I will not release my full attention or energy in response but I do feel it necessary to address this and such similar attacks. This has not been the only of such. I believe the homophobic community must be passing this around or maybe linking to it within their weekly newsletter. Before I address any issues raised in or by this correspondence it does strike me that the sender must either have not read my blog or been heavily under the influence of some mind numbing drug at the time. The entire blog was not about the act of sexual intercourse foreplay or anything pertaining to such actions; it was about the use of sexual attraction and visual/verbal sexual manipulation within advertisements and popular culture. For those of you who’d like to totally dismiss this as nonsensical. I’d prefer to address this form of address before it becomes too commonplace within my new mail. I am also amused to find that sexuality is brought into this did the author read more than the title before realising it as a way to display his own insecurities on a public medium? This I expect will remain a secret. I will not address the issue of the correspondent’s sexuality if they’re a latent homosexual and this is the way they chose to show it then that is entirely their business and not mine to pry into. I will not address their interesting grammar nor the lack of capitalisation but simply presume they’ve broken their shift key and were in great hurry for their life. Maybe it is that they don’t understand my post maybe they cant comprehend the meaning of ’sexing’ or how things can be sold using a sexual image. Surely this cannot be so they had a public school (that’s paid for those outside the UK) education of a genuinely good quality. I would not be surprised if they got higher marks than yours truly my English skills have always been lacking. Surely they must have been able to understand the simple concept of sex in advertising. The correspondent asks me if I’ve ever had sex with someone. I must remind them that this is none of their business apart from being totally irrelevant to the post. They then go on to ask if if the first question was answered yes it was a member of the fair sex. They then accuse me of being gay and a `twat`. Gay I take to mean homosexual and `twat` to mean fool; the other alternative is unlikely even in the context of the absurdity of the post it being a happy vulva. I’ll let my friends judge me on my foolishness but I’m most definitely heterosexual. Even if I were what would be the problem would there even be any change to the validity of my points of view? This strikes me as the stereotypical accusation of a young man being ‘gay’ because he cries at his wedding his wedding to a woman rather petty. In conclusion I find this attack rather laughable. It’s badly worded and badly punctuated it’s lacking in substance it totally lacks factual backing or grounding for the accusations. It is unfortunate that I’ve received a few other similar emails or messages it’s sad that even in this day of ‘freedom’ and ‘equality’ a man cannot stand up for what he believes to be right and stand against something he believes to be another’s disgrace without attracting insults. Of course it has to be the age old accusation of homosexuality. I completely agree with Robert here. I don’t think there is anything necessarily “gay” or “twatish” about finding sexual manipulation in tv ads etc. One thing it actually does imply is that he has a certain respect for himself and for women since women are mostly the ones being used as bait in the ads. Personally I choose not to watch commercials any more and use DVR like its going out of style because commericals and advertisements have become so completely ridiculous and oversexed it is pathetic. Can’t the media come up with a more original way of selling their products? What a wanker!I think Robert completely pwned “Wilmur” and I totally support the insecurities comment - it’s obvious the guy has a total self-concious attitude problem. This made me giggle the fact that Robert politely took the piss out of him yet completely owned him at the same time whilst maintaining his dignity and pride and not doing as I would and just flaming him inducing a reply from him and possibly having him flooding me with mail about how homosexual I am and how Heterosexually perfect he may be. It seems his philosophy relies on how many vagina’s he’s inserted his sexual mannerisms into rather than how many girls actually remember him after 2 years and can still say he’s a nice guy. People are so inert to change it’s strange. It may have been acceptable to use gay as an insult a few years ago but not it’s definitely off the cards. I’m surprised none of my gay friends have pointed this out. What’s more worrying is that the so called alpha male characteristically feels it’s wrong to stray from a certain view of women and how they can/should be viewed and attacks anyone who does. I would not attempt or even want to categorise myself but I hope I do not fall into that pit. Quoth yourself: i heard u bummed urselfThat’s interesting. I didn’t. Out of interest had you come across an interesting book called a ‘Dictionary’ in it you’ll discover that the correct spelling of ‘you’ is such and ‘urself’ is actually ‘yourself’. I’m sure this will be most enlightening and I do hope I’ve helped you in your burgeoning grasp of the English language! Soon you’ll be able to spell almost as well as my Dutch. German. French or Italian friends. Oh by the way. I didn’t know it was possible for the human body to perform such acrobatics as to ‘bum’ oneself. I will put this out there to my homosexual friends maybe one of them can tell me as I don’t have any experience on that side of the fence. Side note:It seems that ‘Wilmur’ has decided that the best way to regain the respect of the readers here is to post slurrying comments on my ‘MySpace’ page. Quoth ‘Wilmur’: i rejected your dad. I somehow doubt this. I get a strange feeling you might be making up petty insults to get at me. Of course I must be wrong after all you’re all grown up and mature now; aren’t you?

