English

This gallery contains 141 images @ 21 megapixels. Sign up now to see them all!


Comments

Excellent set of photos of Erica. I like the theme, but then again....Erica would look good modeling a garbage bag:)

Shaved or not shaved? Funny debate here. My impression is that in the nude industry from softcore to hardcore, it is absolutely necessary to be unshaven since it has become a standard.
Another standard is that men ejaculate on women's faces and that this is regarded as the "normal" finish of sexual intercourse in porn. Women are supposed to like that and moan satisfied.
There are certain differences to real life, though. Girls and women who do not want to earn their money being nude models in soft- or hardcore (despite ten thousands of females in the industry the non-models are a vast majority) are in the majority NOT completely shaved down there. Many of them are trimmed, but not all-shaven. And an even larger majority of them do not want to get their lovers sperm in their faces.
This is the industry, even on this site and the girls try to make some money in it. Some of them have done hardcore to and in those features pretended that they get aroused by cum on their faces.
That doesn't mean, they like it.

Sorry guys, I meant the standard is to have not a single pubic hair, of course.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

It's a porn standard that has spread to glam modeling, but it isn't hard to find girls who take exception to it -- even on this site.

To me these gals represent sanity, reality, the "silent majority" (thanx, Tricky Dick! :-), timelessness, nature -- all kinds of good things.

What they represent will be here long after the current denuded trend has bitten the dust.

I say why wait for that! :-)))

Stop shaving off your bushes etc now!

Be ahead of the curve!

Beats getting your face shot full of cum :-)))

The "silent majority".....and just where do you get these statistics from Doug?

Same place you get them all.....out of your own mind.

Once again, the world according to Doug.

  • Doug
  • 3 months ago:

Who u callin' "out of his mind" :-?:-))))

You don't imagine I'm right in thinking the majority of the world's women don't shave their bushes off?

Regrettably, I guess, we don't have statistics to prove this crazy notion.

We'll just have to go on a hunch...


I'm glad you take me seriously, tho! :-)))

I agree Josh65, good post.

# 37.... just, wow.

I agree:-) WOW, just WOW!

Wow!does this hairy thing really need the content manager giving a piece of advice?there have been other funny agitators here like Rockhard or old
assholes still posting nowadays.We need them,let them be.Without them this,lets say "fórum" would be plain boring.By the way:

Hair is back

Hair!


The seller

"Hair" is most certainly NOT "back", but 'Rach(HARD)' most certainly IS!! ;o)



Still not buyin' it...;o) lol

@ gswkJu: you say "or old assholes still posting nowadays".

I resemble that snippet.

Most of us do!! ;o)

I forgot to make a last statement.It would be better if the "thumbs down"
switch returned.It was a lot of fun.

Hair!



The seller




  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Yeah but those thumbs down got outta hand! :-)))

Says who? I know it bothered some, but it didn't matter to me. As far as I'm concerned, if you put a statement out there, be prepared to be judged on it, negatively or positively. If you can't stand the criticism, you shouldn't be posting (I'm not directing this at you Doug, 'cos I know any criticism you get doesn't faze you). I got my fair share of thumbs down, it didn't bother me.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

The last thing I had to say about them was: I'm honored to be perhaps among the top 5 commentators earning thumbs down! :-)

What a thrill. I figured I must have been doin' somethin' right! :-))

@ fer_realz:

You say "If you can't stand the criticism, you shouldn't be posting" and you are absolutely correct.

However, I choose to think that the thumbs down button encouraged cowardly piling on.

You may recall that our (probably) unanimously respected; model's choice as favorite commenter was only one of the many member's who were disgusted by said cowardly piling on.

Now, let's return to your absolutely correct quote. The written comment allows non-cowards to make their feelings known; and your quote should equally be applied to their written comments.

