robot wrote:But come on, you guys want to believe in these situations, you are asking to believe women routinely do double anal with a smile, you want to believe anal sex is clean, you want to believe a beautiful girl can be convinced to do hardcore just by a crafty guy who charms her and woos her using intellect. That's foolish. And that's what you want to see. Nobody wants to see reality, where the girls are money hungry skanks ready to stab you in the back right after the shoot. We all want to see beautiful girls doing sex acts that looks like pleasure because that's what we like.
And there you go shattering all my illusions in one go

Seriously, you make a good point here but you overstate it a little. I don't mind seeing 'reality' and don't find it a turn off to know that act x was done only for the lure of money (and I loathe the oversanitisation of anal sex - I mean don't go out your way to make it dirty but if shit happens, shit happens ffs!) but some people do seem to want to be spoon-fed ther bullshit AND for that bullshit to be real. That is cloud-cuckoo land they are living in, right there.
As for Woodman, whether or not it is sensible to keep berating him after he has left kind of depends on what his modus operandi really does consist of in these circumstances. If he is simply just a bit of a cunt then these exchanges here probably are just flogging a dead horse. However, if he DOES routinely attempt to poison the well with regard to his competitors, or apply pressure on the models to grant him exclusivity through threats, or otherwise, then these are not things we can so easily turn a blind eye to; these are things that affect producers and consumers alike well beyond the limits of his own sites and forums.