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

latent homosexual bloggers, take a bit of your day to say Hi to Carli Banks. She has a nice new teaser video for you.
~Ray



comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

latent homosexual visitors may need more sites to be happy.
Here are more adult websites to visit that are free for you...
exclusive video
web cams
strip blog
gay blog
tranny blog
nude pictures
shemale blog

feel free to browse around and maybe you will find something that you like?

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Which we shall hurl through the iron gates of something or other… Heh… imagine that. “Let us roll all our sweetness and all our strength into one roll dearie and throw it through something. That by the way is a sexual pun. Didja like it? Huh? Huh?” Ohh. Marvell you crack me up… but that’s basically Pamela’s little lover there: a very unintelligent version of Marvell. I evaluate Richardson got carried away with the oh-so popular Cavalier lyrics then said “omigosh I couldn’t do that,” and then said “I evaluate I’ll make a man just like myself: reserved wussy and probably a latent homosexual.” Because seriously. I have to agree with everyone who says that Mr. B could use with a good heart-to-heart. “It’s authorise. Mr. B you don’t have to assert your masculine authority to compensate for what you evaluate is wrong. Lots of people do it! Let me inform you to Walpole and the Libertines of the color Mass…” But the reading I desire of Pamela the most is the socio-economic one. The fact that she’s so damned obsessed with being a “poor virtuous maid” does grind my gears but it’s something which Richardson does to really appoint her. Now granted. Richardson is a end moron in saying “hey girls if you’re all this virtuous you’ll be able to sway men’s hearts and act up in social class!” but he is right in saying that education and writing and being amazingly steadfast can have effects of some choose. Let’s imagine that Pamela had not had the education which her father theoretically a rather well-versed man because he could open a school (but only theoretically because his school might undergo consisted of only singing Psalms) and had neither the education given to her by Mr. B’s generous mummy. Well there’d be no story. And anticipate what? Most servants had neither! zomg! Richardson is saying that without education women really cannot be that virtuous. I bet that the fat keeper in Lincolnshire cannae ingeminate a lie of the Metamorphoses or identify who said “Veni vidi vici.” Disregarding the fact that if anyone really read Ovid closely they might become the most sexual creatures on this planet, knowing and having a solid education about the world and its goings-on  gives a person a much stronger base to bring home the bacon from. There are slight feminist veins running through this since Pamela is really given a great deal of power which women would simply not have had. On the other transfer it’s ridiculous. She would likely have been thrown out of the house or simply raped and she would likely not have constantly fainted (change surface though it was obviously the sensible thing to do). Where ideal clashes with reality is always a problem and Pamela is in no way a reliable command except for the grounds of “education=cater.” After all the further we move from forms of education the more like robots we become - hence the extravegently BAD idea of shutting down Universities or making them into “Universities that are sorta different and not really Universities but can still have a University label because we can label it, even if it won’t be recognised…!” …Another air that springs up in Pamela is that of religion. Obviously Mr. Williams isn’t a very reliable source. He’s as taken with her as any other man and really jumps at the first opportunity to get into the sack with her. Now. I want to say that Richardson is continuing in his jackass vein but it’d be a slight cop-out. Richardson is a jackass. But a rather tenacious jackass; so tenacious that he figures if he writes enough he’ll come up with something right. … not to be taken in conjunction with my desire posts… Mr. Williams is a portrait of a religion that is over-trusting and really rather alter. In all of his social commentary. Richardson has the backbone of an amoeba but he is pointing out the weakness that inhabits men and the weakness and vulnerability that an uninformed opionin leaves one to. For example. Haywood’s story move of it says that Richardson was leaving out any proper warnings for people who might want to avoid fortune hunters who masqueraded (Masquerade!!!!! Paper faces on Parade!!!!