...not only the models, but also I, like and respect him, a whole lot.
But that does not mean he's always right. I think he ~ and everyone who lobbied to remove the thumbs down for that reason ~ was wrong.
~~~~~~~
How is it "unfair" or "abuse" to "pile on" comments?
After all, it's not like the thumbs down were different from the thumbs up. We each got one ~ and only one ~ to use, per comment.
Unless someone bought himself multiple memberships, there's no possible way to abuse that system!
The plain fact is, people are too sensitive, and do not like taking criticism.
Yes, it is good that we can still write our criticism in a comment, but sometimes you don't want to take the time, you just want to register your disagreement.
And sometimes, that is all it is ~ disagreement ~ not even criticism.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

My impression is that a lot of the time that piling-on reflected, ironically enough, uncritical thinking. And how do we know what was really in the heads of the "pilers-on"? How do we know they weren't just trying to run up the score, so to speak?

I don't miss the down-thumbs, but I'm not against them either. I think the problem with 'em is that they are so imprecise and unspecific, as well as possibly being seen as cover for "cowards" -- maybe too strong a term.

They definitely did not help the communication of ideas here. Except maybe by prompting a commentator to explain himself more. But he would be doing so to a brick wall... -- a wall of red thumbs :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

The thumbs are an OK way to quickly signal agreement or disagreement -- but they can't indicate any more than that. The down variety was beginning to look abused -- too easy, kind of a piling-on group-think as you say -- nothing constructive about it. It made you wonder -- do these people ever actually reveal themselves here? Or do they just thumb people who do?

So they got rid of the down thumbs because they were being abused, apparently. They were saying if you want to express disagreement with someone, spell it out. Which I think is fine.

Thumbs up -- nice to get, but little more.

I swear some commentators look to me like they craft what they say to get as many thumbs up as possible. I guess they need (or feed on) the support.

Usually I find what they say to be predictable and too bland.

Thank god no thumbs down for that! :-))))

I always thought they (thumbs down) were an additional source of entertainment.. It was fun to guess who would get the most for any particular "transgression"...such as giving their opinion...LOL But I have to agree that it was abused...

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Hair-haters under siege! :-)))

Funny.... I don't FEEL "under siege"...lmao!!

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Yeah but you're not a true-blue hair-hater! :-)

Oh... Right...LOL

Doug, do you like a woman to be completely natural (no make up, no leg shaving, etc.), or do you have boundaries too?
If a woman has any undesirable facial hair, do you take issue if she were bleach/wax/shave it?

What about your own? Do you have a full beard all the time?
Or is it only a woman who should be all natural?


Just wondering? :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

I have a semi-full beard -- I shave it around the edges and trim it on occasion.

It's fine with me for women to make themselves up and shave the usual areas, etc. But I do not consider shaving off all their pubic hair to be part of that.

I have no problem with them not wanting it to stick out under their clothes -- similarly, I can understand the shaving of their armpits and legs.

But we're talking about erotic modeling here. These are paid models, and looking erotic naked is their job.

Thus to many of us they should let their body hair be -- in particular on their pussies and under their arms.

But at least on their pussies.

They're in a different category from other women.

They can depilate those areas too -- what I am against is the presentation of them denuded at all times on this site.

I am personally sick and tired of Doug's comments.

metlover, I'm afraid that is the exact reason Doug comments so often on the topic.
He has explained his intention is to provoke and bait people. I guess he gets some enjoyment out of irritating those he can.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Don't recall I've ever said I intentionally bait people.

But I suppose it could inevitably be seen that way.

I am obviously challenging the "hairless" paradigm.

And that will irritate people on this site. After all, they've chosen to pay to see almost nothing but shaven, etc.

That is not why I am here. As I've indicated a number of times.

To be fair, Doug, on being called out over the "twat" comment the other day, you did say you intended it to be shocking.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Think I said it was meant to sting.
Believe it or not, Arkisi in particular.
Had a bit of private correspondence with him...

I mean what do you do when faced with a site as overwhelmingly depilated as this? And which reflects the times to some extent?

Give up? Accept? Or speak out against the apparently sheepish conformity?

I mean if shaven etc is really so great, so as it should be, so right, than what I say should present no problem or threat.

And I'm far from being alone in disliking it -- and by that I mean disliking its overwhelming preponderance.

I'd like some diversity, and I'm not alone in that.

And I just want to keep that radical thought alive :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

"then" what I say shouldn't upset so much...
I want people to consider why it seems to.
Lemme know :-)
You know when people get real defensive, it's because they know they are vulnerable.

Not to make life too tuff on ya, folks! :-)

If I can accept shaved, you can accept unshaved :-)

But Doug, you can't accept shaved, which is why you comment on this practically every single set.
I know that I have my own hobby horses, and you know what they are.
Difference is, I don't complain about them EVERY SINGLE DAY.
....just sayin'

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

But fer_realz, how many times do I have to say, I'm not against shaved per se. I am against 99% shaved, and the women here -- which means almost all of them -- who present themselves in no other way but shaved, or whatever.
I want diversity.*

Again, dude, you are not reading my words before answering them. Your dad would not approve! :-)))

*think of Kristel or Milena. I love to compare shaven Kristel next to furry Kristel :-)

I want to see all the girls here mix it up like that.

Well "he" would suggest that you don't read them, but I find that including them in the "entire MetArt entertainment package" makes them a lot easier to take... Most of them are pretty funny if you read them with the right attitude...;o)

That's right! I'm glad there are some here with a sense of humor. Between you two (Rock & Doug) I am often entertained.

;o) LOL

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

That's right -- we shouldn't take these deadly serious subjects too seriously ! :-)))

