Viewing more than the face

toymaster3 · 2005-07-10 18:20:49

Perhaps a compromise may be in order regarding the policy of BA and the wishes of some members to see more or know more: The site administrators could post information about the actions leading to the orgasm that is presented. It could be specified whether masturabtion or oral is the cause and/or whether devices such as vibrators are used etc. It also might be nice to have some biographical information about the subject with the clip and/or a name as an option. Another suggestion might be to have a picture of the subject fully clothed along with the clip. I think this would add to the eroticism in combination with the face/orgasm clip.

fred · 2005-07-11 00:30:10

Here is my suggestion: perhaps you could consider showing the full body in "the act" but fully clothed. Probably wouldn't work for the guys, but I have a couple vids from other sites where we see a woman, say, with her hand down in her jeans, we see the hand is working away and the fabric of the pants moving as a result, etc. but no "rude bits" exposed. Personally I find these very erotic. I love the face only, don't get me wrong, but might be something to consider for variety's sake while still remaining 100% non-pornographic.

Jo · 2005-07-11 21:40:54

toymaster3 wrote:

...biographical information about the subject...
...a picture of the subject...

subject, object, product, goods...

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HUMANS! Respectfully. :x

toymaster3 · 2005-07-11 22:41:09

I did not mean to use the term "subject" in a pejorative manner; nor
nor do I think that the words "biographical" or "information" convey
a lack of respect for humans. I did not refer to any "product" at
at all. In fact, I think that providing some background about the
"humans" depicted here would tend to personalize things. Sorry if you
you were offended. .

johnp54 · 2005-07-12 03:25:52

fred wrote:

Here is my suggestion: perhaps you could consider showing the full body in "the act" but fully clothed. I have a couple vids from other sites where we see a woman, say, with her hand down in her jeans, we see the hand is working away and the fabric of the pants moving as a result, etc. but no "rude bits" exposed. Personally I find these very erotic. I love the face only, don't get me wrong, but might be something to consider for variety's sake while still remaining 100% non-pornographic.

Sounds like a great idea Fred!

ronper · 2005-07-18 14:59:59

Fred, I like your suggestion as well. A hand down the pants, or a vibrator being held up underneath a skirt, would provide the visuals that are sometimes desparately desired without turning it into a porn site, which I hope never happens. While the face is where I focus, seeing the body movements is sometimes so much fun.

It would be easy to have a separate section with neck up only vids and those with more exposure. I, for one, would still keep out full nudity, as then it become porn. I just would have loved seeing what someone like #161 (I hope that's the right one) was doing to get herself off out in that park or field or wherever she was. Was she so bold as to use her hands in that public setting? BTW, I also would love to see more agonies out of the bedroom!

lucius · 2005-07-19 14:00:31

The internet is full of naked bodies doing all sorts of things. The unique quality of this site is that it leads us to focus on the human experience of sexual pleasure and not simply a set of manipulated images to prompt a response in ourselves.

Keep it as it is.

Lago NY · 2005-07-19 15:59:28

toymaster3 wrote:

Perhaps a compromise may be in order regarding the policy of BA and the wishes of some members to see more or know more:

The compromise being to allow it to grow and mature in a fashion suitable to , and harmonious, with the basic foundations, which have endeared us to it in the first place.

austin · 2005-07-19 16:13:13

There are thousands of sites showing naked people, people having sex or being naked in public, women masturbating while naked with fully exposed genetalia or hands under skirts. What drew me to this site, and granted I am brand new, is that it offers something different. These are real people, having real experiences. Just looking at their faces, and into their eyes, makes the experience so much more real, and erotic, than seeing a woman with a vibrator making fake sounds.

If people don't like what is being offered here, they are free to go somwhere else. I'd never eat garbage food at some place like the Olive Garden, so I don't go there. I could show up at the door and offer suggestions on how to make the place cater to people other that white trash, but it's just so much easier to go somewhere else that has decent food and service. And if I changed it, where would the people from the trailer parks dine?

