What's pourn? If it's meant to be a past tense of pour, then it's poured.
If it's meant to be short for pornographic...then I don't know what your definition of pornography is (I'm sure you're aware of it though if you knew the link to provide...wheyhey... ) but it's certainly not what is shown here. None of the images on this thread show any form of nudity and it will continue that way.
I'm sorry about that whole thing, I just came in here expecting a hot topic (what with that nearly 2000 replies is it?!!) and I found instead a load of hot chicks!! I didn't stop to read it just jumped to silly conclusions, I am also sorry for putting in that link, I did just make up that site though, i expected it not to exist. So next time I see something like this I will stop and read it a little shall i?!! So once again sorry, please be able to forgive me!! ?
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice and everyone dies.
Hugo DraxLeeds, United Kingdom.Posts: 210MI6 Agent
edited April 2003
Looks like it was just a misunderstanding. 'Izabella Stuff' is a perfectly respectable thread where both male and female members come to appreciate beauty in all its forms.
My attempts at humour are always filthier than the images I post, but there you go
So I salute the Izzy thread {[], which always raises a smile, and sometimes more
The hot tasteful pics are a huge motivation for me, but I understand your point, Jedi Master. I do miss the old days (although I wasn't a member at the time) when all that everyone did was joke around, play, make small talk, and flirt. Some classic and hilarious points are the jokes about the Flying Circus Calendar and the flirtation between M5 and Monique. (Sorry to embarrass you guys, but I thought it was funny! ) We were at page 70 when I joined, but I soon had read everything that I missed. Intriguing reading! (The visuals helped, too!)
Quoting Red Grant:I thought when I saw them I was going to have to say, "Just a slight stiffness coming on...in the shoulder."
Quoting Hugo Drax:
We don't just post pics here, we talk about them as well. So I'm not sure where you're coming from Agent00CR.
You're right. Please allow me to clarify. What I meant is that the Izzy thread is much different than it first was. I don't think that it has gotten worse at all because people still have fun and joke around and such. Most, including me, would argue that it has gotten better because of all the hot pics that we all share with each other. The main difference, other than the increased use of visuals, is that the Izzy Thread "get-together" is now more of a party because of the increased amount of visitors; it's slightly less personal, but, as large parties naturally are, it's attracts more great people to interact with. This is obviously a good thing, and my earlier comment was merely an observation and not a complaint whatsoever.
Quoting Monique:
So Agent00CR, are you saying that we do too much picture posting here now, instead of bantering back and forth like we used to?
Definitely no. I love all the hot pics here, and who doesn't? Besides, even if I said yes, is someone supposed to decree that we all start bantering and flirting with each other?
That's enough analysis of this beloved thread from me for now. I'm here to relax, not study! Since we do talk about the pics that we post here, I was wondering about what people thought of my post way back on page 75:
Quoting Agent00CR:
I'm still on top of the Iza bandwagon! I've found more pics, but they're copyrighted. (I found them on an unofficial site, so I wonder why the guy posted them.) Anyway, you all probably know by now that our lovely Iza was a model for Hennes & Mauritz, aka H & M, last November. The pics are elusive, and they are copyrighted, so I'll just post the link. I thought I should share this wonderful wealth with all of you! (By the way, if you didn't know, she was modeling lingerie.)
First, let's warm up with an old friend of ours, Kylie Minogue.
Quoting Agent00CR:What I meant is that the Izzy thread is much different than it first was. I don't think that it has gotten worse at all because people still have fun and joke around and such. Most, including me, would argue that it has gotten better because of all the hot pics that we all share with each other. The main difference, other than the increased use of visuals, is that the Izzy Thread "get-together" is now more of a party because of the increased amount of visitors; it's slightly less personal, but, as large parties naturally are, it's attracts more great people to interact with. This is obviously a good thing, and my earlier comment was merely an observation and not a complaint whatsoever.
Wow Agent00CR! To quote Hardyboy from another thread: Sometimes you can analyze something to death!
That's enough analysis of this beloved thread from me for now. I'm here to relax, not study![/iquote]
There ya go.
Leather.
Hugo DraxLeeds, United Kingdom.Posts: 210MI6 Agent
Now I understand what you meant Agent00CR. The more the merrier I say. More people, more pics.
Quoting jetsetwilly:Jeez, and here was me thinking that Izzy was all about tits and pecs.