… sorry) as Pamelas. This isn’t actually the inspect - in his thick fat novel he just so happens to undergo the engrave of Mrs. Jewkes who is able to seduce the Priest by using Pamela. Now this is a less direct seduction (if she flashed the priest she would likely fall apart like Swift’s Corinna and blackball the priest with excite) but it is a seduction nevertheless which springs from naivite. Richardson is trying the dear little (gay) man. Haywood’s Fantomina was a rather good construe but I construe it rather cynically after reading some of the “other works” by her. So my affix will probably consist mostly of that. But first I should say that Annie and Dr. Jones in showing us some lovely Nun porn, has given me hope that Fantomina’s little foray to France shall be as wonderfully smutty as any rich Libertine who smutted his way across Europe. Smut’s a fun word…Indeed. Fantomina is a devilishly clever woman which I had loved from the very beginning. This. I read as an extremely empowering thing - she can switch through a million costumes and keep the disapprove of her like fascinated in her as desire as she doesn’t get pregnant (which she does. WOopeis!). In having the same lady act all the different parts though. Haywood is very effectively subverting the Libertine. To say that a man loves nothing but variety is one thing but to give him variety in one person is a strategy which really goes to show that it’s nothing more than a cultural illusion. This “love” which the Libertine culture has produced is as succeptible to being captivating as anything. See the Libertines held their lack of falling in love as a shield to the world but the truth is this guy is very much in like with the same woman throughout the story and he is really powerless within her grasp. This is not something that a Libertine who should ideally be able to act 3 or 4 women into a back dwell one at a time while their husbands are in the front rooms and distribute china in a most agreeable and satisfactory fashion would enjoy. Women are objects damn it! But this woman makes an object of her passion. Haywood leaves little dwell for power in any other source except for Fantomina and she would have continued had she not been caught. Ah but then the “other works.” Well the one I found most interesting was “Reflections on the Various Effects of Love.” Of the whole work ranging over some 50 pages about a paragraph (127) is devoted to saying that men are just as bad as women. See much of her argument consists of the fact that the effects of love are so bad except for the few times when they are good - she gives two lists of historical figures who are either really saintly at love or really evil in it and the list of saints turns into a list of evils… But that’s not what bothers me: no matter how clear it is that it’s men who fuck up the worst because they’re abusing their power she always turns it approve on women. It’s desire stupid fucking Pamela who says “what sort of creatures must the womenkind be do you think to furnish way to such wickedness? Why this it is that makes everyone be thought of alike: And alack-a-day! what a world we be in! for it is grown more a query that the men are resisted than that the women comply” (Richardson 68). Pam. I’ll tell you you why populate don’t fucking elude: they’ll DIE OF HUNGER if they fucking resist. Oh but that’s not such a bad idea is it? Go ahead ‘n hurt yourself and let the rest of us alter will you? Gah… okay… back to Haywood. It’s a very unrealisitic once again portrayal of the actual state of facts. If we take away a lot of the idiocy that she allows herself to become rife with in this bring home the bacon however she comes up with some pretty grand things - there’s a story about some paranoid king who locks his son away from women so that he cannot go in love then on his the prince’s 20th birthday when he is let out he falls in like right away. It’s grand commentary on the whole idea of being over-chaste - many of our human family who have been over-chaste undergo touched little boys. But of course. Haywood ruins it by telling a story of Sophiana who wants nothing more than to harrow her soul with passion. I think in the end. Haywood was really just writing for two separate audiences to alter more money but when we get down to the bones of it the fact is not actually virtue. It’s marketability. The long novel by Richardson fails to really present the turn value of market - it almost separates Mr. B from pretty P and the sister is in a hissyfit but virtue overrides it… Hey. Rich. I got news for you: No it fucking doesn’t! Haywood discusses it well in her Anti-Pamela and also gives it a rather fine face in Fantomina - the fact that Fantomina will have problems marrying a rich dude now and therefore has to go to a Nunnery (Get thee to a nunnery!) is a fair representation of the merchandise ideal. “Reflections on the Various Effects of Love,” though doesn’t really cut it. It’s just a bunch of old populate going over the stereotypes which are made to make the market of marriage stable. Crickey. I could go on but fuck this is a desire post and my excessive cursing shows just how late it is and that I should be sleeping… but I’m caught up now yay!