LOL "Deadly serious" only to you doug...;o)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Thanks, Rock! :-)))

LOL No problem!! ;o)

Erica is to die for, but just ONE good close-up leaves me feeling pretty frustrated. Seems like more could have been done to show off her amazing assests.

I totally agree, Red.

Where can I request a model??

@ lanphere: try K, the Content Manager; her email is K@met-art.com

Third floor, ask for Helen Waite... ;o)

Snappy repartee Rock! Did you consider including that K would be a good start.

Thanks!...:oD Nope...sure didn't... I took his comment as an insult to Erica... I had no intention of helping him in the least. ;o) If he has a request, there's a proper way to present it...and it's NOT here! And if it's honored, I have a few requests of my own!!! ;o)

LOL!!

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

This site may soon become an agency as well :-)))

If it isn't already :-)

OVEREXPOSED PHOTOS, what a shame to waste photos of such a beautiful gal.

Erica, the always beautiful Erica, never disappoints:-)
It took a while for her to shed her clothing, but it's hard to be TOO critical because I find any image of Erica to be extraordinary.
Finally a set where Erica didn't need to squint and I get to see her gorgeous blue-green eyes:-) Thank you Matiss!

Erica is one of Met Art's best (it would be difficult for me to narrow down to a top 10 list, but she'd definitely be on it).

Not my favorite set of hers, but still the best of the day by far in my opinion.

Erica is a radiant beauty, but shines her brightest indoors... Unfortunately a few good shots can't save an entire set. I look forward to seeing Erica again, real soon.

Like the concept of this set, but it screams for a model with full bush and armpit hair. The whole 60's vibe with the hippy chick and free love is awesome. Some examples of models: Latoya A - Presenting Latoya; Kristel - Topet; Victoriya A - Bijele; Eddison - Presenting Eddison; Orabelle A - Presenting Orabelle; Milena D - Prohibited; Nomi A - Duvet and Mirelle A - Visentia. Rylsky with his bevy of beautiful natural models could do variations on this set with a number of different models. Hope to hear Doug's view on this.

Well stated, JB.

No

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

No no pleeeze no! :-)))...
Sorry, guy. Especially with a name like that -- I'm gonna say things that stick in your craw.
Believe it or not, I love Met too -- just probably not for the very same reasons... :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

I haven't looked at this set! But I think I see what you mean...

A girl's body hair is natural and often beautiful. A fact forgotten in this fearful age of slavish depilation.

What does it say about a man that he doesn't like it?

My guess is that he has a serious problem with women and reality generally.

Unremarkably so, I might add :-)

It's a cultural thing, too -- we are taught to like and dislike certain things.


JB, of course I would like to see young women here be free again to show us their sexual hair. To be proud of their mammalian nature. To not seek to be like reptiles down there, etc :-)

Bring back another time!

Time's a wheel -- it'll come back!

Despite all the kicking and screaming... :-)

"What does it say about a man that he doesn't like it?

My guess is that he has a serious problem with women and reality generally."

So much for you buying into my suggestion that we stop the "name calling and character assassination"...

And YOU are the one doing all the "kicking and screaming".... Wake up dude... ;o)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

So much for your suggestion! :-)))

I mean really Rock -- what does it say about a man that he doesn't like women's body hair?

Maybe that he's homosexual?

I don't know. I can't fathom it. So I'm just having to guess.

But I do think there is something wrong with him.

Or at least not quite right :-)

Sorry! :-)

Doug,

I'm quite surprised at some of your comments to the preferences of other members. Whatever happened to intelligent debate?

As the Content Manager, I read through all comments and do my best to cater to as many of our members wishes as possible. This includes you, as I have read your complaints on multiple occasions (and also published unshaven models specifically to fulfill your requests). I find as many models that wish to remain unshaven as we possibly can. This is up to the models and their personal wishes and I refuse to put any demands on them.

We should all be honored to have the privilege of viewing such beauty regardless of our own personal tastes. If you don't like a girls style, please feel free to move on and look at the other nearly 3000 models. If you have something specific you would like to ask of me, let me know at k@met-art.com . I will do everything I can to make it happen. In the meantime, how about you all agree to disagree.

K, thanks for commenting and thanks for pointing out that you do go out of your way to publish unshaved models, which is a fact that I don't think Doug believes at this point.
But at least you've put it out there, for the sake of any of the other members who might believe Doug's accusation that you/MA are deliberately depriving us of unshaved models.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

K should not have to go out of her way to publish unshaved models.
K should in fact encourage more photo-sessions with unshaven models.
Then she wouldn't have to go out of her way so much...

The industry of which MA is a part deliberately deprives us of unshaven models. Or herds them into a few "specialty" sites.

What I'm asking MA to be is an emporium of shaven and unshaven -- and everything in between.

I think it would prove to be a business boon.

I mean they'd have no competition! Not at least with the looks of many of their models :-)

"The industry of which MA is a part deliberately deprives us of unshaven models."
...I genuinely wonder, as an experiment, if you made an open casting call for just new models, not women who'd already been in the industry, and did not instruct them beforehand either to shave or not to, what proportion of them would come in unshaven?
~~~~~~
I also subscribe to FTVGirls.com, and they deliberately try to do their shoots with models before they shoot with anyone else ~ it's their "brand" so to speak.
Most of those models aren't hairy. I don't think it's the industry. And I don't think it's brainwashing. I think that most women consider it unattractive not to shave, and so they are not shaving because they're being coerced, but just like most women would not walk out the front door without doing their hair first and putting on their makeup (the way ~ most ~ men [including me] won't walk out the door without shaving their facial hair first) most women won't feel properly groomed without shaving or trimming their privates.
I really think you overstate the case, Doug, in attempting to make your point.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And just to put a fine point on it -- the key word is "privates."
Not to be equated with what shows (usually :-) when you walk out the door.

