I'd usually employ a bit of tact in a discussion such as this but certain posters are exhibiting about as much refinement as a fat pervert ripping off moist staccato farts whilst furiously masturbating on a packed railway platform in peak hour so I'll simply be blunt.
BoxingSpecialist2 has miraculously managed to wrest the title of "Most Embarrassing Dipstick To Ever Post At Caste Football" from erstwhile Hellenic supremacist and mutton-head-in-chief Zeus, who also liked to post photos of himself. Such a "dynamic duo" of Turkic-looking knobs would make a perfect gift for the discerning collector of immature idiots...
BoxingSpecialist2 - You're 26 years old yet exhibit the posturing mentality of a teenager who incessantly big-notes himself in an attempt to mask his own manifold insecurities. For ****'s sake, you keep reiterating over and over and over again that you're so very good-looking, muscular, well-educated, confident, loaded with cash and can cop sex whenever you want. By the way, you forgot to add the all-important stock boast of being hung like a mule and having nuts the size of shot puts.
Well, perhaps instead of forking out money for "rough sex" and even rougher head-jobs I recommend you ditch the off the rack suit or - if quality bespoke tailoring is beyond your "vast" means - at least take care to purchase jackets which fit properly. I know that ties aren't too popular these days but trousers without a belt? What on earth are you thinking..? Thank goodness the photo didn't include your footwear...
After a while you amend your story and "reveal" that you are in fact making amateur "porn films" (insert Old Scratch's "Newman's Laugh" video...) which feature you shagging (not just "rough sex" but - ooohhhh - "
very rough sex") with various slags, including some of your obviously classy "ex-girlfriends". Just when one thinks that you cannot possibly make an even bigger fool of yourself you keep asking if anyone wants to see photos from your latest "shoot"...
Your conveyor-belt braggadocio reminds me of this self-proclaimed "genius", who also refers to his "muscularity:
[video=youtube;K8f0v7Z6z3U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8f0v7Z6z3U[/video]
Congratulations on calumniating your own mother - that's exceedingly gentlemanly and confirms your absolute lack of even a mere electron of propriety. You bravely aver that all women are whores from the safety of some dingy room and thereby insult every one of our members (with the notable exception of your fellow misogynistic, harlot fancying, no-hoping pox farmers), all of whom have mothers, wives, girlfriends, daughters, et cetera. I'll wager you wouldn't be so brashly opinionated if you and the other contributors to this thread were in the same room...
The concept of actually paying for sex disgusts me on all manner of planes and - in my opinion - is one of the lowest points a man (or, for that matter, a woman...) can sink to. That said, everyone is free to make their own choices so if men wish to patronise prostitutes then I have no objection - apart from that of morality, of course...
Let's face it - prostitution shall always exist so it might as well be legal, taxable, and as closely regulated as possible. The sheer number of brothels, "massage parlours", streetwalkers, and "independent operators" indicates that these "services" are utilised by a
very substantial proportion of men, most of whom are self-styled "respectable" citizens who hypocritically swear that they'd
never engage in such acts.
Consider this: Caste Football members (including - significantly - our proud resident whoremongers) are forever wringing their hands and lamenting the disappearance of the traditional family unit and its concomitant gender roles while decrying the modern career woman who would rather go out and earn money than sit at home cooking meals, darning socks, and looking after the dozen or so children. Correct?
Now some of you are saying that the "traditional" male-female relationship is inherently flawed and marriage is nothing more than a form of long-term "informal" prostitution. So, what the **** do you actually want? A woman who doesn't work and stays at home (apparently "leeching off" the breadwinning male martyr - which makes her a "whore"...) or a career woman who works full-time and isn't keen on the aforementioned "homemaker's" role (but will perhaps pay for her own drinks and potentially engage in plenty of casual sex on a regular basis - which, of course, also makes her a "whore"...)? Oh, hang on, I know! You just want to shag as many different women as you can with no effort involved and no strings attached. That's why you utilise
whores. Exemplary stuff indeed...
By the way, how much money are all of you strutting lotharios handing over for these, ah, "carnal services"? Don't tell me that you're opting for quantity over quality by engaging knee-tremblers in piss-and-vomit reeking back alleys or patronising low-budget bordellos in which one can still faintly smell the last bloke's pathetic load despite the "lady's" liberal use of discount perfume plus a glassful of Listerine. Here in Australia, I've been informed that anything less than about $400 a pop (s******...) won't buy one anything that's "fit for human consumption"...
