this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
234 points (89.3% liked)

Greentext

4459 readers
504 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
234
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by Itte@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] spicytuna62@lemmy.world 66 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

I watch porn from time to time, and I'm tired of the faux incest trend because:

  1. I don't believe having sex with a step sibling is incest (note the difference between a step sibling and a half sibling);

  2. This kind of thing caters toward a crowd who actually does want to fuck their mom or their sister, because that's what they actually call each other, despite the title; and

  3. It's every video everywhere. It's done to death. Can I please watch an average size dude kiss on, slowly undress, and adequately eat out his slightly chubby girl before giving her a perfectly cromulent weinering? It doesn't have to be exaggerated to be hot.

[โ€“] Neil@lemmy.ml 31 points 11 months ago

I think the incest phenomenon in porn was forced.

I personally don't read the titles and just base my clicks off of the appearance of the woman in the thumbnail, and usually I have it on mute because I don't want to hear some dude huffing and puffing.

I know it's not real incest so the title honestly doesn't matter, but every time I click an incest vid, I get added to the "oh, this IP is into incest!" list. This started slowly and a long time ago, but I think most views of incest vids are just people who see a hot woman in the thumbnail and click it without really caring about the stupid title.

load more comments (3 replies)