+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=18626)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - lovebabes56 - 30-11-2020 06:39
I'm sitting on the fence on this one, I'm not going to be the forum's real life TMO/VAR - Nigel Owens on this one lol
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - PhredE - 30-11-2020 10:01
I will admit I don't like tatoos, fake tits, fake lips or piercings. I like all natural, preferably smaller breasted girls.
However others do like some, or all of those things, so there are girls who fill the fantasies of most people just like there are people in the "real" world that people like or dislike.
If you don't like a particular girl because of tats/plastic/ironwork etc. do what I do, and don't watch them. Don't go online and diss them.
Having said that I am finding that babeshows are now featuring more girls that I can't watch (especially tattoos which actually make me feel nauseous - must be a psychological thing),
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - crankshaft - 30-11-2020 11:31
I'm not posting a response in relation to any recent contributions in the argument being had on this thread on the subject of an accusation of tattoo shaming. I just wanted to express my own opinion on the prevalence of 'babes' with tattoos. I'm completely ok with small tattoos which don't dominate the surface area of a woman's body, but I do find it off-putting to see the sight of entire arms, legs and torsos covered in dense body-art. A case in point is Paige Turnah on Saturday night. Her arms are now covered in tats (I assume they are permeanent because of the complexity of the design). To me, she has been rendered a 'rock chick', which, while there isn't anything intrinsically wrong with such a characterisation, it does somehow narrow the perception of how I now view her in some indescribable way. Put more simply, to me, it makes her look rougher and less refined in my eyes.
I have to say, I have been quite shocked by the extent to which tattooing has become more and more prevalent. I will freely hold my hands up and say I am one of those people who dislikes the sight of body art on the natural palette of bare skin that in my opinion takes away from what I perceive to be the natural beauty of the human body untarnished
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - Rammyrascal - 30-11-2020 13:12
(30-11-2020 02:37 )The Silent Majority Wrote:(29-11-2020 20:59 )thor Wrote: Is Rammyrascal always like this? Tattoo shaming? Did he make that up? I don't like tattoos. Am I not supposed to say that? Is it politically incorrect? What is the world coming to?
Too many questions. I need a drink.
As far as I can make out, having read through this shit, Rammy's issue was not that you didn't like tats. I was you calling for those babes to be banned.
Personally I don't like fake tits. Lets ban both and wipe out 95% of all the babes on the channels
NAIL ON THE HEAD!!!!! that’s exactly spot on The Silent Majority. I have no issue with Thor saying he doesn’t like babes with tattoos, that’s absolutely fine, we all don’t like the same babes & find different things with a woman sexy. For example, I find heavily tattooed babes sexy & Thor doesn’t
It was that Thor was saying he wants pretty much all babes that have tattoos to be banned & also saying they had “grungy grisly” tattoos. Both of these comments for me are tattoo shaming the babeshow babes which isn’t ok. Be respectful to those you’re being critical off
Crankshaft’s post is saying the same as Thor’s post, in that he doesn’t like babes who have lots of tattoos, but, he’s done it in a way that doesn’t shame anyone. If Thor had worded his post like crankshaft has, I wouldn’t have reacted like I did.
As PhredE has said. If you don’t like a babe, don’t go online on here or elsewhere and diss them
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - Boomerangutangangbang - 30-11-2020 14:06
I think Thor stopped short of personal insults, no issues with the bit about banning them. He can say that. Let the moderators here decide what can & can't be said.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - Kingsmind - 30-11-2020 14:09
Can I just say I can't believe how many awards Grace Elisabeth is winning i didn't even know who she was until she won these awards i mean some awards ain't the biggest ones but she is still winning them , looks like she is well on her way to win the Ultimate Webshow Babe.
I thought Caty was going to be the only dominator this year but to be fair there does always seem to be 2.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - shankey! - 01-12-2020 08:24
lola throwing a wobbly about her content on a babe forum,wouldnt be this one would it
?
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - thor - 01-12-2020 12:55
I think women over 70 should be banned from the babeshows whether they've got tattoos or not.
Or is that age shaming?
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - The Silent Majority - 01-12-2020 14:10
No, I think your in the clear there.
But only because Patti retired when she did...
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - M-L-L - 01-12-2020 21:28
(29-11-2020 11:32 )PhredE Wrote: Nowadays any girl starting on Babeshows know that they will have to become, basically, porn performers. However girls who started many years ago, and thought they were just supplementing a career in "glamour"
^ This.
The elephant in the room, I humbly suggest.
Once upon a time there would I assume have been an element of selection about who might be considered to appear on these shows, because they were probably being approached having already appearing across a range of media and established themselves as being stand-out enough to attract the paying customer; not just anyone prepared to sit in a dingy cam site bedroom and to promote themselves on their own subscribers-only web page.
Now it seems a largely self-selecting free-for-all for anyone who cares to film themselves sticking some pink plastic up their chuff.
I dare to suggest this has lowered the bar somewhat.
Err.. what I mean to say is it has introduced a wide and varied selection of types of beauty to the show beyond the narrow patriarchal oppressive "Playboy" mould of physical attractiveness which models were previously forced to adhere to, thereby introducing a glorious new age of equality diversity and relativism that gives all kinds of definitions of beauty a chance to thrive.
Just as long as they film themselves sticking some pink plastic up their chuff.