It makes me wish all the more he would do another film in which he could wear a great costume and wig. I know a lot of his fans like him no matter what he is sporting. But I dislike most of his bed head hair-dos, and don't like his shaved look much better. I hate and despise the "Faux-hawk". But, other fans love these looks. I just wish he'd do something to please an old long-hair-loving geezer like me. You don't see me sticking him into paintings featuring bald men, do you?
I also love his beautiful speech as Frodo, which goes out the window when he is playing modern roles.
As for "Tempting," that may be too much for you, Shirebound. Bandwench has put a lot of images in there that I would call "R" for sure - ones with testicles visible, for example. The pictures from which these are made, when they are nude, are not actually involved in a sexual situation, so they have been put into "Tempting" rather than "Torrid." But, they still are posed in ways that clearly were meant to be sexually titillating, even if they aren't highly-rated.
If I post a "Michelangelo's David", in which the statue's genitals are fully on view, I say, "NOT WORK SAFE", because, even if he's a statue, he's fully naked. But, I wouldn't call the piece "NC-17" or even "R", because the image was not meant to be erotic. It's just a man naked. But the source pics used for most of "Tempting", and some of "Tame", are meant to be pin-ups. I think that changes the character of the manips, even if they are not explicit.
So, you may not want to click open "Tempting." However, Bandwench often is quite straight about what you'll see, when it comes to literal presentation. If she says "partial view of boy bits", that means you are going to see some testicle. If she says, "veiled, aroused boy bits" (or somthing like that), it means you will clearly be able to see that the model has an erection, but through underwear or something like that.
In "Torrid," you will see something quite different. If she says, "aroused boy bits," it means there is going to be an erect penis in full view. If she adds, "self-touching", it means the model ir, or appears to be masturbating.
I should imagine the same criteria will apply when she gets her "Het" and "Slash" galleries up (which mean EW will be with a partner).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-06-25 11:37 pm (UTC)It makes me wish all the more he would do another film in which he could wear a great costume and wig. I know a lot of his fans like him no matter what he is sporting. But I dislike most of his bed head hair-dos, and don't like his shaved look much better. I hate and despise the "Faux-hawk". But, other fans love these looks. I just wish he'd do something to please an old long-hair-loving geezer like me. You don't see me sticking him into paintings featuring bald men, do you?
I also love his beautiful speech as Frodo, which goes out the window when he is playing modern roles.
As for "Tempting," that may be too much for you, Shirebound. Bandwench has put a lot of images in there that I would call "R" for sure - ones with testicles visible, for example. The pictures from which these are made, when they are nude, are not actually involved in a sexual situation, so they have been put into "Tempting" rather than "Torrid." But, they still are posed in ways that clearly were meant to be sexually titillating, even if they aren't highly-rated.
If I post a "Michelangelo's David", in which the statue's genitals are fully on view, I say, "NOT WORK SAFE", because, even if he's a statue, he's fully naked. But, I wouldn't call the piece "NC-17" or even "R", because the image was not meant to be erotic. It's just a man naked. But the source pics used for most of "Tempting", and some of "Tame", are meant to be pin-ups. I think that changes the character of the manips, even if they are not explicit.
So, you may not want to click open "Tempting." However, Bandwench often is quite straight about what you'll see, when it comes to literal presentation. If she says "partial view of boy bits", that means you are going to see some testicle. If she says, "veiled, aroused boy bits" (or somthing like that), it means you will clearly be able to see that the model has an erection, but through underwear or something like that.
In "Torrid," you will see something quite different. If she says, "aroused boy bits," it means there is going to be an erect penis in full view. If she adds, "self-touching", it means the model ir, or appears to be masturbating.
I should imagine the same criteria will apply when she gets her "Het" and "Slash" galleries up (which mean EW will be with a partner).