Weird Sex (Practices, Preferences & Accoutrements!)

[Mighty_Emperor]

a) a stallion's erect penis is about two feet long
b) think of the weight/power the animal can bring to bear behind it :shock:
c) the human colon is a lot shorter/smaller than the equine vagina and wasn't designed to have something that size in there (people can get injured having anal intercourse with another person, don't forget; the rectum doesn't stretch or self-lubricate to accommodate intercourse)

Sure, you're right on this, but from a mechanical point of view it would depend on how stiff (no pun intended) a horses penis would be, to be able to stick it into the rectum. I have no idea, but wouldn't a thing that size be a bit flabby? And wouldn't it buckle or bend instead of going in?

Experiment: imagine pushing a (unpeeled) banana through a keyring (the first two objects that I could find in my kitchen). It will break or bend, but it will not go in.

But if the person had a rectum like the guy on goatse.cx it might go in ... :cross eye - But now we're getting into unknown territory that I'd rather not explore - however Fortean it may be.

I do think you might need a lie down in a dark room. From what I've read (largely from an article many moons ago in the Garudian about how big horse porn is in Saudi Arabia):

1. They usually put the horses whatsit in a semi-erect state when it is smaller but turgid enough to go in.

2. They usually use smaller horses or ponies.

3. With some work you can fit suprisingly large things into a human rectum certianl wider than a horse's johnson (this last bit passed on by friends who have seen some bad bad videos including the Women's Anal Olypmics and the worst video ever - I've made people cry by telling them about it) - I'd suggest the trauma may have been more due to the vigorous activity than due to the actual size.

Anyway I hope that covers the issue - it is perfecty possible just very very unwise. If you don't believe me there are ways to find out.

I can also ask my friend for the link to the site he found the video on if you want.

 

[Leaferne]

And..like..wouldn't horses just be interested in other horses? Surely? Please??

:cross eye

I don't know how they do it for porn purposes, and I don't want to know, but for AI you just need a mare in heat nearby. Or you let the stallion attempt to mount the mare, then slip the container between him and his beloved. Manual manipulation might work but *I* wouldn't want to try it.

link (moderately work unsafe, shows two horses)

another link, perfectly safe

I know way too much about equine sex, don't I? :?

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

I know way too much about equine sex, don't I? :?

Uh hu :shock:

~backs slowly out of the room~

 

[uair01]

Please note: I know this photograph only because it's made by a controversial modern artist and I'm very interested in modern art. It's not that I actively search for this kind of content :| But it shows the anatomy we're discussing in full detail.

Imagine my shock and surprise when I unsuspectingly entered a room in the Groningen art museum with my (then) 9 year old son and was confronted with a "larger than life" photograph by this artist that they had made part of the permanent art collection.

ABSOLUTELY NOT WORK SAFE !!! AND DISTURBING !

http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/ho/serrano5.asp

With some background commentary:

http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/ho/ho3-11-97.asp

 

[Leaferne]

I found the horse; he's an American Paint stallion (Red Pebbles, APHA #00185986, red dun overo) standing at a farm in the Netherlands. link I wonder if the owners know?

 

[MaxMolyneux]

Mother invents 'orgasm machine

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2976271.stm

Mother invents 'orgasm machine'

A mother-of-three has been nominated for an award after she invented a device which she claims will help women achieve orgasms easier.

Liz Paul's stimulator - for women suffering sexual difficulties - picked up the most attention at the British Female Inventor of the Year Awards on Friday.

The device has already sold well on the internet and is likely to reach high streets by August.

Among the other inventions at the central London show were an anti-allergy perfume "partner" and a lightweight ergonomic fork, which took the top prize.

Mrs Paul, from Ilkley, West Yorkshire, came up with the clitoral stimulator in a bid to benefit the estimated five million women in Britain who have trouble reaching orgasm.

Time reduction

Called Vielle, the device is a small plastic stimulator with eight nodules which fits over the finger.

Speaking at the ceremony at London's Café Royal, Mrs Paul, 49, said clinical tests had proved the device could halve the time it takes for a woman to climax and intensify the orgasm.

She said: "Women are not told how to have an orgasm and it needs explaining to them.

"I wanted to break through this barrier and help women with their sexual needs.

I hope my invention will help all those women who have sexual problems."

The device is disposable and is sold in packs of three at £9.95.

Trophy

Mrs Paul aims to sell 300,000 devices by the end of the year.

