View Full Version : Ok Serious Question
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 09:23 PM
What is classed as Pornographic pictures?
As some of you know I have various pictures of myself as several members have.
So what is pornographic?
A nude picture?
A Nude Pose?
For Male......If the penis is not errect is it classed as pornographic?
I know of the T.V. "Mull of Kintire" Rule (look at pic)
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/Cjcooljonno/mull_40.jpg
So this is acceptable for tv after 7pm, and newspapers, magazines etc and does not need to carry a certification.
As for women, I am not sure the rules on this.
The Female form taken from a frontal shot is used in Schools for education as is the male form providing it adheirs to the "Mull" rule.
So..............Does a full frontal shot of a female or a male (non errect) depict "Porn"?? If there is no sexual act being performed in the picture??
You may now congratulate me for being so serious when talking about sex :D
Jonno B)
titey
11-08-2003, 09:32 PM
http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/clap.gif CONGRATULATIONS!
Ya perverted pillock. <_<
DarthInsinuate
11-08-2003, 09:37 PM
i find any picture with a woman in it pornographic :w00t:
Nightwolf
11-08-2003, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by DarthInsinuate@8 November 2003 - 16:37
i find any picture with a woman in it pornographic :w00t:
Well said. And anything involving a naked man, erect or not, is just disgusting (unless he's with a naked chick). ;)
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 10:15 PM
@Titey........typical, you're away for weeks and when you do come back you just happen to catch me trying to be serious :rolleyes:
I want serious answers, I'm genuanly interested <_<
Jonno B)
titey
11-08-2003, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@8 November 2003 - 17:15
I want serious answers, I'm genuanly interested <_<
Jonno B)
:o Oh, sorry m8.... it's just so out of character for you to be genuinely serious.A wee bit unnerving as well. http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/nerves.gif
http://members.shaw.ca/wenpigsfly/smileys/smartass.gif Ok then.... por-nog-ra-phy the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction
Seems to me then, that whether an image is pornographic or not depends on the intention of the person displaying it. :unsure:
:D Is that better?
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 10:41 PM
Ok this is very scary cos me and Titey are about to be serious :ph34r:
Right.........
to cause sexual excitement
Surly that is down to the person viewing them, for instance, when I was 14 I could'nt look at a nude female without giggling and having to nip to the bog for 10 mins, but now I can look without giggling :P
Nah, it is down to who views it, like I said a naked Man/Woman stood in a full frontal pose is not nessesarrily(<<never ould spell that word......Nikki?) sexual, there is at least 1 pic of me where I just stood there....... :D
that depicts erotic behavior
So if the subject is nude but not involved in a sexual act it's ok? :unsure:
And you say about the intention?...........Surly it's more about the way it is inturprated?
Ok need to go somewhere to be silly :ph34r:
Jonno B)
titey
11-08-2003, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS+8 November 2003 - 17:41--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JONNO_CELEBS @ 8 November 2003 - 17:41)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Ok this is very scary cos me and Titey are about to be serious :ph34r:
Jonno B)[/b]
:unsure: I wish you woulda phrased that differently.
<!--QuoteBegin-JONNO_CELEBS@8 November 2003 - 17:41
And you say about the intention?...........Surly it's more about the way it is inturprated?
Jonno B)[/quote]
:huh: Well, according to the dictionary definitions I quoted, I'd have to say it is determined by intention.
Whether or not the viewer is aroused or disgusted is moot, since people react to images differently. http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/yes.gif
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 10:58 PM
So..........in that respect, is a picture , full frontal of a person who is simply standing still arms by side Pornographic?
See, I knew no one would be able to answer this :rolleyes:
Jonno B)
titey
11-08-2003, 11:02 PM
It would depend on whether or not the picture is intended to evoke a sexual response or offend the viewer - in that case - YES. http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/yes.gif
If it's meant as an educational or artistic display - in that case - NO. http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/no.gif
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 11:20 PM
Hmmm.........so even tho I posed in an artistic way, it caused sexual arousment so it's pornographic?.......See this is a stalemate question but the reason I asked it is because I was reading (yes I can read) my ftp's terms, it says "No Pornographic material", and it just made me think what they class as pornographic :unsure:
Jonno B)
DarthInsinuate
11-08-2003, 11:24 PM
if you use the boards definition of 'sexual nature' - that would mean no nuditity
bigboab
11-08-2003, 11:33 PM
As far as the 'Mull of Kintyre' rule is concerned, the only time it is hard is early in a frosty morning, or all during the winter. Actually I'm glad it is pointing the other way, if not, when it did get hard it would end up in an awkward position for me. :lol: :lol: :lol:
titey
11-08-2003, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@8 November 2003 - 18:20
Hmmm.........so even tho I posed in an artistic way, it caused sexual arousment so it's pornographic?
