Honestly, I am beginning to think that some of you may have stashes of internet porn of such magnitude that they may even begin to rival my own...
Now let's get down to business: for reasons I can't begin to comprehend, Blogger decided to delete the four comments that follow (shown in blue) which were received in the last few hours, even though I instructed it to publish them (although, perversely, it did publish a fifth):
Ben has left a new comment on your post "Keep on growin'":
The arms are indeed amazing, but then so are the hairy chest and the ultra-lean abs. And the face is classic. What a marvel of creation.
Obviously the images bear no relationship to the comments. Obviously.
Anthony has left a new comment on your post "Hairy moment":
Personally I think his cock is perfect, and his hair quotient is perfect. He could maybe stand to firm up his abs just a bit, but otherwise -- fantastic.
Personally I think his cock is perfect, and his hair quotient is perfect. He could maybe stand to firm up his abs just a bit, but otherwise -- fantastic.
That photo (above) was much smaller than I would usually post, but there's something about the sense of wonderment on the face of the chap on the right that I couldn't resist. And I always like images with different sized winkies.
Charles has left a new comment on your post "Back to basics":
There is NOTHING wrong with the size of Landon's instrument.
Much better something of those dimensions than the schlongs that can cause serious damage to the cervixes and/or intestines of their sexual partners.
There is NOTHING wrong with the size of Landon's instrument.
Much better something of those dimensions than the schlongs that can cause serious damage to the cervixes and/or intestines of their sexual partners.
Although, inexplicably, I have never before wondered much about the cervix, let alone a group of them, surely the plural would be cervices? Anyone...?
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Headless wonder":
So much luscius hair, in gorgeous counterpoint to the handsome face (or what we can see of it).
So much luscius hair, in gorgeous counterpoint to the handsome face (or what we can see of it).
Anyway, I wanted to thank you for commenting, and I'm keen not to discourage you from doing so in future (as Blogger decided not to publish them you may well have thought I'd blocked your comments if I didn't post them here. I publish pretty much every comment. 99.9% of them, actually, and almost all the rest are adverts).
Oh, I have to end with this image:
It's pretty ordinary except that it's apparently of Chipper and Scotty Cunningham, a pair of brothers, which plays to many of my weirdest and obviously most perverse fantasies. I love it that the younger brother (at least, I assume it's the younger) has a bigger dick: the hours of arguments and fights that must have caused, though it might have gone some way to balance out the other inequalities in the older/younger relationship. I never had a brother...
5 comments:
Yes, cervices, although I think American English is tolerant of both spellings.
How old are these images?
Are they actually vintage or just made to look that way?
I love the picture of the brothers, and the juxtaposition of NA.31.
The chap on the right reminds me of a young Matt Damon somewhat. The expression of interest on both their faces is nice.
In that final image, the chap on the left with the ungodly powerful legs... sigh... I can only dream of them wrapped around me. Thanks for the post.
Tenores: Thanks for the confirmation that I'm not going mad.
Niall: I think late 1950s, although possibly early 1960s.
Jim: I'm so sorry, I forgot to mention -- I have already reserved the chap on the left. However, his brother is still available (most of the time, when he's not engaged in pervy antics with his brother and me).
Niall: I was referring to the two mentioned in the comments. Most of the others are very much more recent, and near contemporary in some instances.
Post a Comment