Winner of the British Female Inventor of the Year Awards was Tish Fearn for her Lite-Life Shaving Fork, to be used for mucking out stables.

She received a trophy and resources from the event's sponsors to market the invention.

Runner-up in the competition was Rachel Quayle whose Perfume Partner invention prevents irritations and allergic reactions to perfume, as well as making the scent last longer.

Bit of a rip off for 9.95 and you only get a disposoble pack of 3. :lol:

Would it workthough?

Women are not told how to have an orgasm and it needs explaining to them

Neither are some fellas but they know how to do it and they could learn off porn iftheydon't know how.

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

Porn site offers soldiers free access in exchange for photos of dead Iraqis

The site's owner says images of nude female soldiers in Iraq and gory photos of dead insurgents provide an unedited version of the war - while the military investigates.

By Mark Glaser
Posted: 2005-09-20

Warning: This story contains links to unsettling images and sites where people glorify violence and pornography -- and document the hell of war. If only life came with such warnings.

The Internet has proven to be a vast resource of information and knowledge, but it only takes one hyperlink to get from the profound to the profane. When reading an Egyptian blog a few weeks ago, I stumbled onto a bulletin board site called NowThatsFuckedUp.com (NTFU), which started out as a place for people to trade amateur pornography of wives and girlfriends.

According to the site's owner, Chris Wilson, who lives in Lakeland, Fla., but hosts the site out of Amsterdam, the site was launched in August 2004 and soon became popular with soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. When female soldiers started to appear in the nude on the site, the Pentagon blocked access to the site from military computers in the field, according to the New York Post.

But the story gets more twisted. Wilson said that soldiers were having trouble using their credit cards in Iraq to access the paid pornographic content on the site, so he offered them free access if they could show that they were actually soldiers. As proof, some sent in G-rated photos of traffic signs in Baghdad or of a day in the life of a soldier abroad. Others sent in what appear to be Iraqi civilians and insurgents who were killed by suicide bombs or soldiers' fire.

Now there's an entire forum on the site titled "Pictures from Iraq and Afghanistan - Gory," where these bloody photos show body parts, exploded heads and guts falling out of people. Along with the photos is a running commentary of people celebrating the kills, cracking jokes and arguing over what kind of weaponry was used to kill them. But the moderators will also step in when the talk gets too heated, and sometimes a more serious discussion about the Iraq war and its aims will break out.

Wilson told me in a phone interview that he is "not very" political and considers NTFU as a community site.

"People say, 'This is a porn site so why are you talking politics?' " Wilson said. "But it's actually a porn community, and any time you have a community with shared interests there's going to be other interests. Just because somebody looks at porn doesn't mean that they have a below-60 IQ and don't know anything. I have doctors and lawyers and police officers and teachers, and it doesn't surprise me that there are educated people who want to discuss things. It's interesting, and I love reading it."

Wilson has no qualms about running the gory photos of war in open forums that don't require registration or payment.

"I enjoy seeing the photos from the soldiers themselves," Wilson said. "I see pictures taken by CNN and the mainstream media, and they all put their own slant on what they report and what they show. To me, this is from the soldier's slant. This is directly from them. They can take the digital cameras and take a picture and send it to me, and that's the most raw you can get it. I like to see it from their point of view, and I think it's newsworthy."

Wilson says it's a judgment call on whether the photos he gets are really from soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan. After months of sifting through photos, Wilson has an idea of the quality of the digital cameras soldiers use and what the terrain is like in those areas of the world.

I couldn't verify whether these gory photos were taken recently in Iraq by soldiers. But the U.S. military is currently looking into the site and trying to authenticate the photos -- and take appropriate action if soldiers are involved. "We do have people who are specifically looking at that website, and I will talk to my colleagues and my bosses here and get back to you," said Staff Sgt. Don Dees, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command (Centcom) in Baghdad.

Two people posting gory photos to the site responded to my e-mail query into their motivations for doing it.

"I access [NTFU] from my personal computer, the government computers are strictly monitored," one person wrote to me. "I would never try to use this site or anything like it on a government computer. To answer your question about posting the gory pictures on this site: What about the beheadings filmed and then put on world wide news? I have seen video of insurgents shooting American soldiers in plain day and thanking God for what they have done. I wouldn't be too concerned what I am doing on a private Web site. I'm more concerned of what my fellow soldiers and I are experiencing in combat."

