Conquer Club

12 31 year-old Fatima pushing the boundaries a bit here, flaunting the curvature of her breasts and even letting a hint of bra poke through. Don't worry, Duk - she'll be getting 20 lashes tonight for this one!

Dukasaur wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Why were my pictures deleted?

Will repost more once I'm posting from my laptop again. If Sym is allowed to fill this thread with men, I am allowed to post pictures of a girl's face.

I would advise you not to do that.

You were very lucky that KA decided to let you go with a warning. Next time it will be a ban.

1. Posting a picture of someone who is obviously engaged in coitus is pornographic, even if the point of insertion is not shown.
2. The pained expression and the degrading logo attached to the picture clearly implied that it was some kind of abusive sex, possibly even non-consensual, which makes it the worst kind of exploitation porn.
3. The age of the model can't be stated with certainty, but she certainly looked under age, so it may have been criminally actionable.

Like I said, you were very lucky to get off with a warning. Don't push your luck.

To be fair, I reported those pics because of the pornographic nature, not because of the age in question. I somewhat agree with GabonX. It is very difficult to see the difference between certain ages. Personally I'm against posting early teenagers, but not late teenagers. The difference between those two is usually clear. The latter it's nigh impossible to differentiate from people in their 20's, especially when you're talking about asians.

mrswdk wrote:

Luckily the only thing that's smouldering about this lovely lady is her eyes. Don'tcha just love em!

Hot damn.

-TG

waauw wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Why were my pictures deleted?

Will repost more once I'm posting from my laptop again. If Sym is allowed to fill this thread with men, I am allowed to post pictures of a girl's face.

I would advise you not to do that.

You were very lucky that KA decided to let you go with a warning. Next time it will be a ban.

1. Posting a picture of someone who is obviously engaged in coitus is pornographic, even if the point of insertion is not shown.
2. The pained expression and the degrading logo attached to the picture clearly implied that it was some kind of abusive sex, possibly even non-consensual, which makes it the worst kind of exploitation porn.
3. The age of the model can't be stated with certainty, but she certainly looked under age, so it may have been criminally actionable.

Like I said, you were very lucky to get off with a warning. Don't push your luck.

To be fair, I reported those pics because of the pornographic nature, not because of the age in question. I somewhat agree with GabonX. It is very difficult to see the difference between certain ages. Personally I'm against posting early teenagers, but not late teenagers. The difference between those two is usually clear. The latter it's nigh impossible to differentiate from people in their 20's, especially when you're talking about asians.

Did you report the rest of this thread or just those two posts?

mrswdk wrote:

waauw wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Why were my pictures deleted?

Will repost more once I'm posting from my laptop again. If Sym is allowed to fill this thread with men, I am allowed to post pictures of a girl's face.

I would advise you not to do that.

You were very lucky that KA decided to let you go with a warning. Next time it will be a ban.

1. Posting a picture of someone who is obviously engaged in coitus is pornographic, even if the point of insertion is not shown.
2. The pained expression and the degrading logo attached to the picture clearly implied that it was some kind of abusive sex, possibly even non-consensual, which makes it the worst kind of exploitation porn.
3. The age of the model can't be stated with certainty, but she certainly looked under age, so it may have been criminally actionable.

Like I said, you were very lucky to get off with a warning. Don't push your luck.

To be fair, I reported those pics because of the pornographic nature, not because of the age in question. I somewhat agree with GabonX. It is very difficult to see the difference between certain ages. Personally I'm against posting early teenagers, but not late teenagers. The difference between those two is usually clear. The latter it's nigh impossible to differentiate from people in their 20's, especially when you're talking about asians.

Did you report the rest of this thread or just those two posts?

Actually only one of those two posts.

Ohh, kinky. Which was the one you liked?

mrswdk wrote:Ohh, kinky. Which was the one you liked?

The one with the burka duh.

waauw wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Why were my pictures deleted?

Will repost more once I'm posting from my laptop again. If Sym is allowed to fill this thread with men, I am allowed to post pictures of a girl's face.

I would advise you not to do that.

You were very lucky that KA decided to let you go with a warning. Next time it will be a ban.

1. Posting a picture of someone who is obviously engaged in coitus is pornographic, even if the point of insertion is not shown.
2. The pained expression and the degrading logo attached to the picture clearly implied that it was some kind of abusive sex, possibly even non-consensual, which makes it the worst kind of exploitation porn.
3. The age of the model can't be stated with certainty, but she certainly looked under age, so it may have been criminally actionable.

Like I said, you were very lucky to get off with a warning. Don't push your luck.

To be fair, I reported those pics because of the pornographic nature, not because of the age in question. I somewhat agree with GabonX. It is very difficult to see the difference between certain ages. Personally I'm against posting early teenagers, but not late teenagers. The difference between those two is usually clear. The latter it's nigh impossible to differentiate from people in their 20's, especially when you're talking about asians.

This sort of reminds me of some people's reactions to gay marriage. Then, of course, people were trying to argue that it would lead to paedophilia, bestiality, polygamy, incest, etc. Dumbass fear mongering, but some people were adamant.

It's a shame that allowing an institution to be basically inclusive for mature adults to share equally gets this kind of knee-jerk "Oh my God! If the gays can enjoy it too, then full on porn and paedo pics are OK!" stuff from Mrs.

I don't mind the thread evolving into a discussion, far from it, but the discussion has a nastily familiar undercurrent to it.

Symmetry wrote:

OMG, mutant!

Lol- you watch Heroes.

Symmetry wrote:Lol- you watch Heroes.

The first two season were awesome. Don't judge me.

I'm voting for Bernie if he keeps this up. And I mean UP.

Rain:

Boo that man.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ddsZTFSfXaw

warmonger1981 wrote:Boo that man.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ddsZTFSfXaw

Huh?

warmonger1981 wrote:Boo that man.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ddsZTFSfXaw

You know you can just use the youtube function? Just place everything after the 'v=' between the brackets.

(http://youtu.be/MyEZ9WKRhS4)

I use a Verizon tablet and haven't mastered it yet. I'm technologically illiterate for the most part.

Jong Kook:

mrswdk wrote:Jong Kook:

Isn't that one of the guys from 'Running man'?

It is!