There needs to be a new word for pornography that is intentionally devoid of any erotic usefulness. The kind of stuff clearly made on a dare. The smut that exists for the sake of existing, not because anyone ever demanded it.
Because none of you are really and truly jerking it to drawings of Calvin and Hobbes sodomizing one another. You're just not. I'm sorry, but I don't believe you.
close. >
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=webcest&r=f
> drawings of Calvin and Hobbes sodomizing one
> another.
Link please.
Rule #34. No exceptions.
ew. i think you just destroyed my childhood
sure, calvin and hobbes sodomizing each other is wrong, but Michael Jackson and kids from Family Circus... that's just good ol' fashion fun!!
Actually, i'd probably read Family Circus if that happened.
"Who molested these children?" "Not me!"
I think the term that may be applicable is "Schadenfreude Pornography": sexually explicit materials generated solely for the purpose of relishing the suffering that results from its existence.
Also: Rule 34 is a pretty good shorthand.