The woman's physique is an apt illustration of what the Gods in their wisdom have created to inspire man.
shouldn't you put her in the attractive women section vs. a blog spot... i think everyone is silent, cuz you posting porn and trying to slide it off as academic
akso God is only capitalized when it is a monotheistic God. the plural version is lowercase.
Kristin: When praise is due, all you can think of is grammar! Worse, by what unholy creed have you labeled the above pornographic? Academics be damned; thou shalt revel in the glory of creation; God is not mocked (Galatians 6:7).
its also tacky to quote the bible to push a very unbiblical action---posting pictures of women that you appreciate from lustful standpoint. evidently u are not christian or jewish. otherwise you would be offended.
Kristin: Your understanding of Christianity needs tweaking. Sincere Christians can be found doing this. It is the intention that is important. Why are the nipples of the woman censored? To induce lust? I am under no obligation to censor the nipples. The purpose is to illustrate the glory of creation, and if the illustrative examples may induce lust in some individuals, then it is necessary to somewhat censor them to make the purpose of posting the pictures clear.
i just realized this is the most absurdly veiled porn reference commission site on the net. i dunno how i didnt notice immediately. not that i have anything against porn or profiting from it. good luck. being a pornographer seems like a good idea if you want to make money on the web.
Dave: There is no porn within this site; I am not a pornographer, and many of the referenced sites are not porn sites. No commission is being earned from the site referenced in this entry, which is not a porn site to start with. Identifying the source(s) of the images, if known, is a legal requirement since copyrighted images can only be displayed under the fair use provision or with explicit permission of the copyright holder, which is automatically granted to those who sign up as an affiliate. Therefore, it is almost a requirement to sign up as an affiliate in order to minimize the likelihood of legal problems over displaying copyrighted images. Additionally, the images displayed are usually not available to non-affiliates unless they join the site the images are taken from. Therefore, signing up as an affiliate is a necessity, regardless of the commission issue. Moreover, running this site requires money, and the readers are not paying to browse this site. The money has to come from somewhere, and if it comes from the sites providing the images, then it dovetails very nicely with the necessity of becoming an affiliate of these sites.
Speaking of an “absurdly veiled porn reference commission site,” why would I go through the trouble of spending hours looking up scientific literature and addressing it within this site when I could simply post, without using my actual name, more pictures of nude women, and uncensored ones at that, to earn a lot more in terms of commissions?
i think the honest thing to do would be to let your readers know that you are a paid affiliate of these porn sites you are linking. do you disagree?
Dave: I have already told you that many of the sites referenced are not porn sites. Am I being dishonest? If I were paid to display some women here as attractive and did not explicitly state this, then you are looking at a conflict of interest similar to researchers reporting data from a drug trial without identifying that the drug manufacturer paid them to conduct the study. However, none of the sites that I am signed up as an affiliate with work in this manner. They pay a commission only if someone referred from this site joins them. Therefore, there is no need for me to explicitly state that I am an affiliate of a referenced site if this is the case. Even if I were paid to feature a particular model within this site, there is enough scientific data here to justify any claims I would make about her masculinity-femininity/attractiveness, i.e., you could not accuse me of saying that a given woman is attractive because I have been paid to say so.
Note that I have made no attempt to hide affiliate links. For instance, check out superbeauty.org, a website claiming to fight for female beauty. This site has little in terms of written content, but features links to many websites -- supposedly united in their fight for beauty -- and these websites happen to sell nude photographs of women. The links to these websites from the superbeauty site are in the form:
Guess what “site=56” corresponds to? The “out.cgi” file contains the full affiliate link, which you cannot see. I could easily do this with all my affiliate links, but do not feel any need to do so. Both your comments in this entry apply to the superbeauty site, but this site does not offer a facility for people to leave comments. You should try emailing the comments you left above to the webmaster of the superbeauty site and see what response you get.
i dunno what your are worried about, making money from pornography is nothing to be ashamed of. i hope you make lots of money from your porn affiliate links.
Dave: I am not worried about obtaining commissions from porn sites and artistic nudity sites. However, I do need to respond to smear, which I did.
What is this?
"...to INSPIRE man" is right, haha. she is a succubus sent by satan to instill lust in the hearts of men, do not succumb to the ungodly allure of her flesh. The Gods are not pleased by your use of their name.
hoax?: Thou shalt not assign the glorious creation of the Gods to Satan. The Satanic influence is observed in the fashion industry: sodomites, pederasts; starving, sickly and sub-fertile women.
