• CLICK HERE To Join Broke Straight Boys & Instantly Get Full Access To Entire Site & 3 FREE bonus sites.

Please enough Jimmy

If it would be something different that Jimmy was doing, like sucking or being a bottom, that would be one thing. But he never does anymore then he did in the previous scene, so its like watching the same thing each time.
 
Well, whatever some of us have been saying on this forum we will be (mis)treated to another Jimmy scene on Monday,

What does he have on Mark & Clay? It must be really potentially damaging;I can't think of any other explanation for their apparent fascination with him.
 
Watching grass grow or paint dry

Think about the TV gameshow of "Jeopardy" under the "Daily Double" category of

QUESTION: "What model's progression on Broke Straight Boys is like watching grass grow or paint dry?"

ANSWER: "Jimmy on Broke Straight Boys"


enuf said!


Stimpy
 
Stripe,

the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

This is the definition of art that I found. By definition then, these episodes that we watch can be considered works of art. After all, how much more visceral can you get in appreciating a scene than to be so turned on that you can cum? Is that emotional power or what? Granted, most scenes are not true works of art, but a scene that displays a beautiful body of a model who is sensual and seductive I think could certainly qualify as a work of art. Just saying.
 
Sorry!

Seriously, "art form???". A guy jerking off in a solo is art??? There may be some porn that is vaguely "artistic", but most porn is made to help men (and far fewer women) fantasize and cum. Internet wanking 101. I think if you asked any of the guys on this site if they considered themselves "artists", they'd laugh you out of the room. Porn actors, "models", perform sex acts, some better and hotter than others. True actors, sculptors, painters, authors, etc. create art.
I'll probably get jumped all over for writing the above, but I just watched Rocco and Anthony. DEFINITELY not art.

Sorry, my post wasn't meant to laugh at or deride you. I should have read yours more closely to see that you weren't referring to the models.
Art is a very subjective subject. As far as gay erotic art, for me it brings to mind Herb Ritts, Mapplethorpe, and Tom of Finland. I honestly can't say that I think of the current plethora of porn as art. There are some very slick sites out there like Falcon and Lucas that produce very professional porn, and that may qualify as art in some minds, but I think they produce a product to be consumed for profit as opposed to a work to be appreciated. True art is often also consumed for profit, and some artists make art for that purpose alone, but in general most artists produce art because they have to. They have a deep seated need to express themselves and create art whether it ever sells or not. This was very true for some of the great masters in history who never saw a dime for their creations.
I see porn as a commercial enterprise. It's overwhelmingly about money. There may be some producers and directors who aspire to being artistic and indeed may capture that goal. But I believe the vast majority of porn has far less lofty aspirations.
 
Sorry, my post wasn't meant to laugh at or deride you. I should have read yours more closely to see that you weren't referring to the models.
Art is a very subjective subject. As far as gay erotic art, for me it brings to mind Herb Ritts, Mapplethorpe, and Tom of Finland. I honestly can't say that I think of the current plethora of porn as art. There are some very slick sites out there like Falcon and Lucas that produce very professional porn, and that may qualify as art in some minds, but I think they produce a product to be consumed for profit as opposed to a work to be appreciated. True art is often also consumed for profit, and some artists make art for that purpose alone, but in general most artists produce art because they have to. They have a deep seated need to express themselves and create art whether it ever sells or not. This was very true for some of the great masters in history who never saw a dime for their creations.
I see porn as a commercial enterprise. It's overwhelmingly about money. There may be some producers and directors who aspire to being artistic and indeed may capture that goal. But I believe the vast majority of porn has far less lofty aspirations.

Bob Ross anyone?
 
Opps!

abe, did you lease out you screen name and avatar?
the solos are how fngs are introduced.
off the top of my head, i can think of 8 solos that i can see in my mind's eye on command.
i wouldn't have wanted to miss any one of them.
here goes: bobby, jack, kevin, anthony, chad, kurt, seth and my favorite from his solo forward, colin.
solos have the function of letting me see guys i may never want to see again, but they also introduce me to guys i hope to see many more times.
i count solos, not to counting them devalues the art form and inflates the results.
i have come to this opinion and firmly believe it is valid.
fairness, in my opinion, never involves exclusion.

Sorry again, another1!

I quoted my own post above. I meant to quote yours!
 
I would suppose in some part it is a question of availability. I agree that there is such a thing as over exposure. That said I enjoy watching Jimmy in action and look forward to seeing him in upcoming videos for as long as he is inclined to do them. He is one hot stud puppy

thanks juanjo im reliable and get the job done not every model is so its not easy to just rotate guys...its hard to get hard u know what i mean
 
thanks juanjo im reliable and get the job done not every model is so its not easy to just rotate guys...its hard to get hard u know what i mean

Oh Jimmy, don't despair, I like you in your underwea (no, fuck that, I like you naked)!:001_tt2:
 
after seeing Jimmy in the scene with Brad....Im joining the "enough is enough" of Jimmy bandwagon!
 
Top