Pandoras Box

Jo · 2005-10-17 20:36:44

First of all - thanks to Portuguese Man 'O War for speaking out what I thought for long...

The overwhelming number of *Yes-please-more-sayers* in the discussion about full-body-agony is a sign, that most people do NOT understand the concept and purpose of this site.

The initial purpose was to show the FACE as the most erotic PART of the human body. But as it seems to be now, the concept (and perhaps the hope of richard and lauren (and of course of me, too!), that it´s more the artistic aspect instead of the more porn-like aspect what people like) has died the day, where the full body vid has been shown.

It seems, that erotic is important, yes, but the manner of erotics does not play any role. The face is not enough, the whole body is wanted. The FACE as the most erotic part of the body has lost the fight. If you have to choose between the face and the whole body... body wins!

In my eyes this is the death of a great idea. And that's what I find very very sad.

As Portuguese Man 'O War said: Pandoras Box is open.

Let's hope, that despite all these *more*-discussions the site won't turn into a mainstream-site...

Grazee · 2005-10-17 21:12:52

Sometimes I like listening to orchestral music, sometimes just a string quartet or solo piano. It depends on my mood and I neither prefer one type or the other. Less is not always more. Neither is more always more. There can be value in both.

I enjoyed the fully clothed agony, yet kept wishing that I could see a close up of her face. I think if the main site sticks to its roots, then there is no problem with this kind of experimentation featuring in the 'Overkill' section. Featuring only the faces of the contributors is the unique selling point of the site. I can not think of any reason to change it.

richard · 2005-10-18 15:23:19

Jo wrote:

It seems, that erotic is important, yes, but the manner of erotics does not play any role. The face is not enough, the whole body is wanted. The FACE as the most erotic part of the body has lost the fight. If you have to choose between the face and the whole body... body wins!
In my eyes this is the death of a great idea. And that's what I find very very sad.
As Portuguese Man 'O War said: Pandoras Box is open.
Let's hope, that despite all these *more*-discussions the site won't turn into a mainstream-site...

But Jo, the idea hasn't changed - how does the reaction of the other viewers change your reaction to the site?

Also don't forget that the face is part of the body. Imagine if we showed the body only from the neck down - do you suppose that would get much support? I think not. I am content to know that the face is essential but the rest of the body is optional.

santabear · 2005-10-18 16:35:59

And if the idea of the site is to EXPLORE...then it should present and discuss various options. The discussion of the "full body" experience is (to me) very much worth having it on the site, whether or not it continues.

salsasalsa · 2005-10-18 19:56:43

Jo wrote:

First of all - thanks to Portuguese Man 'O War for speaking out what I thought for long...
The overwhelming number of *Yes-please-more-sayers* in the discussion about full-body-agony is a sign, that most people do NOT understand the concept and purpose of this site.
The initial purpose was to show the FACE as the most erotic PART of the human body. But as it seems to be now, the concept (and perhaps the hope of richard and lauren (and of course of me, too!), that it´s more the artistic aspect instead of the more porn-like aspect what people like) has died the day, where the full body vid has been shown.
It seems, that erotic is important, yes, but the manner of erotics does not play any role. The face is not enough, the whole body is wanted. The FACE as the most erotic part of the body has lost the fight. If you have to choose between the face and the whole body... body wins!
In my eyes this is the death of a great idea. And that's what I find very very sad.
As Portuguese Man 'O War said: Pandoras Box is open.
Let's hope, that despite all these *more*-discussions the site won't turn into a mainstream-site...

This one is hard to beat for sheer negativity and refusal to accept a diversity of tastes.

Faces do not exist in a vaccum. Do you object to shoulders in the frame? What about naked shoulders? What about a moving shoulder (the one connected to the masturbating arm)? What about a naked moving shoulder?

OK, what about an upper arm? Or an elbow, heaven forbid (anyone here familiar with the Mikado?) - is that Verboten?

A one-off clothed body, and the site has died? Dear, oh dear ...

Tonning · 2005-10-18 20:42:53

The laws of my country contains a passage that is locally known as "penis in motion". What the law says is that a video must not contain scenes "closing in on and dwelling upon sexual organs and their use" (words to that effect).

What you find in BA is quite the opposite of what this law sescribes. BA is allmost all mental sexuality and no physical, all assotiation, emotion asf, and absolutely no visible physical activity to mention. It's all about the "closing in" of the mind.

The legislators of my country hate and fear sexuality itself far above the actual having sex. I imagine they can accept any sickest of orgies possible, really, if they could only be absolutely sure of no-one feeling anything or the worst of evils: Liking it!

Richard and Lauren: What means a lot to me is that they would SO much like to destroy a site like the one you run, much, much more than a average porn site, but the videos leaves them void of a rational, tangible reason, no cocks, no cunts, not even nudity to strike out against, just the never ending "hupfh, it's not normal ... I don't like it ... what's the neeeeeeeeeeed for this ... !!".

