Jump to content

Recommended Posts

PHWOAR GET A LOAD OF 'ER I WOULDN'T MIND GIVIN' 'ER ONE DRIBBLE


Does anyone remember the days when you didn't have to sing about being lesbian-curious to make yourself sexier to the masses?


I'd choose pseudo-lipsticklezzies Tatu over her. At least their song was better and they don't look like they work the cheese counter at Asda on Saturday (and have a name to match)


file.php?20,file=1332

I clearly need to shop at Asda more often.


And sex has always sold *Bob* - Elvis sure as heck used it. It's just that striaght sex no longer holds the curiousity it once did. To create any sort of media interest you need an angle. Some choose crime (gangasta rappers), homophobia (gangsta rappers) or misogyny (gangsta rappers) whilst our friend Katy chose lesbianism.


You didn't write that tAtU song did you *Bob*? I think I remember you bigging that up before. Very sly.

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Can?t say I have James but if it elicited the same

> reaction in teenage girls as two girls kissing

> does in teenage boys I I probably would have given

> it a go.


I think us girls are just a little too coy to admit it... but I think you may find it does indeed have the same effect...

Haha, hadn't really bothered following this thread, but now I'm sooooooo glad I gave into curiosity (err so to speak).

Thanks you thank you *Bob*.


And if it was one of yours then hats off. It's majestically good pop even if a hook laden chorus looped 20,000 times shouldn't work, somehow it just does.

The whole hetero girl on girl action thing just seems so very, hmm, undergraduate. "Look, look at me fellas, I'm kissing a girl".


The "I hope my boyfriend doesn't mind" line gives the game away a bit.


Not dangerous, not terribly interesting, but hell, while you're young and lissome,(and this cheesemonger does appear to be both), why not? You'll grow out of it love.

This is one of those genuine "WTF" moments in my life


I put up a video of a song that I like, and next thing I know there is a debate about Girl on girl, the use of lesbianism in videos to sell a song, group participation and so on....


like I said WTF.... thank god that Freddie Mercury didn't resort to pretending to be gay to sell his videos ("I want to break free" rests my case M'lord)


Yours in disbelief of Peckham borders !!!

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No they don't Asset. And you're a girl so how

> would you know?


I think the (alleged) straight hetero male's 'fascination' with two girls getting it on is a hangover from past censorship within the British and American porn industry.

Being illegal (as it was) to show boy-girl action in any sort of realistic way (a photo of a gentlemen with an orgasmic expression waving a floppy cock a good foot away from his partner didn't really cut the mustard) - jazz mags soon realised that having two girls, say, messily eating a melon with their knockers touching was a much better draw for their top-shelf readers. And so was perpetuated they myth of the 'lesbian fantasy'.


Personally I don't find it a turn-on at all. They should get a room.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What Firkins were they? The only localish ones I remember were the Phoenix and Firkin and the Fox and Firkin. The Plough has changed its name several times, and then back to the Plough, but to the best of my recollection the Uplands Tavern was named that until it became The Actress, and The Bishop was called something else whose name escapes me (though the smell from the gents lingers in my memory) but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a Firkin?
    • These statements were in the Consultation Findings report published (later than promised) just before the licence was granted:  "The site hire fee goes directly to supporting the delivery of the council’s Events service, which supports the delivery of up to 100 free-to-attend community events per year – please refer to section 1 (Licensing and income)" I've drafted an email to request some more details of these "free-to-attend" events, as "up to" is a fairly meaningless description - could be 100, could be none? - and therefore doesn't help anyone to decide whether it is actually a benefit to the community or not. Even if it is 100, I'm not sure I could name even one of them? "The site hire fee goes directly to supporting the provision of a grants fund – the Cultural Celebrations programme - please refer to section 1 (Licensing and income)" A similarly meaningless statement in terms of gauging whether, or how much, this is a benefit to the local community. What is it, what does it do, how much of the fee goes to it? And how can the fee go "directly" to two different things? Surely, "directly" means without deviation, straight to, without being changed or reduced?? Again, I'll be asking all these questions to the events dept. I find it outrageous & insulting that a public body can try to justify such an intrusive & disruptive event with such flimsy and opaque "benefits", with zero figures or details to quantify them. They may as well not bother with a consultation, just say "Look, we can't be arsed to justify our decision, it's happening so just deal with it".  
    • Thanks so much. Yes I have. Really appreciate your kindness in replying. Thank you.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...