1250 replies and nearly 20000 posts seem to support that theory Jetset
So what do you guys think of this whole controversy? Is it because they are chicks they took such heat, or is it that we really don't want to hear celebrities political views? I think people overreacted to it, but I'm not American maybe it strikes more of an nerve there.
It's all right. It's quite all right, really. She's having a rest. We'll be going on soon. There's no hurry, you see. We have all the time in the world.
People, people, people!! Izzy is not a political animal! Let's leave the Bush talk (well, the political one) and the stuff about the war for a different thread. In the meanwhile, if you want a recent cover girl, you can't go wrong with the divine Ms. B:
Yeah-- but he followed it up by scolding Q-Fan...so that restored his professor mode. )
Moonie we both better duck..lemme borrow that hard hat..{:)
And Luke, that was really the Dixie Chicks posing for that.
Hugo DraxLeeds, United Kingdom.Posts: 210MI6 Agent
Quoting Hardyboy:People, people, people!! Izzy is not a political animal! Let's leave the Bush talk (well, the political one) and the stuff about the war for a different thread. In the meanwhile, if you want a recent cover girl, you can't go wrong with the divine Ms. B:
Bellisima!
Well after viewing several pieces of his (cough, cough) work on here, I must say I do admire the work of Antoine Verglas
And I bet his camera lens isn't the only thing that's protrudes
Ah Hardyboy, don't stress over it. I wasn't trying to talk about the war, I just liked the naked Dixie Chicks picture. I thought it was a hot topic in the US.
I've just scanned through the last few pics and, well. I find it obserdly agrovating that all celebs (not just women) use their bodys to sell themselfs, this just feels like an insult to me!! As if people think I'm so shallow that a bit of pornography will make me a fan. It's even done in the "real world" (away from celebs) so many products use mild porn to sell themselfs, and for some reason it ****es me off!! Am I being silly or do others feel the same way?
(Sorry to take it off the topic, i just want maybe a couple of suplies, I'll open a new thread if we start talking more about it)
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice and everyone dies.
It's not off topic really it is discussing the benefits or lack of them to advertising using beutiful people all part of the Izzy thread!
I personally disagree and don't find it wrong or annoying. However I don't pay much attention to it when they are used to advertise things.
But I am shallow enough to go and see a film because of it's casts appearances in magazines, but not very often!
The main thing is these companies aren't after fans / long time buyers, mainly impulse buys / viewers, immediate sales , bumbs on seats is what counts now days.
Sexuality is apart of human nature, wether it was kept hush hush, or paraded around, its been there always. Nothing has really changed except its exposure. Sex is an effective marketing tool, to all walks of life. As long as it does not, like anything else, go too far (and by far I mean people prancing around in childrens magiznes wearing nothing but panties) It will stay for better or worse.
Hugo DraxLeeds, United Kingdom.Posts: 210MI6 Agent
edited April 2003
Quoting Red Grant:
Sexuality is apart of human nature, wether it was kept hush hush, or paraded around, its been there always. Nothing has really changed except its exposure. Sex is an effective marketing tool, to all walks of life. As long as it does not, like anything else, go too far (and by far I mean people prancing around in childrens magiznes wearing nothing but panties) It will stay for better or worse.
Good point Red. Sexuality is an integral part of human nature. I would watch a film/TV show because there are beautiful women in it. While that may sound very shallow, it is fact of life and I'm sure many others would agree.
Good looks aren't everything of course in a woman/man but it is the first thing we notice about a person. This isn't really a good thing because a woman/man who would be great for you could be someone who you don't look twice at because you don't find them attractive, so ugly mugs like myself remain dateless
And you can't beat a woman prancing around in her panties , well OK maybe if she prances around wearing nothing.
Yeah I start to see it now!! Well actually I see it all the time but for some reason it anoys me ) Yeah but I'll never be able to get over it completely I dont think!! I mean on things like underwear adds, sure, they want you to see their product, but 1 particular advert i've seen did a close up of a womens breast, not even the bra!! It was her breast I tell you!!! )
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice and everyone dies.
Hugo DraxLeeds, United Kingdom.Posts: 210MI6 Agent
edited April 2003
Quoting jetsetwilly:
I'm more annoyed that when they say "sex sells", it usually involves some bird in a bra and panties
Whatever happened to equality?!?! Do we need to send in the Flying Circus ?
I get annoyed when advertisers use sex to advertise all kinds of products. They'll show a scantily-clad woman and then ask you to buy a toothpaste or something. It's ridiculous. How shallow and pathetic do they think guys are?....