Groucho Marx is suppodes to have said: "... I think sex is here to stay ...!"

Jo · 2005-10-18 23:37:27

richard wrote:

But Jo, the idea hasn't changed - how does the reaction of the other viewers change your reaction to the site?
Also don't forget that the face is part of the body. Imagine if we showed the body only from the neck down - do you suppose that would get much support? I think not. I am content to know that the face is essential but the rest of the body is optional.

Richard, I think the point is that if you'd let people chose between body and face - body will get most points - and face will lose.

As your origin concept and philosophy said you wanted to show the face as the MOST erotic part of the human body. BUT: as the last vid showed: there are (till now) nearly 70 opinions. Only two or three like to keep the site like it is and the big rest wants to change (if only for a time) towards the fullbody option. I ask you: WHO is interested in the only-face any longer?

That's why I said: Your idea has died...

Nevertheless your vids (even the one full-clothed...) are surely great, exceptional, asthetical and really beautiful... but: not enough for most of the posters...

pinguin · 2005-10-19 07:34:23

Jo wrote:

That's why I said: Your idea has died...

Yes and no. If you want to see the full body shots, just go to ISM and/or Abbey Winters. You'll quickly find that it lacks the magic and mystery of BA.

Having said that, after nearly 400 agonies I must confess the clips no longer have the same effect on me as they had when I just found this site. The concept has worn a bit thin and there doesn't seem to be much creativity left. Gradually all the clips start to look a bit the same to me. No disrespect to all the brave and beautiful people on BA, but even 400 paintings of Van Gogh in a row become a bit boring.

alaclark · 2005-10-19 08:01:46

Tonning wrote:

The laws of my country contains a passage that is locally known as "penis in motion". What the law says is that a video must not contain scenes "closing in on and dwelling upon sexual organs and their use" (words to that effect).
What you find in BA is quite the opposite of what this law sescribes. BA is allmost all mental sexuality and no physical, all assotiation, emotion asf, and absolutely no visible physical activity to mention. It's all about the "closing in" of the mind.
The legislators of my country hate and fear sexuality itself far above the actual having sex. I imagine they can accept any sickest of orgies possible, really, if they could only be absolutely sure of no-one feeling anything or the worst of evils: Liking it!

>

Tonning: penis in motion, no: Venus in motion, yes? Is that the idea?

Sorry! Mainly wanted to ask, are things THAT bad still in (a) what we (in UK anyway) think of as part of long-liberated Scandinavia, and, more specifically (b) in what I revere as homeland of the wonderful and liberating Agnar Mykle? His Song of the Red Ruby, and Lasso Round the Moon, are gratefully remembered as part of my erotic education!

p.s. On the main thread here, I'm a head-and-shoulders man myself, but happy with very occasional extensions and variants, such as the duos/pairs, and such as your recent pionering whole-body. (Well, almost whole: did we ever actually get to see her feet?!)

Last edited by alaclark (2005-10-19 08:06:47)

AceHoly · 2005-10-19 12:13:49

Jo -

I've lurked here for quite some time and enjoyed the site immensely. Even volunteered to beta test the new site - 'cause I'm good like that.

I have had the urge to post a first message several times but suppressed it. This time I'm actually taking the plunge. You've been the reason each time.

I simply must ask: is it so necessary for you to be the Forum Voice of Doom and Gloom? Because the Site Admins post a full body Agony in OVERKILL - not in the main area, but OVERKILL - you have to bemoan the "death" of the concept? Simply because this issue did not go your way you get "sad" and declare the "great idea" as dead? You have no foundation for that - and you insult the admins and the members here when you say so.

I've found that you are the first person to jump on newcomers and berate them for what YOU consider to be "bad" posts. You jump on new ideas and decry them because YOU don't like them. In America we call that "Firehosing." Or worse - censorship.

Never mind that the FBA (Full Body Agony) was only shown in Overkill and not with the main Agonees. Never mind that you have to go out of your way to access them in Overkill. Never mind that there has been NO indication from anyone that FBA is the direction the site is going in. You have to complain.

These forums seemed populated by good people with open minds. They, for the most part, have seemed very friendly and open to suggestions, idea exchange, and good old fashioned communication. But your posts have often stood out as bastions of negativity.

May I suggest that if you find a newcomer posting to the forums that instead of giving them a written tongue-lashing if YOU find their posts out-of-bounds (and honestly in many occasions I thought you were greatly over-reacting) you instead WELCOME them and gently give them guidance as to what might be acceptable in the forum. Treat everyone as if they were a previous or potential Agonee - I believe we all have the utmost of respect for those folks gracious enough to share their most intimate moment with us. Don't we all deserve that kind of respect?

