Bros, please debate your opinions on the criteria for posting pictures in this forum here ...

Use mild language please !

Criteria?

For me, ANY pictures of the girl you're reviewing.


Even with clothes, it's nice to see the difference between the database pics and real life pics.

Without clothes are even better, because you get to see the goods.

In action pics... well... they're fun to look at....   
and usually, they're in a POV angle, which is nice, since POV is as real as it gets. (I love Doggy POV shots...)

So in essence, ALL pics should be accepted, because every one of them usually gives us a certain (yet different) perspective on the beauty of the girl.


Though personally, I do like the face pics the most.... since for me, the face is the "make or break" of a girl's beauty.

I feel I don't have much say here, as I haven't been on this forum long enough (around 3 months), but I prefer doing away with nude shots, especially dick shots, as we don't know if the girl wants them shown in the first place and it seems more likely than not that she took them, thinking that they were for personal viewing.  If bros want to see nude shots, why not simply go to a porn site and see similar pics there?  Sex141 is not a porn site, but a site informing punters of WGs and assisting them in whom to visit.  Not only this, these types of shots are more likely to be leaked onto other forums, increasing the risk of the WGs' family seeing them.  None of us would like to see that, right?? I can't see any benefit in them, but can see how they can be very damaging.  If nude pics are still allowed, the girl's face should not be shown (just as you don't want yours to be!!).  

When compared to nude pics, it's more likely she has agreed to non-nude pics for advertising purposes.  I think it's no use questioning a bro every time he has posted non-nude pics whether he has obtained permission, since you can't prove it anyway - she may have said "yes" but had a change of heart later on, and in that instance, the bro may have been unfairly blamed.  Also, the thought of being blamed despite acting ethically may turn him off posting.  However, guidelines for fair practice should be set up and bros should be encouraged to follow them, which means getting verbal permission to share non-nude pics with friends.  If the guidelines are in place, we then have to assume the bro is doing the honourable thing by following them.  We can't question him or point the finger.  That's not fair.  .   

Assuming the bro is doing the honourable thing, for HGs, I think unobstructed face shots should be okay, since the girls' faces appear on the database anyway, but for "pixellated pics" or girls who are not advertised, their face should be obstructed, e.g. with a black band over the eyes.  Therefore, in short, my suggestion:
nude pics: banned or discouraged
non-nude HGs and unpixellated walk-ups: no obstruction (and we assume that are playing fair by having asked to "share with friends")
non-nude pixellated WGs and girls not appearing in the database: slight obstruction to face (and we assume that are playing fair by having asked to post)

If the bro has admitted he didn't get permission (as was the case with one member in another thread) or the bro took a blatantly obvious sneaky pic, then those pics should be deleted out of respect for the WG, who should be afforded the same rights as you and I.  


Just my two cents.  

[ Last edited by  Thai-delight at 7-8-2009 00:08 ]

i think Thai-Delight has brought up valid points, but i also can't disagree with reggie in the added bonus for all bros when you get to actually see the real thing vs. the DB pics.  it's a fine line with the nudes/action shots, but as long as permission was obtained then i don't have a problem with it.  of course, we would be resorting to an honour system essentially.  Thai-Delight is absolutely correct about the pixellated WGs and bros who admit they didn't get permission though.  the girls deserve to have their privacy respected.

we all have privacy!

lets say we all met up and went ktv, and during that night we all had a great time and took many photos of ourselves with the girls fucking etc!

then i go and load it on facebook for my other fiends to see.  afterall, we had a great time and i wanted to show them off

if you was one of the guys on the pics, how would you feel? would you be bothered?

some will, some wont|!

since we cant be sure, and to respect the girls, all phtos should now have faces pixelled out! showing the body alone i think is just as good!

girls allowing you to take pics willingly is one thing, but at the time of taking, was she aware that she will be shown on a rather well known website???

if the answer is no, then pixells are required!

i must admit, i do enjoy the pics on the forum as it makes the report more interesting, and im sure most bros didnt mean any harm! me neither untill i had a good think about it!

well... what if the girl already has her face shown in the DB? (though it is photoshopped to be "prettier")
Considering they are already on the internet, would it be fair to post more pictures of them?

Personally, if we had to pixelate parts, I would prefer to pixelate boobs, bush, and especially schlongs.

I notice that compared to the database, the face is the most altered. Bodies are also altered, but nowhere near as much.


How about a compromise of:
If the girl is in the Database, and her face is NOT pixelated, then showing her face is okay.
If her face is pixelated, then we pixelate it as well?


Also, if we really look deeper into it, we "probably" shouldn't be using the "no pictures, because it doesn't respect their privacy" line.  I'm not saying we should disrespect the girls, mind you....
We shouldn't use that line, because we would be hypocrites in saying it, while at the same time, telling about how great a certain girl's BBBJ is, if she does anal, are her breasts real, does she do CIM, etc.

So to say, "respect for the girl", yet kiss and telling, seems hypocritical.
You can say that it's about "drawing a line", as to what's too personal, but I would think that posting a picture of a girl (in a non-action position), is far less invasive on her privacy, than describing in detail what happened between her and a guy between the sheets, in the shower, etc.


For me, it's more of a fact finding mission, to see if we're going to get what we pay for.

Lots of good points already.  

My view is bros should be responsible for their own selection of pics, but be willing to be challenged if the community feels standards of safety / privacy / respect / decency are compromised.  

We want girls to be willing for us to take pics, AND be willing for us to post them.  
The only way that will happen is if we respect their needs and preferences.  

This means we should respect their needs for privacy, and post genuine but attractive pics.  

Safety and privacy first:-
Clearly if a girl has full-face shots on her profile, posting a full-face shot in a report is reasonable.  Ditto levels of undress.  
If she does not show her face on the db, posting an unpixellated face pic is NOT reasonable.  