Jonno B)
:rolleyes: Your pose is irrelevant.... it's the intention you had when you created/posted the image that matters - so far as whether or not it's truly pornographic.
That's not to say that non-pornographic pictures are acceptible in all places either though.... I believe the KLB rule make reference to nudity not just pronography. ;)
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 11:44 PM
So what you guys are saying is all nudity is porn in some way, just some is more acceptable than others, so what about my ftp terms, it says...............Ah, I just went to find it and it actually says no "Nudity" too :ph34r:
Pintless thread, you may now trash it :rolleyes: :lol: :lol:
Jonno B)
titey
11-08-2003, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@8 November 2003 - 18:44
So what you guys are saying is all nudity is porn in some way
Jonno B)
That's not what I said at all Jonno. :huh:
UKMan
11-08-2003, 11:49 PM
Its impossible to define "pornographic material" for each individual, as perverts and "normal" people (like .......uhmmm - well, me) have differing tastes, so a common mean has been agreed upon. I think all agree that naked pictures showing the genetalia would be considered porno IF used to arouse. This is where those berks who practice nudism can get away with showing fucking disgusting pics of their kids on the beach and then arguing that its ART or some other fucking excuse!
Like i said - its individual - now i'm mad again.........
Its my own fault...... :(
Peace
UKMan
JONNO_CELEBS
11-08-2003, 11:58 PM
nudism can get away with showing f***ing disgusting pics of their kids on the beach and then arguing that its ART
That I agree with, it's never art to show pictures of youngsters unclothed, nor to take pictures like that.
But I guess what it really comes down to in the end is if a picture of a man/woman is taken to please others and cause sexual arousment (like Titey Said) it could be classed as porn, whereas a tastful pose could be considered art, so with my pics they were taken to please others (stfu Titey, they were pleased <_< ) they were designed to arouse and be kept hidden (stfu up Titey, that was'nt my fault <_< ) but if they were taken to be hung on a wall in a house then they would be art...............right :blink:
Ok now I'm confused :blink:
Jonno B)
titey
11-09-2003, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@8 November 2003 - 18:58
if they were taken to be hung on a wall in a house then they would be art...............right :blink:
Jonno B)
:D Nah.... they'd still be trash!
An' http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/STFU.gif y'self Jonno!
bigboab
11-09-2003, 12:18 AM
Where are you going to draw the line? If you do not show children in the nude, for artistic reasons, then in about a hundred years you are going to have people saying, " what kind of society was that?". Are we going to have our lives ruled by paedophiles? Just look at how it is now affecting our everyday events:-
You a not allowed to film your child taking part in the school, play or nativity.
You are not allowed to film your boy playing school football. In some cases not even allowed to watch them!
If you are in a situation where a child is injured, you are frightened to comfort that child in case it is misconstrued.
If a child smiles at you, you are frightened to smile back.
Children are frightened of every grown up. That in itself is the most frightening thing of all! Because that is their best defence, runnning to another grown up.
I could go on ad infinitum. The point I am trying to make is, take the problem out of society, do not let the problem rule society. :angry:
UKMan
11-09-2003, 12:21 AM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@9 November 2003 - 00:58
nudism can get away with showing f***ing disgusting pics of their kids on the beach and then arguing that its ART
That I agree with, it's never art to show pictures of youngsters unclothed, nor to take pictures like that.
But I guess what it really comes down to in the end is if a picture of a man/woman is taken to please others and cause sexual arousment (like Titey Said) it could be classed as porn, whereas a tastful pose could be considered art, so with my pics they were taken to please others (stfu Titey, they were pleased <_< ) they were designed to arouse and be kept hidden (stfu up Titey, that was'nt my fault <_< ) but if they were taken to be hung on a wall in a house then they would be art...............right :blink:
Ok now I'm confused :blink:
Jonno B)
Yes - thats what i mean - its impossible to distinguish individually. I might look at that ART and say - "wow, thats real good porno bro!" - but you would say, "No UKMan - thats ART!".