Another person whose e-mail identified him as David Burke was defiant about posting gory photos and said it was a tradition of all wars.

"Yes I have posted kill photos on other forum sites," Burke wrote me in his e-mail. "The computers are military financed if not owned by the military. I think that with all the service members who are over here it was obvious that photos of dead insurgents would surface as time went on and it is not a new occurrence. There have been pics from all wars of the fighters standing over the bodies of the enemy. The insurgents are more than willing to showcase our dead and wounded so if people have issues with what's shown on this site then they need to stay away and quit bitching about things they know nothing about.

"I made it real clear in most if not all of my posts how I feel about the Iraqi people in general and that feeling has not changed a bit in my time here. I [put] a good friend of mine [in a body bag] just a week ago and that really clinched it for me and my teammates. We will always shoot first and ask no questions, period. The military brass will always try to sanitize the effects of war, no matter when or where, and yes if it was possible they would censor all media coming out of this country, pics and stories."

Condemnation for site swift

The story of NTFU and its unusual exchange of free porn for gory war photos was first picked up by an Italian blogger named Staib, and then the Italian news agency ANSA. Blogger/journalist Helena Cobban, who pens a column for the Christian Science Monitor, asked her blog readers for an English translation of the ANSA article and quickly received many versions that clarified what the site was about.

Cobban was horrified by the gory photos, but tried to make sense of the motivation of people who posted them -- and tried hard to grasp the idea of a serious discussion of war on a porn site. She told me that taking and posting "trophy" photos of dead Iraqis was a gross show of disrespect and a violation of the Geneva Conventions. But she put the blame on the direction of military leadership.

"The important thing is for the U.S. military and political leadership at the highest levels to recommit the nation to the norms of war including the Geneva Conventions, and to be held accountable for the many violations that have taken place so far," Cobban said via e-mail. "What I don't think would be helpful would be further punitive actions that are still limited to the grunts and the foot soldiers, who already have the worst of it."

The Geneva Conventions include Protocol 1, added in 1977 but not ratified by the U.S., Iraq or Afghanistan. It mentions that all parties in a conflict must respect victims' remains, though doesn't mention the photographing of dead bodies. This could well be a judgment call, and the celebratory and derogatory comments added on NTFU make the case more clear.

When I contacted military public affairs people in the U.S. and Iraq, they didn't seem aware of the site and initially couldn't access the site from their own government computers. Eventually, they told me that if soldiers were indeed posting photos of dead Iraqis on the site, then it's not an action that's condoned in any way by the military.

"The glorification of casualties goes against our training and is strongly discouraged," said Todd Vician, a U.S. Defense Department spokesman. "It is our policy that images taken with government equipment or due to access because of a military position must be cleared before released. While I haven't seen these images, I doubt they would be cleared for release. Improper treatment of captured and those killed does not help our mission, is discouraged, investigated when known, and punished appropriately."

Capt. Chris Karns, a Centcom spokesman, told me that there are Department of Defense regulations and Geneva Conventions against mutilating and degrading dead bodies, but that he wasn't sure about regulations concerning photos of dead bodies. He noted that the Bush administration did release graphic photos of the dead bodies of Uday and Qusay Hussein to the media.

Karns said that commanders in the field do have latitude to make their rules more stringent than overarching military regulations, but he didn't expect that cameras would be banned in the field.

"I don't think it will get to that point [where cameras would be banned]," Karns said. "All it takes is one or two individuals to do things like this that cast everyone in a negative light. The vast majority of soldiers are acting responsibly with cameras in the field. But on the Internet there aren't a whole lot of safeguards and the average citizen can create their own site."

Karns did say that if soldiers were posting these photos online, that it would have a negative strategic impact, especially when the enemy relies so heavily on the media to win the battle of perception.

Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, saw the gory photos as another black eye for the U.S. military after the Abu Ghraib prison torture photos.

"This is just another form of pornography," Hooper told me. "I think this is something that should be strongly discouraged by military authorities. It's going to give military personnel a bad name, it's going to harm America's image in the Muslim world and it's just plain wrong. You have to wonder what this says about our military personnel, if first of all they're dealing with pornography and why they would be reveling in the deaths of individuals in Iraq."

Respected media outlets?

NTFU site proprietor Wilson says that the military blocking of his site upset him, but that traffic actually went up after it was blocked. He told me that if the military brass did get in touch with him, and had a good reason for him to remove the gory photos, he would.

