The Official Terry Pratchett Forums

by **meerkat** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:21 pm

Yep, relevant, just tell me you are not proud of it! :shock:

by **deldaisy** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:36 pm

Quatermass wrote:
Dotsie wrote:I'm named for Dotsie. She's a minder for the seamstresses. They have a lot of sex.

I think there's a link to the dirty stuff wherever you look

But mine was relevant, as it dealt with reality TV. Ugh.

Look, here's the Wikipedia article for The Year of the Sex Olympics. And I got the year wrong, it was done in 1968. But it pretty much predicted Big Brother, not to mention this bollocks about porno reality TV, it just got the order wrong.

You mean they are just PRETENDING in porn movies??????!!!!!!! :shock:

by **Willem** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:38 pm

deldaisy wrote:
Quatermass wrote:
Dotsie wrote:I'm named for Dotsie. She's a minder for the seamstresses. They have a lot of sex.

I think there's a link to the dirty stuff wherever you look

But mine was relevant, as it dealt with reality TV. Ugh.

Look, here's the Wikipedia article for The Year of the Sex Olympics. And I got the year wrong, it was done in 1968. But it pretty much predicted Big Brother, not to mention this bollocks about porno reality TV, it just got the order wrong.

You mean they are just PRETENDING in porn movies??????!!!!!!!

Yup, the only things that are real are the boobies!

by **Quatermass** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:55 pm

Willem wrote:
deldaisy wrote:
Quatermass wrote:
Dotsie wrote:I'm named for Dotsie. She's a minder for the seamstresses. They have a lot of sex.

I think there's a link to the dirty stuff wherever you look

But mine was relevant, as it dealt with reality TV. Ugh.

Look, here's the Wikipedia article for The Year of the Sex Olympics. And I got the year wrong, it was done in 1968. But it pretty much predicted Big Brother, not to mention this bollocks about porno reality TV, it just got the order wrong.

You mean they are just PRETENDING in porn movies??????!!!!!!!

Yup, the only things that are real are the boobies!

Wait, what?

Why do I get the feeling that the conversation just ran away from me so fast, it left burning tracks in the ground?

by **Willem** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:02 pm

The internet is for... (Link not suitable for working environments (unless it's the kind of working environments talked about in this topic))

by **Jan Van Quirm** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:27 pm

Willem wrote:
deldaisy wrote:
Quatermass wrote:
Dotsie wrote:I'm named for Dotsie. She's a minder for the seamstresses. They have a lot of sex.

I think there's a link to the dirty stuff wherever you look

But mine was relevant, as it dealt with reality TV. Ugh.

Look, here's the Wikipedia article for The Year of the Sex Olympics. And I got the year wrong, it was done in 1968. But it pretty much predicted Big Brother, not to mention this bollocks about porno reality TV, it just got the order wrong.

You mean they are just PRETENDING in porn movies??????!!!!!!!

Yup, the only things that are real are the boobies!

Maybe in 1968 the boobies would have been real but these days...?

by **deldaisy** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:35 pm

Willem wrote:The internet is for... (Link not suitable for working environments (unless it's the kind of working environments talked about in this topic))

OMG! My 23yr old and I sing this as a duet. Though I admit I have never seen that one.... only the original

by **unseenu** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:00 pm

I guess they have finally stripped down reality tv into its constituent components.

by **Quatermass** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:47 pm

unseenu wrote:I guess they have finally stripped down reality tv into its constituent components.

Perverse spectacle?

by **raisindot** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:41 am

Bouncy Castle wrote:More than 1,000 horny hopefuls auditioned in Johannesburg and they are being whittled down to the 100 finalists.

I'd like to know more about this 'whittling down' process.

We have a similar show here in the U.S. It's called "Life with the Kardashians."

Although for an American version of the sex competition, you know that Donald Trump would somehow be involved.

by **Tonyblack** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:42 am

Aren't they the bad guys in Star Trek? :shock:

by **Bouncy Castle** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:43 am

by **Quatermass** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:47 am

I agree.

by **Bouncy Castle** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:49 am

Her ar*e should be enough to scare off even the Borg.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ruNtDnuCSIg/T ... ig-ass.jpg

by **Quatermass** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:52 am

Bouncy Castle wrote:Her ar*e should be enough to scare off even the Borg.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ruNtDnuCSIg/T ... ig-ass.jpg

I'm not so sure. I think that there's only one being capable of scaring the s*** out of the Borg. Two, if you count the Doctor.

*sound of an air vent grate clattering to the floor*

"Heee~eey..."

Crap. And here she is... :shock:

The Official Terry Pratchett Forums

XXX Factor

Re: XXX Factor

Who is online