And may I suggest that instead of trying to force everyone to subscribe to your way of thinking (i.e. FBA's are bad, if you have even one the site is doomed!) that you recognize that not everyone believes as you do, but that the Site Admins have clearly safeguarded the core of what makes this place great - Face Only Agonies in the main area - while experimenting with alternative videos that still fall within the guidelines (no nudity) in an area off the beaten path.

In other words - lighten up, my friend. Don't worry, be happy! :-) Think positive and be kind to others always.

You may call me Ace. :-)

salsasalsa · 2005-10-19 12:49:56

Jo wrote:

I ask you: WHO is interested in the only-face any longer?
... That's why I said: Your idea has died...

More categorical negativity, Jo. Plenty here are interested in 'only face'. But some of us are sufficiently broad-minded to like the odd piece of cheese with our lettuce sandwich.

al · 2005-10-19 17:01:09

pinguin wrote:

... even 400 paintings of Van Gogh in a row become a bit boring.

Umm... well... Yeah.
Even though I really like olny a handful of paintings...
<return to positivity>
Mr. Van Gogh, keep up the good work! (please)

Tonning · 2005-10-19 21:20:53

Oh no, Alaclarc! Not bad at all. No fear. There is even a norwegian transvestite TV sexologist by the name of Esther Pirelli. We steadily improve our world by keeping our moralists down and driving them back, but in doing so we need to arm ourselves with good sex of all kinds

One can compare a porn movie to a musical. You just replace the silly song and dace numbers with equally stupid f***** scenes, and there you are. If Richard wants to keep the site at a safe distance to the main stream dump by use of some restrictions, it's brilliant with me.

But I agree with you Alaclark. There must be a lot of ways of developing and expanding without compromizing the main principles of this site.

Last edited by Tonning (2005-10-19 21:22:42)

No1steelerfan · 2005-10-19 21:47:50

I must say that I was, at first, disappointed to see that Richard and Lauren succumbed to the pressure put up by the members who sought something different, like OV-00086. But now I think that the basic values of the site are still intact. Placing the video in Overkill keeps it off the main page so the purists don't have to be constantly reminded it's there. Then we have to remember that this is a pleasure for us but a business for Richard and Lauren. They have to do what they think necessary to bring in more customers. And lastly, it isn't such a bad thing to throw a bone to those who are already members to keep them coming back. And, purist that I am, I found the idea to be quite interesting and evocative without totally compromising the basic values that people joined for in the first place.

My only question is one of wondering. As in how many hits and downloads has OV-00086 gotten as compared to other agonies both in Overkill and the main pages?

Last edited by No1steelerfan (2005-10-19 21:54:16)

Jo · 2005-10-19 21:53:57

AceHoly wrote:

...lighten up, my friend. Don't worry, be happy! :-) Think positive and be kind to others always.

Ace,

first of all: welcome to the page and thanks for your honest reply!

I found some (true) points to think about and will try to be less negative and insulting next time...

I am sure, you did not only understand my thoughts and behaviour but also my fear of a changement (and therefore struggling against it so strong...) behind.

I just don't like the site to be changed, and I understand (now), that others may think otherwise. My fear is, that Richard and Lauren have created a huge demand for more and now may have difficulties to resist the pressure of the more-sayers and therefore may change the concept. That's my fear. Cause I like the site as it IS!

But that's only MY fear and MY opinion...

Richard & Lauren, you are doing a great job! Keep on doing so...

Portuguese Man'O War · 2005-10-19 22:22:30

This probably isnt the best of analogies, but its what I could manage this late in the evening, so bear with me, people: For me Beautiful Agony is a bit like having sex with handcuffs. Handcuffs, like BAs Thou-Shall-Not-Show-Anything-Below-The-Shoulders Dogma are a self-imposed limitation that deprives you of an obvious and immediate pleasure, but in turn it allows you to experience more refined and original sensations. Sure, one is only human and sometimes you just want to get rid of the darn things and touch your partner, just like many a time (specially with the most attractive agonees) I had the fervent wish to press some button and zoom out so I could see the rest of them. But at the end of the day I was always glad I had no such option because, well, what would be the point of using handcuffs/visiting BA, then?! Stretching this analogy thing even further, the Overkill FBA is like keeping a key to the handcuffs in the bedside drawer which enables you to release yourself and get a full dose of obvious and immediate pleasure. Of course its a heck of a lot of work to open the drawer, get the key out with your mouth and open the lock, just like the Overkill section is a bit out of your way, but now the possibility is there, and part of me thinks that is kind of sad. Granted, this doesnt mean Richard and Lauren have released a Monstrous Wave of Evil upon the Earth, so Pandoras box is now open! WAS a tad alarmist (sorry, guys!..) but (allow me to be a bit negative here) if you are to end up yelling Jeez, its sure great to get rid of those lousy handcuffs!!!, maybe you shouldnt have bought them to spice up things in bed in the first place