"I get many requests for removal," Wilson said. "I get 30 to 40 requests per day for removal for everything across the board on the site. I take each on a case-by-case basis. If [the military] wants something deleted because they think it's a threat to national security or it's showing too much, then obviously, yes, I'm going to get that out of there. But if they're asking me to remove it because they just don't like it, then no."

Wilson says he supported Bush in sending troops to Iraq, but thinks it's long past time that they need to be brought back home. He says he supports the soldiers, and thinks they are pretty split on whether they should be brought home or kept on the job in Iraq. Wilson has tried to obtain a less profane domain name for the site, NTFU.com, but that the domain's owner was asking for way more money than it was worth.

Of course, the NTFU community is not alone in its fascination with the darker, more grotesque side of life. The site Ogrish.com has been around for six years, and includes photos and video of murders, cannibalism, and war kills. The owners of the site explain in the FAQ that they do not enjoy seeing this violent material, but that they are trying to provide an uncensored view of reality.

"Ogrish does not provide a sugar-coated version of the world," the FAQ says. "We feel that people are often unaware of what really goes on around us. Everything you see on Ogrish.com is reality, it's part of our life, whether we like it or not. We are publishing this material to give everyone the opportunity to see things as they are so they can come to their own conclusions rather than settling for biased versions of world events as handed out by the mainstream media."

The site's goal is pretty ambitious: "to become a respected media outlet for uncensored, unbiased news... [with] much more background and educational value to our content." The site uses citizen correspondents in law enforcement and in medicine, much the way that NTFU depends on soldiers in the field who are armed with digital cameras.

Dan Klinker, who formerly was a co-owner of Ogrish.com and now handles PR, told me via e-mail that the site is not about glorifying violence, unlike NTFU.

"As far as I know Ogrish is one of the only sites in this niche that have been focusing on the facts rather than presenting things in a glorifying way like a lot of other sites do (including NowThatsFuckedUp)," Klinker said. "Just the name of that site makes it clear that there's only one goal, which is to shock, glorify and entertain. The combination with bloody pictures in return for naked girls makes them lose all credibility."

While it was difficult for me to ascertain the motivation for people who were posting gory photos to NTFU, I did talk to Steven Most, a psychology postdoctoral fellow at Yale University who has studied the effects of violent and sexual images. He helped explain what these horribly violent images had in common with the nude photographs of women.

"They both seem to be particularly arousing in an emotional way," Most said. "Emotional stimuli can be rated in different ways. You could see something and rate how positive or negative it is. But separate from that is how arousing the image is. A positive picture of a cute puppy dog could be positive but not that arousing, whereas a picture of an opposite sex nude could be just as positive but be rated as extremely arousing. And a picture of a mutilation could be rated as extremely negative but highly arousing. Lately there's been a lot of theories saying that what we're drawn to is the arousing nature of an image regardless of whether we see it as negative or positive."

www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/050920glaser/

 

[JamesWhitehead]

What is more warped, people who make wars and do not openly enjoy them or people who fight them and do?

 

[giantrobot1]

US troops exchanging photos of the dead

I came across this Blog, detailing one guys investigation into what appears to be a site used by US troops to exchange photos of dead Iraqis for pornography:

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/09 ... tures.html

There's not much I can really say about this...

:sob:

 

[Anonymous]

Re: US troops exchanging photos of the dead

I came across this Blog, detailing one guys investigation into what appears to be a site used by US troops to exchange photos of dead Iraqis for pornography:

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/09 ... tures.html

There's not much I can really say about this...

:sob:

It's pretty horrific and it made me wince as well as saddened me. I'm not particularly squeemish either, I've seen some fairly gruesome things in my time and a lot of corpses.

It's easy to be judgemental about it though. Trophies of various sorts have always been part of the 'spoils of war'. In the past, times we'd like to see as more noble or innocent, armies the world over have taken tokens from the enemy dead: hats, guns, etc., etc.. If modern technology had been around on the battle-fields of the Somme or Passchendaele, what would we have seen then? I really can't imagine that it would have been any different. This isn't necessarily a comment on the people involved either. I've known people that have fought in various wars and even read letters from my great-Uncle who fought and died in WWI - including an American who has returned from Afghanistan - and they all say things on much the same lines: people do strange things in strange circumstances.