Thus shaving their vulvae does not compute. Something else is up.

Tell me what.

I think it is often simple conformity to a standard they have not thought through or individuated from.

You wouldn't see so much of it if that weren't at least in part the case.

I mean, how old are these models? Do you expect a 20-year-old to truly be her own person?

I wouldn't.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

That's my point about it being a problem, if you'll call it that, of shaven human sheep following each other, few if any daring to be different.
That's a shame if what you say is true -- that these women really think they are unattractive unless they shave off their bushes.*
But again, it bolsters my point.
That's why these poor girls need instruction and encouragement from people who know better, from powers who could encourage them to be natural, to love their bodies, to not think they have to disappear a very sexy feature that is normally hidden from public view.
And that is what I'm trying to promote.
The practice is so unnatural -- anti-nature -- that it can't go on forever. It's just a matter of when the nonsense is gonna have run its course.

*I have no doubt some do.

And btw fer_realz I'll ask you what I asked Rock -- how does it feel to be a member/defender of the status quo? Bet you didn't think you'd wind up that way either! :-)))

I know, I know -- I'm provokin' ya! :-)))

I don't consider myself a defender of the status quo.
I remember when I first started looking at porn all the girls were hairy. I remember what a charge it was to see them when some ~ a few ~ began shaving*... I liked it then, I like it now.
*It was so novel, there was actually a mag that was all models in the act of shaving. Hot stuff!
Personally, I do not prefer one or the other. I like both. The proportion I see here doesn't bother me much, because I suspect it's representative of the population at large.
Shaved or not shaved simply isn't an issue for me. ( :

Thank you fer_realz:-)

Doug is not interested in "intelligent debate" K. He's only interested in "heated debate", and insulting those who dare to have preferences that conflict with his own.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Now now Rock. That's almost like the pot calling the kettle black :-)

" If you don't like a girls style, please feel free to move on and look at the other nearly 3000 models."

Quoted for truth, because I find it tiring to read through the constant complaint that seems to be predominating the comments section lately. Some days it reads like:

"bleet bleet bleet too much pubic hair, bleet bleet bleet not enough pubic hair, bleet bleet bleet too much clothing, bleet bleet bleet the model's giving me the stink-eye, bleet bleet bleet my finger hurts from pressing the button too much to get to their nudey pics, bleet bleet bleet something about Trudie Beakman"

If nothing here takes your fancy go find a real girl that does


OMG Droog, THANK YOU!
I particularly love the "that mean model KNEW I'd be looking at this set, so she's giving me the stinkeye!" comments... I mean, really?!?

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Thatz right -- they are keeping us in mind :-)))

oh I forgot: "bleet bleet bleet, something about a necklace" ... lol

Dammit, how come I only get ONE thumbs up?!? LOL

Noted and corrected.

"One thumbs up to give out per comment," I meant... ( ;

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Spoken by a true bleeter! :-)))

But look, what are Comments for?

I know it sounds kinda dumb to repeat,

but you really don't have to read 'em.

And you certainly have a right to disagree with something vocally if you choose.