Eric, I recall you once said that you have no religious attitudes regarding homosexuality but you have started to refer to gay men as "sodomites". It seems like you do have some religion-based homophobic beliefs.
You know nothing about the health or fertility of high fashion models so stfu. The high fashion industry is not satanic because you find the models unattractive Eric. Your neutral facade is unraveling. You have provided even more proof that you are a sexist, homophobic, right-wing nutbag.
Danielle: Do you believe a right winger would be posting so much nudity? The comment by hoax? is a joke just as my reply is. Sodomite is a Biblical term, but I have been using the word “Gods.” So what does this tell you? I believe that there are many Gods and also Goddesses, and am not a Christian. I don’t believe in the Christian entity of Satan. I just like the word sodomite, perhaps because of the way it sounds, and I have no religious attitudes toward homosexuality.
How healthy high-fashion models look requires no comment. The readers can look at their pictures and judge for themselves. High-fashion models generally have body fat levels below the medically healthy range and are bound to have sub-par fertility on average.
I don’t see how my arguments are sexist.
Eric, Sodomite is a pretty offensive word so I suggest you don't use unless you want even more accusations of homophobia to be thrown at you.
You cannot judge someon'e fertility levels by looking at a picture of them Eric. I know fashion models are skinny but you know nothing about the health of individual models so stop making assumptions.
You are using the term sub-fertile as an insult. I think that's pretty sexist.
Danielle: Sodomite appears to be a mildly offensive word, and was the standard term for male homosexuals for a long time. Its literal meaning is a resident of Sodom. Besides, given some of the things I have written about the nature of homosexuality, it would be futile for me to avoid using a Biblical term when appropriate in order to appear less "homophobic."
The medical literature argues against your statement that fertility cannot be judged from looking at someone's pictures. I am not judging the fertility of particular individuals but of groups. Outside a range of body fat levels, fertility diminishes. If one encounters a group of women most of whom have body fat levels below the healthy range, then it is easy to infer that the group has sub-par fertility compared to controls. Fertility also diminishes with above average masculinization. Women in the height range of high-fashion models also tend to have below average fertility. Therefore, one can make the inference of below average fertility in high-fashion models compared to the general female population. Look for citations within this site.
What do you mean "sub-fertile" is an insult? How many people have you come across using this insult? There is nothing sexist about it. For it to qualify as sexist, it needs to connote female inferiority/male superiority, but it doesn't.
She looks like a man, with boobs, HUGE boobs!
But her face.... its sooo masculine!
I actually find her very attractive...there is something "calm" about her face. She has that feminine glow lol
Wow I can't believe i read some comments by Erik here....disappointing.
I've always wanted bigger boobs, but not THAT big, lol.
So sad to return after quite some time and find that ads have infested this site. I'd read and leave a comment, but if I don't need a wedding dress or care to look at replica watches than it seems a waste to try.
Has Erik abandoned his site?Its full of spam and i havnt seen a post or updates of contents from Erik for many months.
The site was actually down for a while.
It appears that the site is no longer being updated and the spam is incredibly irritating. No idea what happened to Erik.
I sent him an email but have not received a response.
erik is indisposed, thats a nice indirect anonymous way of saying he will not be doing much with this site for awhile, as i have been watching over it for months, with a few weeks lapse, as many of you have noticed... and lucky i've bailed it out more than a few times...
he might be back at it by the end of february, a little earlier if lucky, later if even more "INDISPOSED"... lets just say he might be going ... for a very long time...
...things didn't seem to work for him, looks like he might not be able to come back ... at this point... soon to be back in ... a few more things he can try... until this whole post grad visa violation situation is resolved he won't be able to save us from piss poor lack of feminine understanding and won't be up to the promotion of feminine ideals for better health of humanity through aesthetic links to better evolution and biological pathways most befitting survival and progress...
how do you know erik is having visa problems? Is her really not who he claims he is? Seriously, can this guy get any weirder?
he is hardly weird, very level headed and got a 3.8 GPA in college, has two degrees and some post grad work... one of the very smartest people i've known... maybe the smartest... you don't get much higher than 3.8 GPA...
tell me what he is claiming to be that he is not... i'm working with his case - he was my roommate for a few years... and why do you care personally about him? isn't his research and data enough to stand on its own? you can do the ad hominem thing all you want and then there is the empirical data that stands on its own no matter the background of the individual...