Peace
UKMan
UKMan
11-09-2003, 12:25 AM
Originally posted by bigboab@9 November 2003 - 01:18
Where are you going to draw the line? If you do not show children in the nude, for artistic reasons, then in about a hundred years you are going to have people saying, " what kind of society was that?". Are we going to have our lives ruled by paedophiles? Just look at how it is now affecting our everyday events:-
You a not allowed to film your child taking part in the school, play or nativity.
You are not allowed to film your boy playing school football. In some cases not even allowed to watch them!
If you are in a situation where a child is injured, you are frightened to comfort that child in case it is misconstrued.
If a child smiles at you, you are frightened to smile back.
Children are frightened of every grown up. That in itself is the most frightening thing of all! Because that is their best defence, runnning to another grown up.
I could go on ad infinitum. The point I am trying to make is, take the problem out of society, do not let the problem rule society. :angry:
Yes - i agree with you here wholeheartedly. The whole world is being turned upside down by the small minority who spoil it for the large majority. Its allways been the case and it allways will be.
Thats why i NORMALLY dont get involved too deeply in these types of threads, because some w*nker allways starts a riot in the end.
Anyways, this has started off as a serious question and it does pose a problem in solving.
Peace
UKMan
Nightwolf
11-09-2003, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@8 November 2003 - 18:58
but if they were taken to be hung on a wall in a house then they would be art...............right
So you were never hung on a wall? ;)
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 02:10 PM
I don't believe that this was serious for so long, I'm so proud............now........
@Nightwolf.........I've never hung on a wall.........I'm hung........but not on a wall :lol: :lol: :lol: ........Well I guess really there's a reason why all the fishing bait shops want me to get a Doner card :lol: :lol:
Jonno B)
NikkiD
11-09-2003, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@9 November 2003 - 09:10
@Nightwolf.........I've never hung on a wall.........I'm hung........but not on a wall :lol: :lol: :lol:
He's right about that... :D
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 02:22 PM
Thats right, I've never been on a wall :P :lol: :lol:
Jonno B)
NikkiD
11-09-2003, 02:25 PM
Careful... it can be arranged :lol:
Not what I meant... but sure, avoid the compliment if you wish.
BTW- You stuck your tongue out at me again...
/me waits...
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 02:33 PM
I was actually trying to get you to say the compliment in a bit more detail :P :lol: :P :P :P
Open wide........Here I cum :P :P :P :P :P
Jonno B)
Rat Faced
11-09-2003, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by NikkiD@9 November 2003 - 14:25
Careful... it can be arranged :lol:
Not what I meant... but sure, avoid the compliment if you wish.
BTW- You stuck your tongue out at me again...
/me waits...
:o :blink: :blink:
:P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P
B)
Yes - i agree with you here wholeheartedly. The whole world is being turned upside down by the small minority who spoil it for the large majority. Its allways been the case and it allways will be.
Sorry, UKman. I tend to disagree here.
IMHO it's the society as a whole who fails here.
If you count up all the "minority's" fucking up, you'd be shocked......
Civilized behaviour is a luxury for a minority who can afford it......
A lot of things we tend to disapprove of were common behaviour ages ago.
And in some "underdeveloped" society's(more than you'd like to know) still are....
As long as people are not able to share their wealth with all people on the world, it indeed will be forever..........
<_< Yogi
NikkiD
11-09-2003, 02:55 PM
@ Paul... hurry up and get over here will ya? I may not have a spare room, but I can hide you under my bed... :lol:
@ Jonno... okay, okay... It's true... you are very well hung... very well indeed... *sigh* Erm... open what wide? :huh:
Rat Faced
11-09-2003, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by NikkiD@9 November 2003 - 14:55
@ Paul... hurry up and get over here will ya? I may not have a spare room, but I can hide you in my bed... :lol:
/me looks up Flight info.....
:wub:
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 02:57 PM
Ok so we're going from porn .....to smut.......to a socialogical<<Look at that for a wordhttp://hometown.aol.co.uk/Cjcooljonno/rock.gif debate.....
