This is seriously the biggest load of unsubstantiated bullshit I've read since the 9/11 Commission.Yes, people have more access to graphic images of sexuality than ever before ( if you ignore the fact that "primative" people observe nudity and open displays of sexuality on a routine basis ), but is there any man here that would admit to turning down real-time, civilian pussy, because he'd rather stay home and watch porn??!!! WTF?! Pornography, or to be specific, graphical or printed material intended to stimulate sexual arousal, has been around since the beginning of human civilization and still hasn't lead to our social ruin or psychological decay. The only thing increased exposure to hardcore images will do, is possibly change our definition of what we consider "pornographic". If we see tanned, big-tittied blondes every waking minute... we're bound to find ourselves more intrigued by the "girl next door". And although there are certain physical traits that are hardwired to trigger our libido -breasts, hips, etc- there's an inevitable attraction to the uncommon or extraordinary. In other words, we usually want what we can't have. More to the point, is there any substantial evidence that people are actually fucking LESS?? Is this a serious issue? Is the world population suddenly in danger of plummeting to critical levels if we don't halt the epidemic of porn-induced impotence?? Here's a worthwhile experiment: Let this stupid bitch walk into a video arcade and lift her skirt, and see what the raincoat crowd chooses when they take the Pepsi Challenge. By way of example, I'd only point out that, of all the hot porn ass that has passed through the hallowed virtual halls of XPT.... the two women who have undoubtedly attracted the most male attention, are the two who are NOT porn chicks.





QED