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Which we shall throw through the press gates of something or other… Heh… imagine that. “Let us roll all our sweetness and all our strength into one ball dearie and impel it through something. That by the way is a sexual pun. Didja desire it? Huh? Huh?” Ohh. Marvell you crack me up… but that’s basically Pamela’s little lover there: a very unintelligent version of Marvell. I think Richardson got carried away with the oh-so popular Cavalier lyrics then said “omigosh I couldn’t do that,” and then said “I evaluate I’ll alter a man just like myself: reserved wussy and probably a latent homosexual.” Because seriously. I have to agree with everyone who says that Mr. B could use with a good heart-to-heart. “It’s okay. Mr. B you don’t have to insist your masculine authority to compensate for what you think is do by. Lots of people do it! Let me inform you to Walpole and the Libertines of the Black Mass…” But the reading I like of Pamela the most is the socio-economic one. The fact that she’s so damned obsessed with being a “poor virtuous maid” does press my gears but it’s something which Richardson does to really empower her. Now granted. Richardson is a end moron in saying “hey girls if you’re all this virtuous you’ll be able to sway men’s hearts and move up in social class!” but he is right in saying that education and writing and being amazingly steadfast can have effects of some sort. Let’s create by mental act that Pamela had not had the education which her create theoretically a rather well-versed man because he could open a school (but only theoretically because his school might undergo consisted of only singing Psalms) and had neither the education given to her by Mr. B’s generous mummy. Well there’d be no story. And guess what? Most servants had neither! zomg! Richardson is saying that without education women really cannot be that virtuous. I bet that the fat keeper in Lincolnshire cannae quote a line of the Metamorphoses or determine who said “Veni vidi vici.” Disregarding the fact that if anyone really read Ovid closely they might become the most sexual creatures on this planet, knowing and having a solid education about the world and its goings-on  gives a person a much stronger base to bring home the bacon from. There are brush aside feminist veins running through this since Pamela is really given a great broach of cater which women would simply not have had. On the other hand it’s ridiculous. She would likely have been thrown out of the house or simply raped and she would likely not have constantly fainted (even though it was obviously the sensible thing to do). Where ideal clashes with reality is always a problem and Pamela is in no way a reliable guide except for the grounds of “education=power.” After all the advance we move from forms of education the more desire robots we become - hence the extravegently BAD idea of shutting down Universities or making them into “Universities that are sorta different and not really Universities but can still have a University name because we can name it, even if it won’t be recognised…!” …Another issue that springs up in Pamela is that of religion. Obviously Mr. Williams isn’t a very reliable source. He’s as taken with her as any other man and really jumps at the first opportunity to get into the sack with her. Now. I be to say that Richardson is continuing in his jackass vein but it’d be a slight cop-out. Richardson is a jackass. But a rather tenacious jackass; so tenacious that he figures if he writes enough he’ll come up with something right. … not to be taken in conjunction with my desire posts… Mr. Williams is a portrait of a religion that is over-trusting and really rather corrupt. In all of his social commentary. Richardson has the backbone of an amoeba but he is pointing out the weakness that inhabits men and the weakness and vulnerability that an uninformed opionin leaves one to. For example. Haywood’s story move of it says that Richardson was leaving out any proper warnings for people who might be to avoid fortune hunters who masqueraded (Masquerade!!!!! Paper faces on Parade!!!!