Men are often used in advertising as well though Jetset, not as much as women though it has to be said. So maybe there is a lack of equality there.
Anyway I think this particular page of the thread needs some pictoral improvement.
Nice pic of Elisha, Hugo . . . wait, I think I just heard someone scream. . . .
Quoting Jedi Master:
I've just scanned through the last few pics and, well. I find it obserdly agrovating that all celebs (not just women) use their bodys to sell themselfs, this just feels like an insult to me!! As if people think I'm so shallow that a bit of pornography will make me a fan. It's even done in the "real world" (away from celebs) so many products use mild porn to sell themselfs, and for some reason it ****es me off!! Am I being silly or do others feel the same way?
I don't feel angry about it or even negative; I just force myself to think objectively and appreciate something for what it is. I will admit that I will watch some television programs based on sex appeal, read some magazines (not Playboy or anything such but the milder stuff like Cosmo), and visit particular forum threads just because they activate some hormones. I realize that marketers take this into account, so I can just admire the sexuality just for that and keep my reasons for purchasing separate (difficult at times but possible).
Everyone here acknowledges the truth of the matter, which is that sexuality is a natural part of humanity. I think that it is a Darwinistic notion: survival of the fittest. We find the healthiest people, in general, hot and sexy; we naturally want to have sex with them and produce healthy offspring. This isn't really an excuse for shallow behavior, but I dare you to try rationalizing your actions to an object of lust this way; tell me what happens! (Okay, I'm half-serious; don't do anything stupid!)
Jedi Master, I guess I do see your point. I think we've all become desensitized to it, though. Using one's body and one's self as a means to an unworthy end, especially something cheap as sex out of lust or even just to sell a product, is demeaning and wrong. Models such as our beloved Izzy walk a fine line in some cases, but I have nothing against what they are doing as long as they are just having fun and being confident about themselves. I am hardly breaking the surface with this issue, and most of you already know that giving me something to analyze is like, as Natalya would put it, "boys with toys"!
I'm fairly certain that this magazine cover from the previous page helped spark your earlier post:
[img=http://i.timeinc.net/ew/covergallery/img/2003/may22003_708_lg.jpg]I said earlier that I try to remain objective and appreciate something for what it is, so I don’t find much against this pic. Perhaps the Dixie Chicks are using their bodies as a means to an end, but I don’t think that the end is just selling some magazines; I think they are trying to draw people’s attention to a serious issue. If you were to drain all the testosterone from my body (please don’t do this), I would still find special meaning in the picture: the caustic responses to their statements have stripped them down bare, and they are extremely vulnerable now. Also, they are sacrificing their bodies to speak out for what they believe, which I assume they did within the actual magazine. We are not supposed to see a hot, erotic picture here but one of resolve, vulnerability, and defamation. Although I do find the picture sexually appealing, I see it more from the respectful perspective that I believe the Dixie Chicks would like us to have.[/img]
Quoting jetsetwilly:
Jeez, and here was me thinking that Izzy was all about tits and pecs.
Comments
If it's meant to be short for pornographic...then I don't know what your definition of pornography is (I'm sure you're aware of it though if you knew the link to provide...wheyhey...
My attempts at humour are always filthier than the images I post, but there you go
So I salute the Izzy thread {[], which always raises a smile, and sometimes more
Long may it continue.
Famke Janssen was on TV here in the UK last night and she looked stunning. She was promoting X-Men 2
I'll have to post these as links:
http://www.celebritywizard.com/images/image_galleries/famke_janssen/pages/famke14_jpg.html
http://www.celebritywizard.com/images/image_galleries/famke_janssen/pages/famke39_jpg.html
This is a very enjoyable topic once you get down to the heart of it and it's soul and meaning, Hardboy started an avalanche! A good one mind!
If you have concerns abotu topics please pm myself or a mod we can always sort things out.
Well see y'all!
You're right. Please allow me to clarify. What I meant is that the Izzy thread is much different than it first was. I don't think that it has gotten worse at all because people still have fun and joke around and such. Most, including me, would argue that it has gotten better because of all the hot pics that we all share with each other. The main difference, other than the increased use of visuals, is that the Izzy Thread "get-together" is now more of a party because of the increased amount of visitors; it's slightly less personal, but, as large parties naturally are, it's attracts more great people to interact with. This is obviously a good thing, and my earlier comment was merely an observation and not a complaint whatsoever.
Definitely no. I love all the hot pics here, and who doesn't? Besides, even if I said yes, is someone supposed to decree that we all start bantering and flirting with each other?