So if you want nudity, vibrators, etc., you should look for another site.

flamesofhades · 2005-07-19 19:59:03

I dont think seeing the whole body is anymore pornograffic then just the face...

toymaster3 · 2005-07-20 03:11:43

It is amazing to me to think that a mere suggestion of compromise can evoke such rancor and negative emotion among some members. How we got to calling people "white trash" and referring to trailer park residents is quite remarkable. Although I fully agree that this site is splendid a it is, we should be free to make suggestions nonetheless. After all, the moderators need not follow any of them at all.

austin · 2005-07-20 03:33:27

Toymaster, I am sorry if you are unfamiliar with the argumentative technique of analogy. An analogy is when one takes the same logic from the problem at hand and applies it to a completely unrelated issue for the purpose of illustration. If this is still unclear to you, let me be perfectly clear, I called no one on here white trash or said they live in a trailer park.

If you identified with these terms, that's on you. Maybe you just like to dine at the Olive Garden.

No1steelerfan · 2005-07-20 08:10:54

toymaster3 wrote:

It is amazing to me to think that a mere suggestion of compromise can evoke such rancor and negative emotion among some members. How we got to calling people "white trash" and referring to trailer park residents is quite remarkable. Although I fully agree that this site is splendid a it is, we should be free to make suggestions nonetheless. After all, the moderators need not follow any of them at all.

But when we have been told time and time again that these changes will never be made, it's time to quit flogging a dead horse. And maybe check out another thread or two and see if this issue has ever been raised before. Which it has, probably 30 times in the almost 2 months I have been a member.

It ain't changing, not in this way. We have been assured of this probably 20 times by Richard, the administrator of this site.

Jo · 2005-07-20 20:19:22

No1steelerfan wrote:

But when we have been told time and time again that these changes will never be made, it's time to quit flogging a dead horse. And maybe check out another thread or two and see if this issue has ever been raised before. Which it has, probably 30 times in the almost 2 months I have been a member.

So, imagine how often I heard this topic, since I am a member for the whole living period of this site...

And I have to say, I am tired of discussing this theme again and again!

No1steelerfan · 2005-07-21 00:42:02

Jo wrote:

So, imagine how often I heard this topic, since I am a member for the whole living period of this site...
And I have to say, I am tired of discussing this theme again and again!

I bow to your seniority, Jo. Like your posts, by the way.

toymaster3 · 2005-07-21 12:23:22

Since I am a new member, I was unaware that the discussion of this topic is basically an exercise in futility, so I agree that we should all abandon it and move on to other things. I had seen so many posts where people expressed different points of view, that I had assumed this issue was worth a look. I now realize the error of my ways and I thank you for pointing this out to me. On the subject of analogies, I am aware of what they are and how they are used as rhetorical devices. Even within that context I sill feel that there was no need to use "white trash" as part of the device since it could very easily offend some members. BTW, I do agree with you about the Olive Garden.

Last edited by toymaster3 (2005-07-21 12:24:56)

#1 2005-07-10 18:20:49

Viewing more than the face

#2 2005-07-11 00:30:10

Re: Viewing more than the face

#3 2005-07-11 21:40:54

Re: Viewing more than the face

#4 2005-07-11 22:41:09

Re: Viewing more than the face

#5 2005-07-12 03:25:52

Re: Viewing more than the face

#6 2005-07-18 14:59:59

Re: Viewing more than the face

#7 2005-07-19 14:00:31

Re: Viewing more than the face

#8 2005-07-19 15:59:28

Re: Viewing more than the face

#9 2005-07-19 16:13:13

Re: Viewing more than the face

#10 2005-07-19 19:59:03

Re: Viewing more than the face

#11 2005-07-20 03:11:43

Re: Viewing more than the face

#12 2005-07-20 03:33:27

Re: Viewing more than the face

#13 2005-07-20 08:10:54

Re: Viewing more than the face

#14 2005-07-20 20:19:22

Re: Viewing more than the face

#15 2005-07-21 00:42:02

Re: Viewing more than the face

#16 2005-07-21 12:23:22

Re: Viewing more than the face

Board footer