erdna · 2005-10-20 03:44:08

We have to understand deeply that the whole universe is not static. Stars, galaxies, the solar sytem, our planet, continents, the virus, the bacteria, the man, the fashion, the hair cut, the girls shoes heels...everything changes, everything is dynamic, nothing is static. Even more, a lot of abstract things change too like ideas, philosophy, arts, music, photography, painting, morals, movies, liberty, democracy, government, technology...Everything is in evolution. A simple atom is changing all the time. The most stable particule is the proton which has a very very long life.
Why then BA shouldn't change? The status quo is dangerous. Adaptation and anticipation are the keys.The one who doesn't go ahead actually step back. That's why for a healthy site, there is a need for evolution and diversification. BA overkill is a very good way to do it and OV0086 a good move to evolve. If you don't adapt you disappear like the dynosaurs did. Can't wait to see the BA site new approach! Is it too hot stuff!!!???

AceHoly · 2005-10-20 03:51:21

Thanks for the welcome, Jo! Much obliged.

Fear of change is understandable. Fortunately, Richard and Lauren seem pretty dedicated to keeping the core of the site on target conceptually. Overkill has always been about spill-over that didn't quite belong on the "main" part of the site.

Showing people talking about their orgasms is as much a deviation from the main Agonizations (ok, I'm making up words as I go, but at least I'm using punctuation. :-D ) as the FBA is. The only difference in the deviation is that one is visually sexual and the other is intellectually sexual.

I wouldn't want the main site to be clogged with a lot of talking, either. I'm pretty sure R&L (or should that be L&R?) wouldn't let that happen. I think the same will be true for the FBA. As with a television program, if one doesn't want to view something in Overkill, one simply need not click there... or click on a specific overkill that is not to their taste.

I understand your concern. But we need to have a certain amount of trust that the folks who brought us this concept want to stay true to it as well.

Ace

miamibob · 2005-10-20 10:45:56

Hey, boys and girls: I think it's great that the forum generates such passionate talk, but everyone sounds like they think the fate of the world hangs in the balance over this issue. It doesn't. If you don't want to watch a full-body clip, then don't watch it. Personally I enjoyed it, but after watching it a couple of times I haven't been back. It lacks the intimacy of the full-face shots. But we're all curious about what they're doing "down under" (pun intended, so why not post a few more if people want to send them in? It would put more variety in the mix, and we are all grown-ups and can choose what we want to watch.

zzzooo · 2005-11-09 09:08:59

ummm, okay. this thread is old but the whole full-body thing is imho kind of a moot issue...

A. This is a site that encourages people to submit face-only vids of themselves having orgasms, which we all deem worth paying to see...

B. I doubt as many beautiful people as appear on this site would want to submit vids which exposed themselves further, unless it were perhaps anonymously (sans face)...

C. That's not the point. The point is the "Beautiful Agony" which is orgasm expressed. Not "Throbbing Vaginas and Penises" or other graphic imagery associated with typical porn. (not that there's anything wrong with that in its own context)

D. There are plenty of sites out there which show the whole body... some are associated with this one, like ISM. (and that is their own context)

E. See Khanada's thread about What do Women find Arousing?" and you'll get a good idea of why this site's a turn-on for women and leaves men wanting more... some great posts there by Ruby and others... really thought-provoking about how our own psychologies of arousal work, male or female

Last edited by zzzooo (2005-11-09 09:10:37)

#1 2005-10-17 20:36:44

Pandoras Box

#2 2005-10-17 21:12:52

Re: Pandoras Box

#3 2005-10-18 15:23:19

Re: Pandoras Box

#4 2005-10-18 16:35:59

Re: Pandoras Box

#5 2005-10-18 19:56:43

Re: Pandoras Box

#6 2005-10-18 20:42:53

Re: Pandoras Box

#7 2005-10-18 23:37:27

Re: Pandoras Box

#8 2005-10-19 07:34:23

Re: Pandoras Box

#9 2005-10-19 08:01:46

Re: Pandoras Box

#10 2005-10-19 12:13:49

Re: Pandoras Box

#11 2005-10-19 12:49:56

Re: Pandoras Box

#12 2005-10-19 17:01:09

Re: Pandoras Box

#13 2005-10-19 21:20:53

Re: Pandoras Box

#14 2005-10-19 21:47:50

Re: Pandoras Box

#15 2005-10-19 21:53:57

Re: Pandoras Box

#16 2005-10-19 22:22:30

Re: Pandoras Box

#17 2005-10-20 03:44:08

Re: Pandoras Box

#18 2005-10-20 03:51:21

Re: Pandoras Box

#19 2005-10-20 10:45:56

Re: Pandoras Box

#20 2005-11-09 09:08:59

Re: Pandoras Box

Board footer