It's funny how they can do certain things, but can't kiss
Maybe it's a weird health and safety issue??? Normal body parts and other places are fine, but mouth to mouth could make someone sick, or give them an STD??? Maybe that's how they think, because otherwise it makes no sense.
Either way, the 11pm 2-4-1 with Sam and Alexandra was terrific, even if just topless, and part of the reason was due to the POV, which really made you a part of the fun! The lighting was great as well, because it was more dim, which is a preference of mine! The later ones were OK, but the handheld makes it more interactive for me. The two of them work well together, and I really want to give Sam a hug, because she's so cute!
(03-09-2012 11:26 )SteveHG Wrote: [ -> ]Not sure if it's the same one, but the one I was watching was looking good (on current terms) but the girls were pulled off just as it was getting interesting to be replaced by two other girls who didn't seem to know what to do. Is this fear of Ofcom once again?
Sounds like the 1am 2-4-1, which didn't really turn into a 2-4-1 until closer to 1:30, when they switched sets. You must have missed a bit of it, but the 11pm one was the best, and lasted for just over an hour.
just wanted to say congrats to studio 66 for this latest 241 it was a step forwards from the dark days of recent times lets hope u decide to persevere with this as it worked really well especially with both of the babes having such good chemistry on screen
great 2-4-1 by elite the other nite, then when I seen ashley doing the usual lying on the bed makes u realize she need to be in 2-4-1 action to make her move
Another good 2-4-1with sammi and ally tonight it was a shame they moved streams in the middle of it
(16-10-2011 01:46 )vila Wrote: [ -> ] (11-10-2011 23:49 )aceman65 Wrote: [ -> ]2-4-1's arn't banned. It's just that Ofcom have placed such ridiculously heavy restrictions on them, that they are virtually unworkable. 
As no physical contact is to be made between them whilst on screen.
Not unless they've said something beyond the last comment I've seen from them.
That was one of their occasional rule interpretation reminders which listed several practices which are unacceptable in any circumstances and added a final item saying that certain types of girl/girl contact carried a "high risk" of running foul of their 'Generally Accepted Standards' non-definition. They quite specifically didn't say those things were banned and it's quite evident from some of what I've seen since that the channels understand this but seem to have decided not to take any risk unless they think it's in their interest to do so (e.g. a certain channel's relentless promotion of its encrypted so-called "porn channel").
All that clarification notice says to me is that the channels need to be careful not to overdo it. Since the rule and its interpretation have been in force for a considerable period of time during which a great deal of 2-4-1 content has been shown without any challenge fron Ofcom I really don't understand the channels' knee-jerk reaction.
Its odd that Ofcom say GG interaction risks widespread offence. This seems to be blatant antigay discrimination - they would not say that its offensive for a man and a woman to snog, otherwise the entire James Bond genre would have to be banned. And its OK for two men to snog in family soaps. What makes it even more odd is that their own detailed study into public attitudes supported the same rules for gay and straight and did not object to kissing.
Ofcom are making it up.
Another great 2-4-1from ally and sammi tonight have studio66 changed producer's as they seem to let them get realy close again tonight
I think their first 2-4-1 with the POV was the best!
Caty is looking rather lonely at the moment, so how about a 2-4-1 with her...
Regardless of rule restrictions Ally & Sam have been great again & have just finished a section at 5am.Can't wait for more from this duo.
lest get dionne daniels, caty cole and ashley involved in these 2-4-1's
(09-09-2012 02:41 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]Its odd that Ofcom say GG interaction risks widespread offence. This seems to be blatant antigay discrimination - they would not say that its offensive for a man and a woman to snog, otherwise the entire James Bond genre would have to be banned. And its OK for two men to snog in family soaps. What makes it even more odd is that their own detailed study into public attitudes supported the same rules for gay and straight and did not object to kissing.
Ofcom are making it up.
I suppose there is the factor that the supposition is not that these women are gay but that they are heterosexuals exploiting a heterosexual male fantasy of girls kissing each other for male pleasure.
If the babechannels hired outright gay women to engage in realistic lesbian interaction (e.g. without breaking off to attend to an imaginary phallus every couple of minutes) then the antigay discrimination angle could be more interesting.
But as any realistic portrayal of lesbianism would involve telling the panting male wanker on the phone to feck off, it's probably not workable.