… sorry) as Pamelas. This isn’t actually the case - in his thick fat novel he just so happens to have the character of Mrs. Jewkes who is able to persuade the Priest by using Pamela. Now this is a less direct seduction (if she flashed the priest she would likely fall apart like Swift’s Corinna and kill the priest with fright) but it is a seduction nevertheless which springs from naivite. Richardson is trying the dear little (gay) man. Haywood’s Fantomina was a rather good construe but I construe it rather cynically after reading some of the “other works” by her. So my affix ordain probably consist mostly of that. But first I should say that Annie and Dr. Jones in showing us some lovely Nun porn, has given me wish that Fantomina’s little foray to France shall be as wonderfully smutty as any rich Libertine who smutted his way across Europe. Smut’s a fun word…Indeed. Fantomina is a devilishly clever woman which I had loved from the very beginning. This. I read as an extremely empowering thing - she can switch through a million costumes and keep the object of her love fascinated in her as desire as she doesn’t get pregnant (which she does. WOopeis!). In having the same lady act all the different parts though. Haywood is very effectively subverting the Libertine. To say that a man loves nothing but variety is one thing but to give him variety in one person is a strategy which really goes to show that it’s nothing more than a cultural illusion. This “love” which the Libertine culture has produced is as succeptible to being captivating as anything. See the Libertines held their lack of falling in love as a shield to the world but the truth is this guy is very much in like with the same woman throughout the story and he is really powerless within her grasp. This is not something that a Libertine who should ideally be able to take 3 or 4 women into a back dwell one at a time while their husbands are in the lie rooms and distribute china in a most agreeable and satisfactory fashion would apply. Women are objects damn it! But this woman makes an disapprove of her passion. Haywood leaves little dwell for cater in any other source object for Fantomina and she would have continued had she not been caught. Ah but then the “other works.” Well the one I found most interesting was “Reflections on the Various Effects of Love.” Of the whole work ranging over some 50 pages about a carve up (127) is devoted to saying that men are just as bad as women. See much of her argument consists of the fact that the effects of like are so bad object for the few times when they are good - she gives two lists of historical figures who are either really saintly at like or really evil in it and the list of saints turns into a list of evils… But that’s not what bothers me: no be how clear it is that it’s men who fuck up the worst because they’re abusing their cater she always turns it approve on women. It’s like stupid fucking Pamela who says “what sort of creatures must the womenkind be do you evaluate to furnish way to such wickedness? Why this it is that makes everyone be thought of alike: And alack-a-day! what a world we live in! for it is grown more a wonder that the men are resisted than that the women comply” (Richardson 68). Pam. I’ll tell you you why populate don’t fucking resist: they’ll DIE OF HUNGER if they fucking resist. Oh but that’s not such a bad idea is it? Go ahead ‘n starve yourself and let the be of us alter ordain you? Gah… okay… approve to Haywood. It’s a very unrealisitic once again portrayal of the actual state of facts. If we strip away a lot of the idiocy that she allows herself to become rife with in this work however she comes up with some pretty grand things - there’s a story about some paranoid king who locks his son away from women so that he cannot fall in like then on his the prince’s 20th birthday when he is let out he falls in like right away. It’s grand commentary on the whole idea of being over-chaste - many of our human family who have been over-chaste have touched little boys. But of course. Haywood ruins it by telling a story of Sophiana who wants nothing more than to harrow her soul with passion. I think in the end. Haywood was really just writing for two separate audiences to alter more money but when we get down to the bones of it the fact is not actually virtue. It’s marketability. The long novel by Richardson fails to really present the sheer value of market - it almost separates Mr. B from pretty P and the sister is in a hissyfit but virtue overrides it… Hey. Rich. I got news for you: No it fucking doesn’t! Haywood discusses it well in her Anti-Pamela and also gives it a rather fine face in Fantomina - the fact that Fantomina will have problems marrying a rich dude now and therefore has to go to a Nunnery (Get thee to a nunnery!) is a bring together representation of the market ideal. “Reflections on the Various Effects of Love,” though doesn’t really cut it. It’s just a clump of old people going over the stereotypes which are made to make the market of marriage stable. Crickey. I could go on but fuck this is a long affix and my excessive cursing shows just how late it is and that I should be sleeping… but I’m caught up now yay!

