*
Porn Review
Reply
Smiles
Your name:
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Close tags
[quote="Dynamo"][quote="False Delirium"][b]to Dynamo:[/b] You should understand that all review you read are party subjective. Our stuff writes their point of view in reviews. For you softcore is "where you rarely even see a pussy and its not touched in any way at all, or if you see a penis its flacid, or the people in the scene are simulating sex" and we think that softcore is everything except obviouse sex action. There are as many opinions as people on the Earth :wink:[/quote] When you say we, does that mean all the reviewers on the site or just the people who agree with you? From a legal point of view here in the UK, watching a woman masturbate is definately hard core. If it wasn't, then every newsagents shop would be able to sell videos of it, but as it is, films like that only became legal at the same time as full penetration films became legal, and both types can only be bought at licensed sex video shops, hence the reason why I call it hard core. I am glad though that you have entered the debate about this because its annoyed me in the past that masturbation videos have largely been hidden away by people who promote sex videos. Its only really now that the internet has taken things into its own hands that people have suddenly realised that a lot of men, and women for that matter, actually enjoy watching a woman masturbate, hence the profusion of female only masturbation sites online. As a reviewer, I believe you are doing an injustice to the people who you are reviewing the sites for if you call female masturbation soft core. Compare the difference for instance between "Candy Carmichaels" site, which I regard as soft, and "I Feel Myself" which I regard as hard, and you'll see what I mean. If you are going to call it soft core then surely you should also state, as was done in this particular review admittedly, that full blown female masturbation is to be seen. All too often the review states that there are good/poor quality pictures, and videos in wmv or mpeg or whatever format, and if there is a large or small amount of them, and that bonus sites are available, which in other words means that the reviewer is telling us nothing about what he or she has actually seen. Yes, there are as many opinions as there are people on earth. All the more reason then that the reviewer should describe what is available much better. Cheers. Dynamo.[/quote]
Settings:
HTML
Off
BBCode
On
Smiles
On
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
Reload
captcha
image
Captcha code:
new!
Write a short review of any site existing in our ratings and get the prize:
15-min prepaid
pin-code to
HotMovies.com
— giant movie achive!
Read more »
You have switched off topic preview option. You can chznge your settings in your
profile
.
Follow @porninspector
About us
|
Privacy Policy
|
2257 Statement
|
Review Request
|
Support
PornInspector.com
Discounts
Categories
Sample Videos
Sample Galleries
Featured Models
Forum
Amateur
Anal Sex
Asians
Babes
Bbw
Bdsm
Bisexuals
Bizarre
Black
Breasts
Celebs
Cum Shots
Dating
Drunk
Ethnic
FemDom
Fetish
Fiction
For Women
Gay
Group Sex
Hardcore
Hentai & Cartoons
Interracial Sex
Latina
Lesbians
Lingerie
Megasites
MILF
Mobile
Site Networks
Nudists
Old & Young
Older Women
Oral Sex
PornStars
Single Models
Smoking
Softcore
Software
Spanking
Squirting
Teens
Toys & Masturbation
Transsexuals
Variety
Video
Voyeur
VR Porn
Watersports
Web Cams
News
Polls
My Profile
*
Subscribe
Newsletter example »
FAQ
|
Inspectors
|
Friends
|
Site map
Advanced Search
*
Featured Sites
Hegre Art
(5)
Abby Winters
(5)
Private.com
(5)
Reality Kings
(5)
Kink.com
(5)