In the old days if you were ugly, stupid and broke you get no girls.
If you were ugly, stupid, broke and hung like Danny D you get girls.
Nothing much has changed.
Will we be fucking dolls in the next ten years?
- Thread starter Kracker
- Start date
If you were ugly, stupid, broke and hung like Danny D you get girls.
Nothing much has changed.
That and farm animals, aliens, comic book characters, Si-Fi - maybe even long lost girlfriends. I'm guessing their would be image lawsuits from actor/ actresses / pop stars as their clones pop up everywhere.
Are they doing any modeled, face and body, after actual porn stars? Reincarnation of Shauna Grant or the like?...
james t kirk, the argument that Deckard is a replicant in Blade Runner is based on his having dreamed of a unicorn, and an origami unicorn was left at his door by Officer Gaff at the end of the film. The 'unicorn sequence' is part of the 1992 Director's Cut rerelease, but not part of the original 1982 theatrical release.
Like self cleaning cavities? She'd get pretty gnarly otherwise. Imagine having to lug that thing around and cleaning it all the time. At least my wife can shower herself. lol
The above is an actual sex doll. She just is lacking in a few details.
But in the end, you'll still get bored with her.
Last edited:
That's what the butt plug is for. Just be careful when you remove it.My question is this does she swallow? and if so who cleans it out
Also confirmed in Blade Runner 2049.
Many tells in the original film, (Directors Cut, which is a masterpiece, visual poetry) that alludes to Deckard being a Replicant.
This should be the end of this debate as I am scholar when it comes to Blade Runner
No, I'm not.
Roy Batty was a Replicant.
Roy had a moral compass and in fact saved Deckard's life when Deckard was hanging from the precipice. Roy showed the advanced trait of mercy, a trait that Deckard did not possess. Had the situation been reversed, Deckard would have, without even a second thought, merely stomped on Roy's fingers. End of story. That is the ultimate irony, not that Deckard was a replicant. Deckard being a replicant was only too obvious. Roy being more human than the human is the meaning. Not Deckard being a replicant.
I want mine delivered in a big huge box like in the videos and then out walks the real thing
Now we're getting into profound philosophical questions.If your sex dolls nose is running, is she sick? Or is she full?
If you mean in 2049 where Deckard says, "we were being hunted", sorry that is ambiguous at best. "We" could mean "we" as in we replicants", or "we" as in Deckard and Rachel. That was obviously put in there by the writers of 2049 to give fans something to chew on.Also confirmed in Blade Runner 2049.
Many tells in the original film, (Directors Cut, which is a masterpiece, visual poetry) that alludes to Deckard being a Replicant.
This should be the end of this debate as I am scholar when it comes to Blade Runner
Obviously I lean toward the latter.
I know Ridley Scott has claimed that Deckard was a replicant, but I don't agree. There is no evidence from the movie. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary. Replicants, all replicants, possess super human strength. Deckard did not, he was a mere mortal in that respect. In all his confrontations with the 4 replicants (Zora, Priss, Leon, and finally Roy) , he was completely overwhelmed and out matched physically. In addition, he possessed emotions which the replicants all struggled with.
But as I said, for me Deckard was only human because Roy was a better man than him. A better human. That is the irony. Deckard being a replicant is just sledge hammer irony.
