Who Makes You Drool? - Pls Read Mod Note Posts 93, 138

d'Oracle

I'm sort of worried now to post this, given what this lady does for a living and how difficult it is to find appropriate photos of her.

But hey, this is technically alright and OT.

Iga A.
Makes me drool.

Herbal Deity

Deleted User wrote: »

Just to bring something up whilst we're in the early days; Aren't there practically hundreds of images of topless men and barely-dressed men in the Ladies Lounge version of this?

Yup, it's most definitely a double standard.

It basically boils down to the fact that (A) there will be much more complaints about pictures of women showing skin than men, for whatever reason, and (B) there's a strange, arbitrary thing called "taste" or "class" that is enforced here.

I'm not that bothered by it, but I do think the double standard is irritating.

Straight from the tLL thread:





EDIT: Was writing my post as Mystik Monkey was replying.

Nevyn

Well I think all those image are to riské tbh, have you reported them in tLL and how long ago where they posted as there was a revision in that thread a while back as to the standard.

Again why do guys keep comparing here to there, really I don't get it.

trout

Deleted User wrote: »

Just to bring something up whilst we're in the early days; Aren't there practically hundreds of images of topless men and barely-dressed men in the Ladies Lounge version of this?

Maybe there is. So what? Different forum, different community, different ethos ... there's a Mustard forum, and a David Hasselhoff forum, funny how they're never mentioned. There are car forums too ... with pictures of cars, should we emulate those as well?

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Yup, it's most definitely a double standard.

It basically boils down to the fact that (A) there will be much more complaints about pictures of women showing skin than men, for whatever reason, and (B) there's a strange, arbitrary thing called "taste" or "class" that is enforced here.

I'm not that bothered by it, but I do think the double standard is irritating.

Straight from the tLL thread:

If there is a double standard at play here, it is a double standard in the global sense ... outside of these forums, outside of Boards ... in this forum we don't have one standard for pictures of men, and a different standard for pictures of women; up until today we didn't even have a thread.

My thoughts on this type of thread are well known. I don't believe it will end well.

Leucifer

Natalie Portman







Anne Hathaway

Herbal Deity

Thaedydal wrote: »

Well I think all those image are to riské tbh, have you reported them in tLL and how long ago where they posted as there was a revision in that thread a while back as to the standard.

All in the last 3 pages (at 40 posts per page).

IMO those pics are fine, so I wouldn't report them

Creamy Goodness

karen o


gwen stefani (before she turned into a skank when she went solo)


kari byron


gillian anderson


kristen schaal (dobby from peep show).


mary lynn rajskub (chloe o'brien)

Klingon Hamlet

Nervous Wreck

Fajitas! wrote: »

I really don't like the idea of it - I don't think it brings anything useful to the forum, and there's already a whole internet full of it. I'm most likely in the minority with that opinion though. Scantily dressed girls are all well and good, but I don't think this is the forum for it.

Woah woah woah, flower! I never encouraged, incited or promoted the idea of posting pics of scantily clad anyone. Look at the picture I myself posted. Well dressed, fully clothed, classy looking upper body (mostly face) shot of a beautiful woman. I was gonna include a line at the bottom of my first post saying "Let's not wreck this thread with ott pics of mostly naked women" but that's not really my perogative as I am not a mod on this forum. That's not what I started the thread for.

Fajitas!

Sorry, I didn't mean that whole message to be aimed at yourself.

The scantily clad part was aimed at what was posted after your post.

That's not what I started the thread for.

But unfortunately, that's what the thread will be used for, and it'll end up being a bit of a collective wankbank, with arguments thrown in over what constitutes as being lewd or art.

flower

/blushes

Klingon Hamlet

Cicero

the person who put these in my mouth...and she's feicing gorgeous:p

Nevyn

The are OPAL FRUITS, always were, always will be, OPAL FRUITS.

Cicero

Thaedydal wrote: »

The are OPAL FRUITS, always were, always will be, OPAL FRUITS.

...........they still make ure mouth water....:p

krudler

Katy Perry, sigh...



Christina Hendricks from Mad Men:



Bryce Dallas Howard (who'd have thunk something so good looking would come from Ron Howards loins )

force majeure

Kim Thomson
EMMERDALE actress. Faye Lamb:cool::cool:

Dr Galen

Katy Perry

I really don't know what it is about her, but she really does have it going on in my opinion

Ok

I'm off to bed

Dannyboy1987

That will do me for now haha

gerk86

kim deal from the pixies

so. ****ing. cool.

Klingon Hamlet

Snowie

There's something exceptional about this thread bassicly all the women listed have very similer jaw and chin structure......

humberklog

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

There's something exceptional about this thread bassicly all the women listed have very similer jaw and chin structure......

Same tastes or same surgeon?





Dreadful thread tbh...sorry to moan.

ignol

Aishwarya Rai

Jules

She is stunningly beautiful!

K-9

Ah Christina was already posted, but what a figure!

Boston

Herbal Deity wrote: »

I'm not that bothered by it, but I do think the double standard is irritating.

It's not a double standard since it's not the same forum. A poster can say things on this forum which would have them banned over on tLL. If we allow everything which is allowed on tLL, then surely we must ban everything which is banned on tLL? I thought not.

Personally, I think these threads are tasteless and just because one grouping of people have no taste, doesn't mean it should be a race to the bottom for all of us.

Herbal Deity

trout wrote: »

in this forum we don't have one standard for pictures of men, and a different standard for pictures of women

Aha! But you do.

The provocative images of men in my earlier post have not been deleted yet, despite the fact that there have been several mods viewing this thread in the ~8 hours since I posted them

The question is why? Be honest, you would have jumped to delete any remotely provocative picture of a female, but the male ones I posted have been left up.

(No, I'm not trolling, I think it's genuinely very interesting.)

Mackman

Mira Sorvino


Tea Lioni


A More tasteful pic of Sandra Bullock;)

Jemmy

Herbal Deity wrote: »

The provocative images of men in my earlier post have not been deleted yet, despite the fact that there have been several mods viewing this thread in the ~8 hours since I posted them

Eh did you go back to the photos in tLL and report them if you still have an issue with them?!
Oh wait a second...

Herbal Deity wrote: »

IMO those pics are fine, so I wouldn't report them

Come on! Do you think they will just disappear because you mentioned them in a totally different part of the site? :rolleyes:

Different mods and different forums have different rules. Get over it move on and if you post here there are rules here so if you want to contribute then do. If your not happy or it's not to your liking don't. Some of the men have said it's not to there taste so they won't be. Simple.

I know they will look anyway though!


I did not see the picture of the lady you posted before it was removed but as was already said...

Thaedydal wrote: »

You can see plenty of men exposed like that in public with their shirt off and it is not considered lewd.
As for the lady in her robe, that is lewd and while you can't see her labia you can see part of her mound of Venus.

Herbal Deity

Jemmy wrote: »

Eh did you go back to the photos in tLL and report them if you still have an issue with them?!
Oh wait a second...

I mean in this thread Nothing to do with tLL.

It's like trout said, it's a double standard that exists in a global sense.