 

[Jerry_B]

Photos taken by soldiers and of soldiers with the corpses of their enemies is, as has been pointed out, not at all new. Such photos were being taken not all that long after photography itself became quite widespread. There's a trophy element to this.

That said, one assumes the US military takes a dim view of these sorts of photos being placed in the public domain. But that may just be an assumption, of course.

And you're always going to get bozos on the internet thinking it's cool - although I'd doubt they'd have the same attitude to images of dead US soldiers.

 

[Anonymous]

And you're always going to get bozos on the internet thinking it's cool - although I'd doubt they'd have the same attitude to images of dead US soldiers.

Given the American media's stance on showing dead American war casualties - which if memory serves, stretches to how other Western media portray their dead too - I doubt Johnny Bozo would get to the opportunity to think whether it's cool or not.

 

[BuckeyeJones]

Now that IS fucked up indeed!

As the author of that blog states...

Personally, this site sickens me. But I asked myself "why"? War is horrible, and these pictures simply show us the war we don't see on our TV screens. Is there some glorification of killing going on? Sure. And having this on a sex site only makes the glorification that much creepier. But having said, I can't imagine what it must be like for our soldiers to look at scenes like this, day in and day out, for real, up close and personal. That has got to take its toll, and I wouldn't be surprised if, for some of these guys, posting these kind of photos is their own version of therapy. Yes, it's gruesome - but unexpected?

I agree with the above quote. I also will be turning alot of my "boo-rah!" friends onto that site so they can see what their friends are going through over there. From the timbre of the posts previous to mine on this thread, I gather that not many of us, while shocked at seeing these images are surprised by them. I am 100% sure that there are "media control" experts at both 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., and 10 Downing St. that try to control every bit of news that comes out of the theaters of war. Wanting to show us only the side of the war that makes it look like a good struggle and by and large they do a good job at that. There job is much harder now than it was even thirteen years ago with Gulf war I. Now the internet is really coming into its potential as the worlds largest cafe`. I have IM'd a few soldiers that were in the Iraqi "green zone", one of which had just come back from a patrol that involved a fire fight. I find that truly amazing. I know damn well that the feed was monitored by the military, yet I was talking to a kid from Ohio who was in Iraq. Cameras? My God are there cameras over there. There is no way that "they" can control all of the media that is coming and will continue to come out of Iraq.
Mine is not a commentary on the rights or wrongs of the Iraqi war as much as it is on war it self. The disturbing images that are linked on that site are but one face of war, and they need to be known about if not seen, at least known about. Have not images of carnage been used to incite nations to the cause of war ever since man first laid down thoughts to petroglyphs? Just do a google on "lynchings in America" or "the Holocaust" and the awful images are there to remind us of the horror that man is capable of, lest we ever forget.

It was so nearly like visiting the battle-field to look over these [photographs], that all the emotions excited by the actual sight of the stained and sordid scene, strewed with rags, and wrecks, came back to us, and we buried them in the recesses of our cabinet as we would have buried the mutilated remains of the dead they too vividly represented.

--Oliver Wendell Holmes, "Doings of the Sunbeam," The Atlantic, 1862

Peace
=^..^=217

 

[Anonymous]

Thats sick.

 

[OneWingedBird]

Erm, can I click on the first link without having photos of dead bodies all over my monitor?

I'm at a loss to work out from what people are saying where the connection is between said photos and the sex site - it's just the hosting? Or are the photos being billed as some sort of necro porn?

 

[Quake42]

I'm at a loss to work out from what people are saying where the connection is between said photos and the sex site - it's just the hosting? Or are the photos being billed as some sort of necro porn?

According to yesterday's Metro (free London morning paper), the soldiers are given free access to pornography by the site owner if they first upload war pictures. The article suggested that it may have originally simply involved patriotic pictures of soldiers with their buddies etc but has gradually become more and more extreme.

 

[ramonmercado]

SuicideGirls Gone AWOL

SuicideGirls Gone AWOL
By Randy Dotinga

Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,69006,00.html

02:00 AM Sep. 28, 2005 PT

Talk about piercing the veil.

A group of angry ex-models is bashing the SuicideGirls altporn empire, saying its embrace of the tattoo and nipplering set hides a world of exploitation and male domination.

The women are spreading their allegations through the blogosphere, raising the hackles of the SuicideGirls company, which has until now enjoyed a reputation as p orn even feminists can love. It offers burlesque tours, clothes and DVDs in addition to a sprawling online library of nakedpunk and goth women.