It's like in the Middle East -- we're all for democracy and the rule of law as long as we get our way. If not, forget it! :-)

Are you calling me a "bleeter" Doug? One reason I think I'm not... by far the lion's share of my comments are positive, NOT complaints or criticisms.
The "bleet bleet bleet" statement is (ironically enough!) a complaint about all the complaints.
So, I don't think I am what he was talking about. ( :

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

No, I meant Droog. These comments are out of order.

Hey, we wanna good mix here of praise and criticism, fantasy and reality :-)

Yes Doug...we agree again...you are one sorry individual...;o)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Sorry folks. I'm standing by what I say there. Why would a guy who doesn't like women's body hair -- and understand what I mean by that phrase -- be on a site that features hi-rez photos of naked young women?

I also note again that people think it's acceptable for personal shots to be taken at me. But we know double-standards abound.

That's cool -- I can take it. Can you?

And K thank you for the sets in which you have thought of people who like natural. I believe their numbers are very unrepresented here. If few are available, maybe you could encourage more? That's all I would ask.

Except that you get my fave back here as soon as possible :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Meant to say "very underrepresented" -- don't want to make it out as even worse than it really is :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And OK maybe there's not something wrong with him -- but in his mind there sure is something wrong with women's body hair!*

And that is where I most respectfully disagree :-)


*and by extension their bodies, and thus them overall?

I mean women believe this, having been terrorized by men** and the beauty industry all of their lives. So it's little wonder almost all of them knuckle under to depilation demands, which if not explicit are constantly implied.
As I've said, it may not be long before they're shaving their eyebrows off, if not their tresses.
It pretty much all depends on what industry, etc, thinks it can get away with.

**and not just men :-)

Doug...I can see intelligent conversation is simply beyond your reach. The conclusions that you draw are based in a fantasy world that you've created in your mind, and confused it with reality.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Please be specific :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And btw, I'll amend that about the shaving of heads etc: probably not (I hope), because theirs is not "sexual" hair, so to speak...

Doug, why are you so convinced that women are bowing to men's pressure regarding pubic/body hair?
It could be the exact opposite.

Women are much more apt to speak their mind and choose what they want to do today VS. any other period in the history of Western culture.
Clothing is more revealing than ever, so there is more need to trim and/or shave today than in the past.

I know you try to be provocative (which is fine), but you were a little over the top with "maybe that he's homosexual" remark.
You must know that is definitely not the case for damn near 100% (my estimate) of the male members of Met Art.

>

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

It's not just pressure from men they're bowing to. It's women, and society generally.
And to what they believe they must do because of what the culture has drilled into them.
Name a woman who speaks her mind here. I can think of one...
I've already said clothing puts understandable pressure on women to restrain their natural body hair.
But does that mean they have to get rid of it all under their arms and "down below" all the time?

OK -- would you believe maybe the guy's bi :-? :-)

Other than to provoke a response, how do you equate a man preferring a woman not have underarm hair with being homo or bi?

I actually see it as quite the opposite.....maybe those who like underarm hair subconsciously wish they were with a hairy, sweaty, man :-)

LOL

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

fer_realz, with all due respect, your stupidity is showing.

I mean, do you just take his word for it, without reading what I said?

Jeezus C!

I can't help it if you twist my words, don't understand English, and project BS to suit your biases.

But I will call you on it :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

I don't equate that!

I was talking about one guy (I'm assuming he's a guy) who whenever he feels prompted practically begs that a pussy be denuded.

As far as underarm hair goes, it's a very personal thing. As you quite clearly demonstrate :-)

The point is that women have it too. For some reason :-)

Doug, you may very well have been referring to one person when you made that remark, but the way you worded it ~ whether intentionally or in the heat of the moment ~ sure as hell didn't sound that way. It genuinely sounds as though you are saying that every guy who doesn't like hair on his women is a closeted homosexual.
I'm not trying to pile on you here, but let's be clear that that is what that comment sounds like.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And I'm going to hit on this one last time for the edification of fools:
I said women's body hair. Period.
And when a man doesn't like it, it says to me he doesn't like women.
Now if that is true, the next question is, Why?

Body hair. Understand the simple phrase, you dolts. What is the disease where no hair on the body grows? Alopecia? Is that what he, and some of you, prefer women to present?

K, I hope you've got some of it lined up, because I'm sure alopecic models will be hot items on this site.

