Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

FairPlay, Babestation keep recruiting well. I’m loving newbies Fay Fox and Jessica Mae and also two top free agent signings in Holly Gibbons and Roxyie. BS always finding top babes

(22-08-2023 10:26 )Joh176 Wrote:  

(21-08-2023 21:22 )Asspocalypse Wrote:  I’m sure I’m in the minority here but I’m very bored of Bethstation.

rather have Bethstation then having to sit through Laylastation or even worse Valentinastation when nobody moves for about an hour

There are and have been a number of women in recent years, who haven't been very active on camera, but I wouldn't have named those two..
Whilst there are others who are hyperactive, but unless they're actually doing something, such as actually masturbating, I don't see the point!

I've commented recently on Layla's 'movement' (see also other posts on the same page): https://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.p...pid2795520

(23-08-2023 11:15 )Count Spankula Wrote:  

(23-08-2023 03:32 )Bbefan_london Wrote:  There are others who put on a fantastic show but don’t get the praise on here. No point mentioning names because I’ve realised it’s all about preference…

Why isn't there any point? If you think someone deserves credit then give credit where credit's due. Let's hear who's fantastic and deserves praise. Maybe someone will agree with your choices.

I don't agree that it's all about preference. For example, I would say that Michelle Moist has been extremely impressive since she joined Babestation even though she isn't a favourite of mine.

"Well, in a number of different ways, I have said, that I'd rather be underwhelmed by a show by one of the women I'm really attracted to, than watch other "types of shows and presentations" by women that don't really interest me*." - https://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.p...pid2795520

["To elaborate on my previous posts, from some of the commentary throughout the year, some people evidently commend mere efficiency, i.e. some women who seem to be effective, 'satisfactory', or 'popular', regularly doing mostly the same routines.
As I suggested, I find that an oddly, rather impersonal attitude, more suited to those who manage the companies.
On occasion I have indicated, when women who don't especially interest me, have turned me on, nonetheless. But even when the women I'm most attracted to, underwhelm me, the individual women in those two groups, are unlikely to swap places.",] - https://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.p...pid2786767 - that itself was quoting from a longer post in a different thread!

Why does Kim Jenner sit in the tv studio and not go the night show ? She has the certain up on babestation but on stream mate she is not even topless ? they could put her on screen or use the set for someone else .

I find it odd that Bbefan_london has been described as "sycophantic", and maybe even working for BS, as his overall emphasis has been on actually interacting with individual women, rather than where they're working. (There have certainly been others on the forum, who have been more fittingly described as cheerleaders for particular channels and companies.)

Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with some of the criticisms he's questioning, I do nonetheless agree with Bbefan_london that we have to deal with the situation as it is, rather than how we would want it to be.
As I've suggested in (a) (few) post(s), which I might search and link later, the only way is down, because the babe channel format is going to fade away, rather than resume its earlier glory years.
That, alas, makes hopes for much more "honesty of endeavour", something of a lost cause.
I say that as someone who recently used up a lot of time, again, with the customer service of BS, and some similar companies, and will again, soon enough, most probably....

I get the impression that the overall opinion is that BS is not as good as it used to be, due to pressure from the government and Mary Whitehouse type groups. This I wouldn't argue with. But what I do say is that the likes of BS are taking advantage of this, with sub standard shows and dodgy money grabbing gimmicks. Having been on this planet for a good number of years I think I can honestly say though, that what comes round now, comes round again. After the staid Victorian era and World war 1, we saw in the 1920's the resurgence of the youth of the time, having outlandish parties, shortish skirts and swimwear when wet, very revealing. Then we had a few decades, with prohibition, war and rationing. Followed by, in the late 50's, coffee bars, Teddy Boys and their girls, introducing us to the jive. Plenty of swirling skirts, revealing those, often not seen before for some guys, stocking tops and suspenders. Then as the 50's moved into the 60's we men were then blessed with the sight of women in their mini skirts. Plenty of bum cheeks on display if you looked for it and even stocking tops if the lady was up for it. Then there was free love and ecstasy. Followed soon by video recorders and their cameras. Made it more easier for you to participate in a video, or watch some amazing porn, the like of you've never perhaps seen before. Till today with the development of the internet and it's obvious open doors to sex. Which now is being pin pointed for more censorship. One can only hope that in the not too distant future, a time probably not in my life span, which will allow more freedom of movement, expression and no censorship.