"The recent accusations are a little upsetting," said "Missy," the co-founder of SuicideGirls. "We think they're all pretty much unfounded."

According to the site's critics, about models have quit in disgust over the past few weeks. (Anti-SuicideGirls blogs can be found here http://un-pink.blogspot.com/ and here .)

Despite their resignations, their photos remain on the site, minus their ubiquitous SuicideGirls online journals.

It's hard to measure what impact the exodus will have. The site's 75,000 photos of nearly 800 women -- punkified nakedmen known as SuicideBoys only get a tiny chunk of bandwidth -- probably face a much bigger threat from the federal crackdown.On Saturday, SuicideGirls announced that the site was taking down a number of photo sets -- "bloodbathing beauties, rope-bound babes and handcuffed honeys" -- because of the threat of prosecution.

Still, the woman-friendly reputation of SuicideGirls is being battered. Since its creation in 2001, media outlets have lauded the company's focus on goth, indie and punk models. "It wasn't the first altp orn site to come along, but it was certainly the most widely promoted and probably the most influential," said John d'Addario, editor of the blog Fleshbot.

The message of business-side female empowerment hasn't hurt either. "The perception that women had an important/equal role in the administration of the site probably made it more attractive to some people who might not have visited a pornsite otherwise," d'Addario said.

Two of the ex-models say they were attracted by the empowerment message, too. "I liked that you had a journal and voice, you had the chance to make your own (photo) sets," said "Dia," a 30-year-old former model who doesn't wish to be identified because she now works outside the pornbusiness in Northern California.

"I looked forward to making great art," added Dia, who has unsuccessfully tried to get her photos off the site.

She and other models say that contrary to its image as a women-run operation, SuicideGirls is actually controlled by a man -- co-founder Sean Suhl. They accuse him of treating women poorly and failing to pay them enough. (According to the site's FAQ, SuicideGirls models get paid $300 per photo set.)

"The only reasons I'm doing this and I'm sticking my neck out is that people, especially females who are 18 years old and want to be a SuicideGirl, need to understand who they're representing," said 28-year-old ex-model Jennifer Caravella of San Francisco, who said she goes by the name "Sicily." "It's certainly not a group of women who are working together for this."

Not so, according to Missy. "I don't think that's a really good argument," she said. Suhl "co-founded a site that is about the appreciation of women. The majority of the people in the office are women. He deals with women every day."

As for the charges of exploitation, she said models get plenty of opportunities to promote their own bands and "artistic endeavors."

So what's going on? "A few girls," she said, "are spreading rumors and lies."

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

I was watching bits of this on Channel 4 tonight:

22:55 Sexology

Obscene Machines

Channel 4's Sexology strand continues, looking at the startling and, for many, disturbing ways in which some people are utilising technology to crank up their sex lives, examining the potential and consequences for a future world of mechanised sex.

And they had a big feature on Real Dolls - I wodner if a certiany snaily person around these parts was watching it?

Somehting that they said really made me wonder: They will customise your doll but won't make it look under age or dead. They also turned down one guy who trained dogs who wanted an urmmm dog. Then they mentioned rather off hand that they'd do pretty much anything else like add a limb. This was said quite matter of factly as if it came up all the time. If that was quite a normal modification (hmmmmmm that doll just doesn't look real enough - can we have another arm in the middle of its chest) I wonder what really freaky stuff they do? How like the Chapman Brothers does it get? If you asked them to make one with the head of an ibis (or ibex) would they? What about bat wings? Green skin? Two heads (a Zaphod special)? A bumhole in the middle of the forehead?

As was touched on in the extra limbs thread the body dismorphic or body modifiers or Otherkin might lead the way in changing the human bauplan - I wonder if the pervs will actually be way ahead of them experimenting with knocking boots wih all sorts of strange creations.

------------
Today/tomorrow is:

23:05 Sexology

Attack of the Giant Women

For some men, giant women are the ultimate sexual fantasy, a fantasy that takes them beyond the S&M world of the dominatrix and into the weird world of the 'giantessophile'.

Pity it clashes with Lost

 

[MaxMolyneux]

Giant women! What fella would enjoy going out with a woman taller than them? Guess women would find a little man getting down with them thrilling though.

Wouldn't mind a giant lady though. :yeay:

Whats the record for the tallest woman?