Respect:-
Another thing they're sensitive about is whether the pic is a good one or not.  My view is if you have several shots, and one of them makes her look fugly, no need to post it - post the good-looking shots.  (In any case which bro is going to post pics that make his choice look ugly????)  We all know girls have good sides and bad sides, and even the quest for authenticity is best served by posting good-looking shots.  

Decency:-
Lately there have been a lot of dick shots, in full flagrante delicto, both vaginal and anal.  I'm no prude and I don't care for myself.  However there are misguided people out there in the World who are offended by sex and make it their business to try to eliminate it from the World - there's no value in attracting their attention by going too far over the lines that have been drawn by the ever-changing definition of what is and is not pornography.  

There is no need for proof guys: if you write you had sex or anal sex, no need to show us your dick to make us believe you ...

This site is stronger as a reference site, not as a porn site.  
As suggested, a much better way to share pornographic material is to put it on a site who's stated goal is sharing amateur porn, and put a link from here to that site.  I probably will go and see it there

A question for you twice:  is the matter getting attention from the Admins?  

Or are you only looking for an internal community consensus?

Another follow up question:

Should all these be restrospective? assuming the forum is going to implement these guidelines.

i suppose if the girl has already exposed hersef, then thats fine! but to be honest, no girl on this database look anything like the picss taken by bros!

photos on this database often have faces pixelled out! those that havnt often dont look human. looks more like those anime characters

either way, photos have been altered so that the girls true face can not be recognised, only a resemblance!

there are however, some escorts out there that uses real photos on their site without any fear! this can be an exception, but it is still best to ask.

I completely agree with you here.  Permission is the BEST assurance that you can post a picture of the girl.



Here's a slightly off topic question for everyone, but since we're on the subject, and you since kind of mentioned it.....

Regarding the non-pixellated photos of the girls' faces:
How many of you bros out there think that the photoshopping of the faces is because the girl doesn't want to be recognized?
How many of you think that the photoshopping is to make the girl's face more attractive?

photoshopping = marketing/pacakaging = $$$$ to WG and Papa

pixel face = old/ugly n of cos she dont want her husband to recognise



Talking bout Permission, how are we gonna do that and verify it?
"Rest assured, I was granted permission from the WG to post her pic here"........yes, I believe you, you are so considerate and protective towards our fellow WGs....

i don't think there really is anyway to verify permission.  like i said before, permission is def got to be an honour system whereby we trust that our fellow bros are not being douches about it and vice versa

There is no need for any kind of certification process. What's involved here are standards of personal conduct. One shouldn't be posting photos that are obtained by deceit - photos that have the potential of causing great harm and embarrassment. It's a question of respect and what kind of person you are.

Ultimately there is no way for the reader to know if the girl in the report knew her pics were going to be broadcast to the world in a web sex report, just as there is no way to know that the guy didn't steal her mobile phone while she was in the shower. What's the point of asking for guarantees? People will say whatever they want.

In posts #69, #70 and #71 in this thread:

http://forum.sex141.com/eforum/v ... page%3D1&page=4

three different guys give three different examples of girls whose lives would be completely fucked if someone thought it cool to sneak a pic of the chick and post it online in a report. Does anyone really think that's OK?

very well.


nobody is asking for guarantee or certification.
.............. it's basically one bro's word over another.


So what's the use of making a fuss of this?.........we're not going to stop ppl from posting pics of WGs (with or without their permission)

It's just a simple discussion of ideas Hunter - the kind of thing that makes forum participation interesting.

I believe there really is no need for permissions nor certifications.  There are websites out there the makes posting pictures of ex-girlfriends an exclusive thing.  They don't care about permissions.  Here's an example of one of those sites:  www.submityourex.com  I'm sure most of these postings don't have permissions nor cares about it.

In other words: since other people do shitty things, it's OK for you to be a shit as well. Have I understood you correctly?

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do"?
A horrible way of putting it, but that's how it goes...

As far as I can tell, we're all in this forum, because we like to get reviews, info, etc. about WG's.
So, wouldn't a picture (to compare with a Database pic) be part of that review?


Granted, if a girl DOESN'T want to have her picture taken, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE comply with her wishes.
But if a girl ALLOWS pictures to be taken of her (naked or clothed), then all responsibility belongs to the picture holder.
I don't let people take pictures of me when I go to a massage parlor, etc. because I don't want them circulating on the net. IF I ALLOWED someone to take a picture of me, then it's an "ASSUMED RISK" that it MIGHT get on the internet.  The girls SHOULD understand that they are taking the same risks.


Of course, if the picture or video is "spy cam/hidden", then no... it should not be posted on the internet.  HELL! Spy cam/hidden video/pics shouldn't be taken in the first place!


As for the permission/certification of a girl's picture.... how can we really know if permission is given?
The only thing we can really condemn, is if the picture looks like a spy/hidden picture (girl is sleeping, girl is showering, funny camera angles, etc).
If the girl obviously poses for the shot, then, for me, I'm going to assume the picture is fair game to be posted on the internet.


Seriously though... asking a forum full of mongers, if we would like real pictures of pretty girls, naked girls, girls we can have sex with.... is like asking a dog if it would like to have a steak.....
Does anyone really expect a "no"?

yeah - the point is that WE get the chance to define what it is Romans do here - because we are the ones who make it happen.

It's one thing to turn a blind eye in the name of broad-mindedness and tolerance, it's another to stand by silently if you become aware one person's action harms another.  

This question is not about policing each other - it's finding out people's views what it is that makes the forum most valuable.  Andclearly, when asked about posting pics of girls who want to have sex with us in a forum full of mongers most people are saying "yes, but ..."