egafd.com

RaymondT wrote:

>
> I absolutely get what you're saying but by less appealling I
> was simply thinking about tattoos and/or boob jobs. If you had
> the option of identical twins but one was all natural whereas
> the other happened to have had a boob job and/or tattoos,
> there's no way you're going to give the job to the latter.
>


There's no way? Really?

Suppose somebody likes alt/goth style porn? There's a good chance somebody casting for such porn would give the job to the latter.

3SS wrote:

> Interesting how you didn't put lesbian porn on the list since
> "your" creator takes a dim view of that sort of thing.


Yes, good point.

The teachings of the bible are clear, that sexual activity should only take place between husband and wife.

Or husband and mistress. Remember Abraham and Issac?

JamesW wrote:

> The teachings of the bible are clear, that sexual activity
> should only take place between husband and wife.
>
>


The bible that is taught in church and school is both incomplete and full of misinterpretation.

All the evidence that exists tells us that sex was simply intended to be between a man and a woman.

The only reason lesbian porn didn't make my list is that it's something I have seldom seen, it isn't something I feel is forced on people the same as the other points.

The other points aren't forced on people either.

Given how much anal sex is marketed in porn I can choose not to watch scenes with it pretty much as easily as I can choose not to watch lesbian porn.

Yet again, you're demonstrating the inevitable cherry picking so many religious zealots practice any deny.

RaymondT wrote:

> The bible that is taught in church and school is both
> incomplete and full of misinterpretation.


This part's pretty clear though.

Romans 1:26 (New Living Bible):
"That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other."

Way below average, skanky looking, so called 'models' being being repeatedly foisted upon clearly uninterested punters by desperate, penniless pimps!

I have to agree with the earlier point about the "visual appeal" of the girls.... porn is supposed to be a fantasy, a way for people to step out of their real life and see attractive women doing things that your wife doesn't do on a regular basis... why on earth do producers think people genuinely want to pay their hard earned money on a girl who looks like your next-door neighbour or the fat lass down your local each night??

come on guys, people like Angel Long, Lexi Lowe, Katie K, Michelle Thorne & Michelle B are all superstars in this industry... why? because they're hotter than your wife and won't be seen in your local boozer!

so why do producers not hire those models more often, and give them a regular line of work, even if it's a new scene a week on a website or something? stop wasting money on the chavs and spend it more wisely on building some credible superstars and rebuilding an industry where the world WANTS to pay for these girls, rather than us being a laughing stock of only having one hot girl for 20 chavs that no-one really wants to see

rexwantinsex wrote:

> so why do producers not hire those models more often


Because not everyone wants to watch the same few girls over and over and over again.

maybe everyone doesn't but some must because otherwise you wouldn't get (admittedly predominantly american) actresses with hundreds of credits across a significant number of years. It would be a case of right we've seen her in say fifty scenes that's enough, next. And don't the phone in channels prove that that is simply not the case. The same girls, the same moves, night after night. Once they'd been on one channel no other would want to employ them. On most channels the same few girls get a higher percentage of screen time because people do want to watch, call them over and over again. neither would models make any money from their own sites because that relies 100% on people wanting to watch them or even just see photos of them over and over again.