Bottom line, living in a small town I can magnify the breakdown of sociaty, I used to live right on the seafront, 9 years I was there, it was beautiful, I open my curtains in the morning and all I could see was the sea :)
I moved from there mainly due to the trouble started forming on the prom infront of my house, kids!...........12/13/14/15 y/o, pissed on a friday night smashing the place up, I had my windows put out, they kept climbing into my garden, I would go out and tell them to "Go Away" (sort of) , one night this happend, as they ran off they were shouting "We're gonna burn you while you sleep", I phoned the police, he said "It's just kids, ignor it", great, big help <_< Me and Baz sat in the garden til 3am, sure enough 3 of them came back along the prom each carrying a bottle full of petrol with a rag in the top, the only thing I could do was talk to them......I aproached them, they also had sticks as weapons but I had to do something, after a lengthy conversation I managed to talk them out of it.
This is the way things are in my little town.................what it's like in the cities I dread to think :(
Society has broken down, law and order has been lost, before long I sometimes wonder if the world of Mad Max will come true :(
Now.............Where are ya Nikki, me's got some licking to do :P :P :P :P :P
Jonno B)
Skweeky
11-09-2003, 03:01 PM
um ok, here goes
In my opinion it all depends on the situation the picture is used in. A naked picture in let's say Hustler magazine is meant pornographic, a naked picture in a Maplethorpe photobook isn't. I've seen many beautiful pictures of men in an 'aroused state' and I 've never considered them pornographic. As a matter of fact, a while ago there was an article about this in Elsevier (the Dutch people among us will certainly know that). It was about a picture of a man with an erection and his child standing next to him...
I've taken many naked pictures of myself for asseignments and stuff like that, and I know that some people who saw them (and who knows how many :lol: ) found them arousing but it was not my intention. What I'm trying to say is; if the creator didn't mean it pornographic, then it is not for others to judge whether it is or not.
I was raised pretty liberal and it's always been normal to walk around naked in the house. I have a lot of little nieces and nephews who stay over here every now and then and they're used to that. Of course I'm not going to take a bath and go stand naked in front of my 13-year old nephew (he IS 13 of course :lol: ), but I don't see what's wrong with little kids to see what an adult body looks like.
As for the naked pics of kids: I have plenty of pics of me naked on the beach when I was 3-4. That's the way kids ARE on the beach when they're 3 or 4, so what's wrong with taking a picture of it? You can't deny reality just because you don't choose to portray it...
Here in Belgium it's been awful ever since that Dutroux-scandal '(guy kidnapped several kids, raped them and murdered them). People are getting arrested for changing clothes in front of their own kids (wtf??? :blink: ). I think society has forgotten where the line between normal family behaviour and paedophilia is...
Originally posted by Skweeky@9 November 2003 - 17:01
um ok, here goes
In my opinion it all depends on the situation the picture is used in. A naked picture in let's say Hustler magazine is meant pornographic, a naked picture in a Maplethorpe photobook isn't. I've seen many beautiful pictures of men in an 'aroused state' and I 've never considered them pornographic. As a matter of fact, a while ago there was an article about this in Elsevier (the Dutch people among us will certainly know that). It was about a picture of a man with an erection and his child standing next to him...
I've taken many naked pictures of myself for asseignments and stuff like that, and I know that some people who saw them (and who knows how many :lol: ) found them arousing but it was not my intention. What I'm trying to say is; if the creator didn't mean it pornographic, then it is not for others to judge whether it is or not.
I was raised pretty liberal and it's always been normal to walk around naked in the house. I have a lot of little nieces and nephews who stay over here every now and then and they're used to that. Of course I'm not going to take a bath and go stand naked in front of my 13-year old nephew (he IS 13 of course :lol: ), but I don't see what's wrong with little kids to see what an adult body looks like.
As for the naked pics of kids: I have plenty of pics of me naked on the beach when I was 3-4. That's the way kids ARE on the beach when they're 3 or 4, so what's wrong with taking a picture of it? You can't deny reality just because you don't choose to portray it...
Here in Belgium it's been awful ever since that Dutroux-scandal '(guy kidnapped several kids, raped them and murdered them). People are getting arrested for changing clothes in front of their own kids (wtf??? :blink: ). I think society has forgotten where the line between normal family behaviour and paedophilia is...
Thanks.
Nothing to add.
