. Even if this girl is 20 yrs old she appears to be a child and we all know we shouldn't be looking at it. I have no problem with pornography but this is something else. I'm not jumping on you @goes2fast you mange to find some of the most amazing looking women I've ever seen so please keep up the good work but anything coming close to Pedophilia is abhorrent and disgusting. To be a pedophile the object of your attraction must be prepubescent, or younger than 10-11 years old. Prepubescent are those who have not entered puberty and haven't developed secondary sex characteristics like breasts for one example. So looking at the above picture, this argument is moot. 1 2 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.