I think there's a stupidity bug goin' around this forum. Perhaps I brought it in, but I'm sure as hell not the only one infected by it! :-)

"And when a man doesn't like it, it says to me he doesn't like women.
Now if that is true, the next question is, Why?"
~~~~~ That is NOT true.
A man can like women and not want to see their body hair. If he does not enjoy women's body hair, that does NOT mean he does not like women.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

fer_realz, my friend, read what I said:

"when a man doesn't LIKE women's body hair"...

That is not the same as saying he doesn't want to see it.

"enjoy" it :-? .... your word, I don't know...

Alopecia universalis, anyone :-?

We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one, rather than argue futilely :-)


My goodness do u folks have a problem with hairy! :-)))
AKA me I suppose :-)))

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Well I can't help it if you guys interpret things the way you want to!
Don't we all.
Remember, I wasn't asserting it as a fact -- I was just trying to figure it out.
Read what I said.

In any event, that is why I try to be Kristel :-) clear in what I say. But I'm not always going to succeed with everyone, because we hear what we want to hear.

And again for people who complain about a reference to homosexuality -- how come you're so touchy?

PD's comment about a guy liking a woman's hairy armpit because he wants to be with a man -- very interesting -- I'd never thought of it that way.
But why isn't anyone calling him out for the derogatory suggestion?

Very simple. He's not me.

Let's just be clear about that, fer_realz :-)

PD doesn't hammer on his hobby horse EVERY.SINGLE.DAY.
So, people aren't so irritated with and by him that they look for ways to insult him.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

I'm just sayin... :-)

Double standards... :-)

....and some days, EVERY. SINGLE. SET.
It gets a bit monotonous, because we've read EVERY. SINGLE. ARGUMENT. repeatedly...

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Well, you don't seem to mind the monotonous quality of the praise you and others dish out ad nauseam.

We do not have to read comments -- no one is forcing us to -- and commentators are more or less free to say what they want.
Despite what some people seem to believe.

And btw, I comment on far fewer sets here than you or many of your brethren.

It's OK for you to comment -- but not me?
Unless my comments first pass your test :-?
Are you proposing censorship? Democracy Egyptian-style?

Just wonderin'... :-)

"And btw, I comment on far fewer sets here than you or many of your brethren."
I don't think so, but even if this is true, the central problem of your posts remains...
It is 99% of the time (conservative estimate there) about one and only one thing... hair on models, or the lack thereof.
If you read my comments, you will see that I comment on many different things ~ I try to keep things relatively novel, mostly positive, and engaging, rather than negative.
Yes, I do have hobby horses, like you. For example, and this is something I am persistent about commenting on ~ panties... I'd like to see many more sets with panties.
The difference between you and I?
I occasionally comment on this subject...
You comment EVERY.SINGLE.DAY. on your hobby horse.
If you'd mix it up more, talk about more than one subject, keep it pleasant and light, and keep your suggestions on body hair more infrequent, you wouldn't get as many complaints as you do.
Let me make it clear: the difficulty I have with you is not your hobby horse.
It's that you're up on it EVERY.SINGLE.DAY.
It gets really old, man...

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

That is why I say to you and others simply don't read me.
I am who I am, just as you are who you are.
You're here for a reason, I'm here for a reason.
Those reasons are about as individual as a thumbprint.

Check it fer_realz -- it's a small but significant point. The number of sets in which you comment far exceed the number in which I do.
That's because I'm quite selective about which sets to comment in -- or even really look at.
You're happy to comment on almost every new set -- no prob. Do it your way! Spread the joy!
You're extensive, I'm intensive, and our comments reflect this :-)
We're not here for the same reason. I'm asking MA to change, and now you're asking me to stop asking for that change.
It'd be easier for both of us if you just didn't read my comments!

But I think it interesting that you have such a problem with what I'm saying, since you claim to equally like unshaven*. I'm not sure what that reveals,...
But I think I get it: you are happy with MA the way it is -- "99% shaved" and all :-)
As I said -- avoid my commentary! :-)
But I do appreciate your response.

*You'll recall we also don't see eye-to-eye on airbrushing. I look for detail you don't care about.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

That said, fer_realz, what I say here is meant less to please than to challenge, obviously.
I don't blame anybody for getting sick of what I say.
I am criticizing them too, implicitly, and it's not pleasant for them or you :-)

So I would suggest since you've heard my message that you just move on past my comments. Because they are very likely going to contain more of the same.

Sayonara! Enjoy the sites! You're payin' for 'em! :-)

:-)

I would like to put an end to this in some way. I am FEMALE, I prefer my legs shaved (and underarms) sometimes because I like the way they feel in my clean cool sheets when I go to sleep at night. If some guy didn't want me because I didn't shave screw him. This is my personal preference, some girls like to be shaved and some don't. The end :)