Yogi
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Skweeky@9 November 2003 - 15:01
I think society has forgotten where the line between normal family behaviour and paedophilia is...
Exactly!........The problem being is because of such monsters that do bad things to kids the law has done the only thing it thinks can be done, same with Corperal Punishment, you are not allowed to hit your child, I was clouted when I deserved it and I did'nt do the wrong again, I'm still here and ok, the trouble is the people that do BEAT their children will do so regardless of the law, same with Pedophiles, it does'nt matter whether it's legal or not, they will still do it.
The world has gone mad and are children will face the consiquences of our mistakes!
Jonno B)
UKMan
11-09-2003, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by SensualGardening@9 November 2003 - 15:40
Yes - i agree with you here wholeheartedly. The whole world is being turned upside down by the small minority who spoil it for the large majority. Its allways been the case and it allways will be.
Sorry, UKman. I tend to disagree here.
IMHO it's the society as a whole who fails here.
If you count up all the "minority's" fucking up, you'd be shocked......
Civilized behaviour is a luxury for a minority who can afford it......
A lot of things we tend to disapprove of were common behaviour ages ago.
And in some "underdeveloped" society's(more than you'd like to know) still are....
As long as people are not able to share their wealth with all people on the world, it indeed will be forever..........
<_< Yogi
okilidokili - but i was in fact just replying to a particular comment, not in general. If we gonna start talking generally, then here goes:
*Yes, i agree that society has failed. Society is after all the human race, different races -> different societies - very very few actually work, just a couple in the rain forests maybe, but they are getting sucked dry by the rest of us.
*Yepp, i'm aware of the amount of doo dahs made by minorities - i did actually refer to that in my statement. Its a very poignent statement and needs to be examined to be understood. People react to the missgivings of the few by becoming reactionary thinking it will solve the problem. It just creates more and makes the law more of an ass than it is. I could go on here, but i agree with you anyway.
*Civilised behavour being a luxury for the few - well, i'm not sure i agree with that all the way. Its a cop-out made by those who dont want to be civilised in some cases, but if your gonna compare undeveloped countries, then i'm not gonna get into that one. Its a different situation entirely. If you mean the poorer people in the States or in the civilised parts of Europe, i agree up to a point. BUT WHAT do you mean by civilised? A family, being happy, obeying the common rules of decency, working hard for a living, NOT luxury - just living and being happy with what you've got. Treat you neighbours and friends in the same way blah blah - thats civilised behavour in my opinion.
*Sharing wealth is what we are all about here - well at least a part of it. The problem is too complex and has been going on for thousands of years and we would be naive to think we are gonna make a change. The only thing thats gonna happen is that the big corporates are gonna take over and Big Brother WILL happen. Its just a question of time. Theres too much money involved, too much corruption allready for it to stop. Im not being defeatist - just being realistic. I personally dont worry, because my time on earth is for a purpose that has nothing to do with now. Thats my belief anyway. BUT - i do believe that if all individuals do what they can then they will achieve a personal goal - but it wont change anything in the long run.
These are my own opinions and beliefs and are personal. Im happy and i do what i can - thats all we can do. All that happens to martys is they die and land up in the history books to be taught to most people who dont care anyway. We are doomed as a race to be greedy and take what we can - be damned the rest. sad but true.
Peace
UKMan
UKMan
11-09-2003, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by Skweeky@9 November 2003 - 16:01
um ok, here goes
In my opinion it all depends on the situation the picture is used in. A naked picture in let's say Hustler magazine is meant pornographic, a naked picture in a Maplethorpe photobook isn't. I've seen many beautiful pictures of men in an 'aroused state' and I 've never considered them pornographic. As a matter of fact, a while ago there was an article about this in Elsevier (the Dutch people among us will certainly know that). It was about a picture of a man with an erection and his child standing next to him...
I've taken many naked pictures of myself for asseignments and stuff like that, and I know that some people who saw them (and who knows how many :lol: ) found them arousing but it was not my intention. What I'm trying to say is; if the creator didn't mean it pornographic, then it is not for others to judge whether it is or not.
I was raised pretty liberal and it's always been normal to walk around naked in the house. I have a lot of little nieces and nephews who stay over here every now and then and they're used to that. Of course I'm not going to take a bath and go stand naked in front of my 13-year old nephew (he IS 13 of course :lol: ), but I don't see what's wrong with little kids to see what an adult body looks like.