No offense but just by analyzing your writing you don't seem extremely educated yourself. I mean I know I'm not extremely educated, but if you are going to come on here and stand up for how educated and intelligent Erik is than I would at least expect for you to use proper sentences, grammar, and spelling. You can get better than a 3.8 gpa honey, and just because Erik "tries" hard, which it is very clear that he tries oh so hard, it doesn't make him some kind of genius. And yes, Erik is weird. I actually imagine him quite feminine because in all honesty he acts like a woman. Just look at the way he replies to people's comments. It's like he has a pole stuck up his ass half the time. He's almost catty and a little condescending, like a stuck up bitch. You are right Erik. Those Victoria's Secret models are practically men. Heidi Klum is more of a man than you. And the bitch talks and acts more like a man than you, because she doesn't get catty about subjects she is touchy about.
And if Erik is so "smart", maybe he should actually have credentials. And maybe he should actually present his work in a scientific manner.
i disagree, u waste time with all your extra typing, capitalizing, etc... and besides with carpal due to so much typing and work i found short cuts - text messaging has also been a process of efficiency discovering in our language, which is highly inefficient and just plain faulty on so many levels --- a cursory comparison with spanish speaks volumes...
i got a 3.31 at UF, erik was almost a full .5 higher than me... and yes, i have seen his transcript with water marks and all the security i had with mine from UF showing it to be a valid document of his record... he can give you the standard deviation expanse between him and the average UF student, as explained to him by a UF professor actually...
when i went, i came across 2.87 GPA as being the average at the time, which includes second semester freshman to last semester seniors...
i type fast and this hack style is what i've developed... of course i know the CORRECT ways... but don't you like to see something different? - too challenging for you? bothersome? can't open your mind a bit and embrace the ellipsis? or the excessive use of the slash-dash or whatever i throw in there?
you don't know what you are talking about... and he VERY obviously can't do the science aspect of it and have a popular site like this one has been... just read his THE NATURE OF HOMOSEXUALITY and you will see the depths of the empirical mastery and synthesis, hardly weird as you say... WEIRD is often used by those neophytes, those uninitiated or overly challenged enough to just want to insult... they see they have reached an intellectual peak and limit, so they can at least call the stuff thats over their head weird, right?
i know erik, you do not - stick to his data and ideas, save your ad hominem speculation... and tough crap if you don't like my writing style - i won't "CLEAN IT UP" for you
I recognize that this is a post from ages ago, and that I'm late, but as a female, a feminist, and a political lesbian, Erik has managed to offend me in nearly every way possible.
Erik: Because it would be inconceivably time consuming to point out all of the fallacious bigotry on this site, I've chosen one small statement to provide an argument against. You said in your earlier comment that "[t]he Satanic influence is observed in the fashion industry: sodomites, pederasts; starving, sickly and sub-fertile women." You later claimed that "sub-fertile" is not sexist, that you did not use the term as an insult, and that you personally are not sexist.
By associating sub-fertility with "the Satanic influence," you showed that you find sub-fertility to be a bad thing. Your tone was accusatory, and by associating the term "sodomite," which is generally considered to be an insult, with sub-fertility, you effectively used "sub-fertile" as an insult itself.
Fertility is only a useful thing if a species wishes to carry on. Historically, and in some cultures still today, men were and are often looking to have an heir, to continue their line, to pass down the, ah, family jewels. Without a fertile women, this is and was impossible. Obviously. Women were never aided by heirs, for all money was passed to the men of the family, and women changed their names when they married and were expected ti change families totally, so family lines were not all that important. Thus, fertility has been the one thing that women were good for for men: to give birth to the heir; to carry on the lineage. By associating a non-fertile woman with satan, you suggest that a woman who cannot carry a child is inferior, perhaps evil. Essentially, you were saying that a women who can't be useful to a man is inferior to one who can be. Sexism, my foe friend. It is inescapable.
Just to add to the previous argument about your utter misogyny, I'd like to point out that you consistently reference what a "heterosexual man" is a attracted to in a woman as being the ultimate standard for female beauty. It doesn't matter to you how women feel about themselves or their beauty; a beautiful woman is one who makes a straight guy horny, in your opinion. You are the epitome of the hetero-patriarchy, and it is infuriating.
In short, fuck you, you're a pig, you encourage me to eat less so as to avoid subscribing to your standards of beauty, and also, did I mention fuck you? Fuck you.
Wow. Reading all these comments is like a story. What do I say to all of this? ... Tee hee, boobies. =D
Utterly gorgeous milky beauty - you really can pick em!
Utterly delicious but I do think her legs are a tad bit short compared to her torso.
But those supple figure-of-8 curves! Those gorgeous champagne-glass bosom(s)! What a bounty! Even her toes radiate feminine sexy!
I feel my pirate instincts being aroused!