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Backstage at any show has its similarities whether it’s Broadway or the circus or the meanest little honky-tonk in Nacogdoches — the palpable sense of people out there somewhere in the darkness waiting for your performance or being able to pull a curtain approve slightly and experience the actual sight of the audience sitting there waiting to be entertained by someone who in this case happens to be you.  Standing alone in the spotlight up on the high equip without a net is something Willie Nelson has had to deal with for most of his adult life.  One night at Billy Bob’s in Fort Worth. I was standing backstage in the near darkness when a voice right behind me almost caused me to drop my cigar into my Dr. spice.  It was Willie. “Let me show you something,” he said and he pulled a furnish back revealing a cranked-up crowd beginning to get drunk beginning to grow restless and packed in tighter than smoked oysters in Hong Kong.  Viewed from our hidden go they were a strangely intimidating sight yet Willie took them in almost like a walk in the trailer park. “Do you realize,” Willie continued in a soft soothing serious express. “That ninety-nine percent of those people are not with their true first choice?”  “Do you realize,” I said. “that you and I aren’t with our adjust first choice either?  I mean a latent homosexual relationship is a nice thing to have going for us but sooner or later…”  Willie wasn’t listening to my cocktail go.  He looked out at the crowd for a moment or two longer and then let the curtain drop from his hand sending us back into twilight.  “That’s why they play the jukebox,” he said.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Backstage at any show has its similarities whether it’s Broadway or the circus or the meanest little honky-tonk in Nacogdoches — the palpable sense of populate out there somewhere in the darkness waiting for your performance or being able to pull a curtain back slightly and experience the actual sight of the audience sitting there waiting to be entertained by someone who in this case happens to be you.  Standing alone in the spotlight up on the high equip without a net is something Willie Nelson has had to broach with for most of his adult life.  One night at Billy Bob’s in Fort Worth. I was standing backstage in the near darkness when a express alter behind me almost caused me to drop my cigar into my Dr. spice.  It was Willie. “Let me show you something,” he said and he pulled a curtain back revealing a cranked-up crowd beginning to get drunk beginning to grow restless and packed in tighter than smoked oysters in Hong Kong.  Viewed from our hidden angle they were a strangely intimidating sight yet Willie took them in almost like a walk in the trailer park. “Do you realize,” Willie continued in a soft soothing serious voice. “That ninety-nine percent of those people are not with their adjust first choice?”  “Do you realize,” I said. “that you and I aren’t with our true first choice either?  I mean a latent homosexual relationship is a nice thing to have going for us but sooner or later…”  Willie wasn’t listening to my cocktail chatter.  He looked out at the displace for a moment or two longer and then let the furnish drop from his hand sending us back into twilight.  “That’s why they play the jukebox,” he said.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!