I would also like to add during winter, if I get goosebumps in the shower my clean shave is over before it started. During winter I just let it go, during summer I like to be clean shaven because my legs tan better :) You never know what a models reasoning behind her choices are. Shaven vs unshaven will always be a mystery. I strongly believe only like 10% of women make a choice based on a guy. My choices are for me and my comfort.

Thanks for throwing the woman's perspective in there K, I don't think very many of us really get enough of that in the "real world" so to speak. ( :
You'll notice that when a commenter reveals herself to be female, most of the members reply very positively... ( :

Thanks "K". I apologize if I went too far with my comments. I am thankful that you chimed in and told your side from a woman's perspective. After all it's your body and I have no right to tell any woman what she should (or shouldn't) do with her body.

I'm also glad you explained it is YOUR CHOICE (not because you feel pressured by other outside sources/forces).
This point is where I have been in disagreement with Doug.

I have stated from the beginning that I believed weather/season/temperature and a woman's attire (along with her personal tastes and comfort) is/are the deciding factor as to why a woman shaves/trims or prefers to remain natural.
In today's modern world most women will rightfully so tell a man to go to hell if he tries to dictate to her how she should look or act in public (or private for that matter).

I do not find woman's underarm hair very attractive. This is most likely and engrained cultural "thing" with me.
If a woman chooses to let it grow it is none of my business.
____________________________________

Doug, I hope I did not offend you in any way (I doubt it though because you have a good sense of humor and "thick skin":-)).

Thank you for clarifying a few points.
I simply don't care one way or another if a woman lets her pubic hair grow or not. I find both to be as equally attractive.
I understand your point that pubic hair is a sign of womanhood and I would guess this is why I find woman's pubic hair attractive.
In the USA it is uncommon to see woman's pubic hair, leg hair, or underarm hair in public. I assume this is deeply rooted in cultural and religious beliefs here. My feelings are more than likely the norm (at least where I am located).

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And I just wrote that thing above before seeing these later comments.

A point about the visibility of women's androgenic hair. In fact in most of the Western world it is very commonly seen in public. Just usually shaven.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

I was just gonna say that body hair is unisexual, belonging just as much to females as males, and that, contrary to what PD said, I've always been attracted to women's underarms, shaven or not, because they are womanly -- the hair, et al, is womanly to me.
You can say the same about all the hair on their bodies. It might be there because of testosterone, but that hormone is normal for women to have -- just not to the degree men have it.
I'm glad to hear that many women make reasoned, personal choices about it. If a guy loves her, he'll respect that choice :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

BTW, you mention my fave Kristel -- if you wanna see beautiful body hair in a beautiful setting have a look at Pinnate. But any of her Rylsky sets are very interesting. I've been dwelling on Stoa...
Her first published set, Presenting -- thatz why I'm here! :-)

And Eddison's set is/was a totally unexpected beauty.

Of course I applaud Victoriya and Schneider too...

It's amazing with all the interest these sets generate we don't see more like them. The question is why.

It's the age we're in, hopefully beginning to emerge from...


PS -- you can throw the rigged ratings right out the window :-) They heavily reflect the shaved bias here. The very thing we are deconstructing :-)

The very thing YOU are ATTEMPTING to deconstruct...

(But you will never succeed!)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

You gotta give me an A for trying tho :-)

Do I...??

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

It's up to you :-)

BTW, "deconstruction" has several meanings, and I had a specific one in mind.

You may have been thinking of a different meaning...

Not that either task is a piece of cake :-)))

A misunderstanding?? Is this possible?? lol Don't make me hurt my brain doug...please...lol

I think the rating only tell you how much the person voting wants to have sex with the model. Not necessarily how good the photography is, not necessarily the skill of the model. If her body is hot (and most on this site are in the 99th percentile) the rating will be good. Waste of time IMHO.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

That's why I think they should be tossed -- the model ratings that is. They do no actual good that I can see, but definitely are harmful in the resentment and hurt feelings they give rise to.

And lord knows we don't need more of that here! :-)

....surely you're not worried about hurt feelings, Doug?!? Really? ( ;

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Hey, I'm human. Just like hair-haters! :-)))

Well, maybe not like all hair-haters. Crocs don't I imagine go for humans too much -- except when they're hungry :-)))

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And btw, those feelings hurt by the model ratings -- they've fueled some of my rages here.
They shouldn'ta done it!
To say nothing of how they make some models and their photogs feel.
They can also give an illusory sense of triumph to those who happen to be (momentarily) on top.
I often see 'em as targets :-)

Comes with the territory :-)