That's enough analysis of this beloved thread from me for now. I'm here to relax, not study! Since we do talk about the pics that we post here, I was wondering about what people thought of my post way back on page 75:
@merseytart
All that I can say is don't let me cause you to think that it's not.
1250 replies and nearly 20000 posts seem to support that theory Jetset
Please don't hit my face {:)
Moonie we both better duck..lemme borrow that hard hat..{:)
And Luke, that was really the Dixie Chicks posing for that.
Well after viewing several pieces of his (cough, cough) work on here, I must say I do admire the work of Antoine Verglas
And I bet his camera lens isn't the only thing that's protrudes
And Mo..heh heh, you can borrow MY helmet {:)
Was that the word Moonie?
(Sorry to take it off the topic, i just want maybe a couple of suplies, I'll open a new thread if we start talking more about it)
I personally disagree and don't find it wrong or annoying. However I don't pay much attention to it when they are used to advertise things.
But I am shallow enough to go and see a film because of it's casts appearances in magazines, but not very often!
The main thing is these companies aren't after fans / long time buyers, mainly impulse buys / viewers, immediate sales , bumbs on seats is what counts now days.
But we all love it really
Good point Red. Sexuality is an integral part of human nature. I would watch a film/TV show because there are beautiful women in it. While that may sound very shallow, it is fact of life and I'm sure many others would agree.
Good looks aren't everything of course in a woman/man but it is the first thing we notice about a person. This isn't really a good thing because a woman/man who would be great for you could be someone who you don't look twice at because you don't find them attractive, so ugly mugs like myself remain dateless
And you can't beat a woman prancing around in her panties
We should take advice from James Bond and
"take pleasure in great beauty"
Whatever happened to equality?!?! Do we need to send in the Flying Circus ?
@merseytart
I get annoyed when advertisers use sex to advertise all kinds of products. They'll show a scantily-clad woman and then ask you to buy a toothpaste or something. It's ridiculous. How shallow and pathetic do they think guys are?....
Men are often used in advertising as well though Jetset, not as much as women though it has to be said. So maybe there is a lack of equality there.
Anyway I think this particular page of the thread needs some pictoral improvement.
[img=http://elisha.primenova.com/some/saturnawards.jpg]{:) But I watch 24 for the drama and suspense. Honest!
I don't feel angry about it or even negative; I just force myself to think objectively and appreciate something for what it is. I will admit that I will watch some television programs based on sex appeal, read some magazines (not Playboy or anything such but the milder stuff like Cosmo), and visit particular forum threads just because they activate some hormones. I realize that marketers take this into account, so I can just admire the sexuality just for that and keep my reasons for purchasing separate (difficult at times but possible).
Everyone here acknowledges the truth of the matter, which is that sexuality is a natural part of humanity. I think that it is a Darwinistic notion: survival of the fittest. We find the healthiest people, in general, hot and sexy; we naturally want to have sex with them and produce healthy offspring. This isn't really an excuse for shallow behavior, but I dare you to try rationalizing your actions to an object of lust this way; tell me what happens!
Jedi Master, I guess I do see your point. I think we've all become desensitized to it, though. Using one's body and one's self as a means to an unworthy end, especially something cheap as sex out of lust or even just to sell a product, is demeaning and wrong. Models such as our beloved Izzy walk a fine line in some cases, but I have nothing against what they are doing as long as they are just having fun and being confident about themselves. I am hardly breaking the surface with this issue, and most of you already know that giving me something to analyze is like, as Natalya would put it, "boys with toys"!
I'm fairly certain that this magazine cover from the previous page helped spark your earlier post:
[img=http://i.timeinc.net/ew/covergallery/img/2003/may22003_708_lg.jpg]I said earlier that I try to remain objective and appreciate something for what it is, so I don’t find much against this pic. Perhaps the Dixie Chicks are using their bodies as a means to an end, but I don’t think that the end is just selling some magazines; I think they are trying to draw people’s attention to a serious issue. If you were to drain all the testosterone from my body (please don’t do this), I would still find special meaning in the picture: the caustic responses to their statements have stripped them down bare, and they are extremely vulnerable now. Also, they are sacrificing their bodies to speak out for what they believe, which I assume they did within the actual magazine. We are not supposed to see a hot, erotic picture here but one of resolve, vulnerability, and defamation. Although I do find the picture sexually appealing, I see it more from the respectful perspective that I believe the Dixie Chicks would like us to have.[/img] Ha, look at us. I guess not!