This is a(n attempt at a) quick response, ahead of possible elaboration later.. (notwithstanding, as I've quoted previously, "If I'd had more time, I would have written a shorter letter", attributed to Blaise Pascal)

I've said some of this in previous posts, but to save time, I'm not looking for and linking them, for now..

The OFCOM regulatory regime that BS et al have to work within, and the renewed, international, porn panic of recent years, as discussed by me and others on the forum, which has been pushed not only by the usual suspects, certainly constrains them.
However, I wouldn't agree with any cyclical historical narrative, as understandably tempting to which it might be to succumb.
For instance, whilst some might complain about wider, general 'pornifiication' and 'sexualisation', I doubt the Hays Code is likely to be reintroduced in Hollywood, or adapted and adopted elsewhere in the Euro-American world.

One alternative historical trajectory to which I referred previously, was offered by a series shown on Channel 4, over twenty years ago, Pornography: Secret History of Civilisation, and its associated book.
Albeit, still limited in its broad and mechanistic explanation.

As I've suggested from probably my earliest forum posts, the conditions that supported the babe channel format, both within specific sexwork terms, and wider economics, culture, and media, have been receding, for a number of years.
One of the differences between porn and associated sex work, in Britain, and in USA, as written about by various people over time, including Jerry Barnett, author of 'Porn Panic', also on his YouTube channel, and formerly a senior adult industry figure in Britain, is that there's little, sustained, and coordinated campaigning against censorship in its diverse forms.
Indeed, it seems that companies have been more likely to report each other to the pertinent authorities, than join forces to resist the tentacles of censors.
Any concerted resistance is provided by individual sex workers joining together, which obviously means it doesn't have anything like the resources of campaigns in USA, where it's backed up by the wider industry, and the protection of the national constitution.

Any long-term future for BS and Xpanded will be online, and without the tv 'shop window' infomercials, they'll have to compete alongside companies and websites that have established themselves without them.
Albeit, as I've said in a number of posts about Xpanded, one of which I've linked in a post in recent days, going back to an inadvertently candid response from a moderator, on its own, defunct forum, before I was banned, the online side seems to have been the overriding priority for Xpanded, as further evidenced by various characteristics over the years, up to the development of SoSpoilt.

In its own, ultimately disastrous way, Studio 66 had some of the vision of the online future, including with its association with Sixty6 magazine. Although as I've said, if it had happened several years before, during the peak years of the babe channels, and in association with the other channels, it could have helped to firmly establish the brands in the wider culture.

All this diversification, including BS merchandising, are all catching up with things that should have been tried several years earlier.
Against other established websites, and individuals with fan sites that are outstandingly successful in their own right, it will be tough times ahead.

I’ve noticed last night and tonight both Kendal and Poppy cover their face tattoos in foundation. Is that a Babestation thing or just the girls doing it themselves?

Poppy said a few months ago that she's had second thoughts about her facial tattoo and is covering it up for that reason. I don't know about Kendal.

(07-09-2023 00:18 )dominar rygel xvi Wrote:  Poppy said a few months ago that she's had second thoughts about her facial tattoo and is covering it up for that reason. I don't know about Kendal.

That's quite sad really maybe a few more girls should think what they are going to.look like in the future before covering themselves in tats , I am not anty tats just think some girls go to far,
Poppy was one of the most naturally beautiful girls on the shows but all the ink she's had for me takes away from her beauty