Beauty's in the eye of the beholder. That's what's real.
And I'd swear some of the people voting here are blind :-)

Please NO armpit hair. If you find armpit hair attractive, there are plenty of all natural/hirsute sites that cater to this fetish.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

It ain't a fetish. Look up the term. Which is thrown around in careless ways.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

And btw the repulsion you feel for it -- that could be perhaps a kind of fetish in reverse :-)))

Merriam-Webster

fetish: a strong and unusual need or desire for something.

an object of irrational reverence or obsessive devotion.

an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence
is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and
that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may
interfere with complete sexual expression.

So, it can easily be interpreted as a fetish under the first definition, possibly under the second, and only those who desire "hair" can answer the third.

For the record, pubic hair doesn't bother me at all.
Women with underarm hair is a completely different subject all together (I lived in Europe for several years and first hand experience confirmed my dislike of underarm hair on women).

Of course if a woman chooses to go that route it is none of my business, but I will never find it attractive.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

You gotta read that whole definition, not just the simplified part at the top.
Which sort of exemplifies the carelessness I'm talking about.

Check this out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_fetishism

And you gotta accept there are several definitions of the word "fetish", not only the ones you choose :-)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

That's my point. Some are not accurate. Use a more accurate term.

Wow!!!! I take a couple days off to catch up on work and watch hockey and this thing exploded in a way I didn't see coming when I wrote the comment. For the record, I prefer shaved/trimmed models, but can see the beauty regardless of the model's grooming choices. Even with this preference, Kristel is in my top 5.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

Be careful what ya ask for! :-))))

BTW, if you don't know Kristel's latest set is on Stunning 18. And as she has been for the last couple of years, she is completely shaven.

And very very pretty, if not exactly as spirited as in other sets, unshaven or not.

Thanks Doug. Not on Stunning 18. Already spend too much money on sites and frankly don't have the time to dedicate to another site.

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

With care you could take a free tour and get her set for free.
That's what I did.
Then I split :-))

I wish they'd get her back here, but apparently there are some issues...

She's special -- one of the few gals that you can take in both ways... :-)

The hippie chick with guitar theme is okay for something new. Erica looks great playing the part. A nice strip to open the set. Some photos are too bright, but overall this set is good, IMO.

I've never been jealous of a guitar before now.

"It's déjà vu all over again." In 1967 John Phillips wrote, and Scott McKenzie sang ~ "If you're going to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair. . ." No flowers, but a pleasing reminder of a gentler time.

I always appreciate visits from lovely Erica. Amongst a lengthy list of great physical features, she has superb butt cheeks. Erica and Matiss generally collaborate very well.

Thanks to Matiss and K for bending the rumoured limitation to the # of images allowed in a gallery.

A small neat pussy - but it lacks certainly a visual sign to be
really erotic - some soft hairs!

I love her, no doubt and nothing negative to say, but I would love to see her indoor preferably, in my bed. :)

A great lot of very unsightly overexposed photos! Incompetent photographer!

  • ergo
  • 4 months ago:

Well worn guitar but thank the Lordy that Erica is fresh as a daisy.

She holds that guitar really well :-P

Stunning body and gorgeous smile, and I love watching those daisy dukes find their way to the ground.

  • H WU
  • 4 months ago:

Erica's great body is playing my tone.

"Pine Cones with Guitar as Phallus" will perhaps not be remembered for being our artist's best work.

Politely understated Magwich. As capable a photograher as Matiss has shown him/herself to be, the day he shot Erica B (all the series shown so far appear to be from the one day) wasn't one of inspiration and technical finesse.

"Series average rating: 8.84 out of 10 (221 Votes)" - Either this is a vote for the model, few care about quality photography, or many are just pining for a sunny day........

Click once, you bought it once; click twice, you bought it twice.

Baggy, I've noticed several times that when the double-post gremlins strike, it does not require a second click. I have "double posted" several times after a single click ~ and not even a hard or a long duration click, just a normal one.
It is obviously a glitch in the software. ( :

I thought it was a "glitch" also, but have proven to myself that it is not a glitch in the "site" software... It's that "human" software that has the glitches...;o) But in any case, it could also be a hardware issue...YOUR hardware...;o)

  • Doug
  • 4 months ago:

I don't think I've ever had a double post here, maybe because I always read what I have "published" before going on to another comment.

Good practice...;o)

"Pine Cones with Guitar as Phallus" will perhaps not be remembered for being our artist's best work.

Stunning, a lovely start to a Sunday morning.


Access The Full Set Of 141 Images By Joining MetArt Today!
CLICK for FREE ACCESS