 

[Onix_Martinez]

Giant women! What fella would enjoy going out with a woman taller than them? Guess women would find a little man getting down with them thrilling though.

Wouldn't mind a giant lady though. :yeay:

Whats the record for the tallest woman?

I did. I am 5'4'' and had a girlfriend, on a on and off relationship for seven years, that happens to be 5'6''. We looke pretty funny while walking under the rain, in a half embrace, with her holding the umbrella

 

[MaxMolyneux]

Giant women! What fella would enjoy going out with a woman taller than them? Guess women would find a little man getting down with them thrilling though.

Wouldn't mind a giant lady though. :yeay:

Whats the record for the tallest woman?

I did. I am 5'4'' and had a girlfriend, on a on and off relationship for seven years, that happens to be 5'6''. We looke pretty funny while walking under the rain, in a half embrace, with her holding the umbrella

Does she have those instincts were when she sees something smaller than her and thinks awwww cute like when they see kittens?

 

[escargot]

This is Page 69 by the way.

Yup, I did catch the Realdoll feature. Very intersting, although the tray of ladybits left me feeling a little queasy.

The, um, satisfied customer who demonstrated his technique was rather brave. If not barking mad.

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

The, um, satisfied customer who demonstrated his technique was rather brave. If not barking mad.

I think I could have probably got by without finding out about his school uniformed doll, the complex pulley system he uses, his Photoshopping his ex-wife's face until photos hes taken of himself having sex with the doll, the fact that he can lose his ardour until the doll tickles his......

As I said - a little too much info.

 

[escargot]

How long he keeps 'going' cropped up too. What a stud. 8)

Also, the fact that he sometimes, just sometimes, thinks the doll is real... :lol:

The guy with the automata-fetish too, didn't believe a word of it. Obviously a wind-up.

 

[Onix_Martinez]

Giant women! What fella would enjoy going out with a woman taller than them? Guess women would find a little man getting down with them thrilling though.

Wouldn't mind a giant lady though. :yeay:

Whats the record for the tallest woman?

I did. I am 5'4'' and had a girlfriend, on a on and off relationship for seven years, that happens to be 5'6''. We looke pretty funny while walking under the rain, in a half embrace, with her holding the umbrella

Does she have those instincts were when she sees something smaller than her and thinks awwww cute like when they see kittens?

That's probably part of the equation also. Tenderness is always around in a romatinc relation anyway.

 

[MaxMolyneux]

Giant women! What fella would enjoy going out with a woman taller than them? Guess women would find a little man getting down with them thrilling though.

Wouldn't mind a giant lady though. :yeay:

Whats the record for the tallest woman?

I did. I am 5'4'' and had a girlfriend, on a on and off relationship for seven years, that happens to be 5'6''. We looke pretty funny while walking under the rain, in a half embrace, with her holding the umbrella

Does she have those instincts were when she sees something smaller than her and thinks awwww cute like when they see kittens?

That's probably part of the equation also. Tenderness is always around in a romatinc relation anyway.

I'd need a woman to be over 6ft 4 If I wanted a taller Girlfriend!

Anyone know any?

Yeah, Women like to be very tender.

 

[Leaferne]

I know one who's 6'2".

Have only every had one bf who was significantly taller than I am, and I'm only 5'8".

It's not the size of the instrument, it's the skill and soul of the musician.

 

[ramonmercado]

Sex 'therapy' psychologist guilty

Sex 'therapy' psychologist guilty

A psychologist who had sex with a patient claiming it was therapy has been suspended from the British Psychological Society for three years.
Dr Steven Manley, 51, of Wrexham, was banned from practising as a member of the BPS after being found guilty of professional misconduct on Monday.

Dr Manley met the woman, known as Mrs W, at car parks across north Wales.

Mrs W said Dr Manley "brainwashed" her into thinking it would help her and charged her £35 for the sessions.

The panel, sitting in London, heard that chartered psychologist Dr Manley began seeing Mrs W on a professional basis in April 2002 after she had been referred to him by her GP.

Mrs W, 52, from Wrexham, said her relationship with Dr Manley first became inappropriate in December 2002.


Psychology is a one-to-one relationship and psychologists should not be doing the things he was doing to me
Mrs W

In her witness statement, Mrs W said she did not complain initially.

She said: "He made me feel special and it was the first time that anyone seemed to care about me. I did realise that it was unusual for a professional to do this though."