As for the naked pics of kids: I have plenty of pics of me naked on the beach when I was 3-4. That's the way kids ARE on the beach when they're 3 or 4, so what's wrong with taking a picture of it? You can't deny reality just because you don't choose to portray it...
Here in Belgium it's been awful ever since that Dutroux-scandal '(guy kidnapped several kids, raped them and murdered them). People are getting arrested for changing clothes in front of their own kids (wtf??? :blink: ). I think society has forgotten where the line between normal family behaviour and paedophilia is...
I have nothing to add or comment on you there Skweeky - i agree with you and just have to admit its all a damn shame.
I think we all agree here - we just have different ways of putting it over - thats all.
Peace
UKMan
Thanks for that, UKman.
Nothing to add there aswell.
Our main standards are quite close, but i think we allready knew that, huh?
It's just when i see someone blaming a small group for some issue, i tend to refine.
That's all.
I really appreciate your comments and your willingness to see the big picture.
Love&peace :rolleyes:
Yogi
Think just trying hard to be a good example for others is all we can do!!!
Wich also means showing what a beatifull world there is outthere aswell!!!
Yogi
Skweeky
11-09-2003, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by SensualGardening@9 November 2003 - 16:32
Think just trying hard to be a good example for others is all we can do!!!
Wich also means showing what a beatifull world there is outthere aswell!!!
Yogi
GROUP HUG!!!!
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 03:36 PM
Sorry guys, I asked a stupid pointless question, did'nt want you guys arguing :(
Jonno B)
Originally posted by Skweeky+9 November 2003 - 17:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Skweeky @ 9 November 2003 - 17:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SensualGardening@9 November 2003 - 16:32
Think just trying hard to be a good example for others is all we can do!!!
Wich also means showing what a beatifull world there is outthere aswell!!!
Yogi
GROUP HUG!!!! [/b][/quote]
Exactly my point, Skweek!!!!
More Group HUG!!!!!!!!!!
@JONNO; who's arguing????
Rat Faced
11-09-2003, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by Skweeky+9 November 2003 - 15:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Skweeky @ 9 November 2003 - 15:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SensualGardening@9 November 2003 - 16:32
Think just trying hard to be a good example for others is all we can do!!!
Wich also means showing what a beatifull world there is outthere aswell!!!
Yogi
GROUP HUG!!!! [/b][/quote]
:wub:
UKMan
11-09-2003, 03:40 PM
http://w1.542.telia.com/~u54207239/simpfam.gif
UKMan
11-09-2003, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by JONNO_CELEBS@9 November 2003 - 16:36
Sorry guys, I asked a stupid pointless question, did'nt want you guys arguing :(
Jonno B)
We aint arguing bro - in fact, SensualGardening, Skweeky, your goodself and me were having a nice discussion i think. Its the others that need a hug - ha ha
Peace
UKMan
JONNO_CELEBS
11-09-2003, 03:44 PM
:)
Sorry
Jonno B)
Skweeky
11-09-2003, 03:46 PM
Whose hand is that on my butt? <_<
Sorry, couldn't resist.......
I will repend..........
NOT!!!!
:lol: Yogi
Skweeky
11-09-2003, 03:51 PM
UKMan...you did not drop your pen under my skirt <_<
Bah, you're all a bunch of perverts!
But I love you :wub:
once more:
GROUP HUG!!!
InverseKinetix
11-09-2003, 03:54 PM
Please tell me if this is porkographic
http://www.publicitywhore.com/pwblast19/graphics/pig.JPG
Originally posted by InverseKinetix@9 November 2003 - 17:54
Please tell me if this is porkographic
http://www.publicitywhore.com/pwblast19/graphics/pig.JPG
Gives a whole new meaning to: "you're a pig!!!"
http://www.publicitywhore.com/pwblast19/graphics/pig.JPG
:lol: :lol: :lol: Yogi
UKMan
11-09-2003, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by Skweeky@9 November 2003 - 16:51
UKMan...you did not drop your pen under my skirt <_<
Bah, you're all a bunch of perverts!
But I love you :wub:
once more:
GROUP HUG!!!
Uhmm - yes well......i had to bend forward for another reason.... :">
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.