Quote:
Originally posted by badboy65260
[reply=oxygenetic]
Thanks for the post badboy...very much appreciated. I visited the site, though, and I have to say it's bs. No offense to you for posting these by the way...it's kind of interesting true or not! Anyway, the start page of the site kind of "tabloidizes" the whole taboo of it which makes me wonder if they didn't get a bunch of naked people together of different age groups together and call them "The Smiths." Think about it, nudists want absolutely no association with the word "pornography." I don't think these people would let this site fly much less sign any release for publication on it. My two cents...again, thanks for the post!
I see your point...but theyd have to give consent for their photos to be shown right?(on the website)
[/reply]
Yeah, they would have to. That's why I think it's not nudists...just people paid for posing with others. Once the release is signed, someone posts them on the site with ficticious family names. Or I could be wrong and dear ol' Dad mentions over Sunday pancakes and oj, "Hey family, how's about we all get naked in front of a stranger and let them pay us cash to take our pictures? Then, we can rest easy that half the world is beating off to my daughter, Janey Sue."
The fact that the start page expressly implies how shocking, taboo, and inapppropriate the subject matter is leads me to believe caca de toro.