In March 2003, Dr Manley persuaded Mrs W to become a private as well as a NHS patient, charging her £35 for sessions which were carried out in car parks in Rhyl and Prestatyn, where they would have sex.

Caspar Glyn, representing the British Psychological Society (BPS), said: "He would justify such things to her by saying it was sex therapy."

'Totally brainwashed'

In June 2003, Dr Manley told Mrs W he was leaving his wife and persuaded her to leave her husband and daughter and move into a caravan with him.

Giving evidence, Mrs W told the panel: "He persuaded me that it would be better for me, that it was the right thing to do.

"I was totally brainwashed by him. He had taken me over by that stage."

Mrs W said she reported the affair to the Conwy and Denbighshire NHS Trust after Dr Manley ended the relationship in 2004.

She denied she had been motivated by revenge, but did so because she did not want the same thing to happen to other patients.

She added: "There (are) an awful lot of vulnerable patients out there.

"Psychology is a one-to-one relationship and psychologists should not be doing the things he was doing to me."

Allegation denied

Mrs W said she had been left in a worse psychological state than when she began seeing Dr Manley.

Dr Manley, who was suspended while an investigation was carried out into the allegations, admitted professional misconduct in that he had discussed other clients with Mrs W and that he had tried to conceal their relationship by shredding her medical records.

But he denied the sexual relationship began while Mrs W was in his professional care.

The committee found in favour of Mrs W that the sexual relationship began before Dr Manley discharged Mrs W from his care at the end of May 2003.

He was found guilty of conducting himself in his work as a psychologist in a manner likely to be detrimental to client and of exploiting a relationship of influence and trust by embarking on a relationship with Mrs W while she was still his client.

'Totally inappropriate'

Phillip Partridge, chair of the panel, said the speed with which the pair moved in together following the end of Mrs W's treatment suggested they were already involved in a sexual relationship.

He said there were inconsistencies in what Dr Manley told the NHS Trust and his witness statement, whereas Mrs W had been a composed and coherent witness.

Under conditions imposed by the panel, Dr Manley will only be able to begin practising again as a member of the BPS if he continues to undergo professional training and if he does not attempt to practise psychology during the period of his suspension.

At the end of the hearing Mrs W said: "His actions have caused my physical and mental health to deteriorate. I feel he acted in a totally inappropriate manner."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/wales/4350712.stm

Published: 2005/10/17 18:47:01 GMT

© BBC MMV

 

[ArthurASCII]

I know one who's 6'2".

Have only every had one bf who was significantly taller than I am, and I'm only 5'8".

It's not the size of the instrument, it's the skill and soul of the musician.

I'm 6'2" and Mrs ASCII is 4'10". I don't see how relative height figures in a loving relationship.

 

[JamesWhitehead]

A very odd tale here

Lesbian stalker loses vampire love battle

Chris Osuh

ORDER: Honor Donnelly.
A LESBIAN stalker convicted of harassing a "Vampire Queen" performance poet has lost her High Court bid for a judicial review.

Mum-of-three Honor Donnelly, 50, of Wythenshawe, was given a year's restraining order, a six-month rehabilitation order and £75 costs by magistrates in Manchester after she became obsessed with Rosemary Garland, bombarding her with love letters and pestering her at writers' meetings.

Miss Garland, 39, from Manchester appeared on stage as poet "Rosie Lugosi, the Vampire Queen," a comedy act.

Donnelly, a former Inland Revenue clerk, told judges she was the victim of "lies and injustice", but failed to win a judicial review.

Manchester magistrates heard that Ms Donnelly became smitten with Miss Garland in 2001. She is said to have followed to Miss Garland to poetry readings where she would pester her and was eventually barred from the meetings.

HARASSED: Rosie Lugosi, vampire poet.
Seduction

The seduction campaign ended briefly when Donnelly was warned by police, but soon afterwards she applied to be a backstage dresser in a pantomine Miss Garland was performing in.

Today Ms Donnelly claimed the court decisions had "created an injustice for me and my children".

She said: "It is not in the interests of justice to humiliate someone for a communication which was not distressful to the person who received it."

Lord Justice Maurice Kay and Mr Justice Penry-Davey held there was "no merit" in her case and refused permission for a judicial review.

:shock:

"Well, officer, you may be wondering why I have nailed this Wythenshawe lesbian over my bed. I don't suppose you are going to believe this but I ran out of garlic. . . " :?