A sitting duck blog

[Roman]

Girls-in-film isn't really that special. There are much more comprehensive sites, the author can be self-indulgent and long-winded, he goes off in tangents, and most stupid of all, he chronicles some of his sexual and (less often) romantic exploits with minors overseas. Another 'weakness' is he can be a bit haughty and judgmental, openly expressing his distaste for 'baby-bangers' - thus there are very few reviews with girls under 9 or 10. He recognizes the distinction between reality and fantasy, however.

But as far as movie reviews about adolescents and teens go, it's pretty darn good. They run the gamut from exotic documentaries and serious dramas to exploitation flicks and a few child model sites.

He/I is/am his/my own worst critic. Welcome any comments, but for now no outside posts. Soon a new blog will appear, that will contain only good to excellent visual material.

[Debaser]

Girls-in-film is wicked.
I find myself visiting Girls-in-film before CIC & CVMC etc in my search for new OT movie info.

How do you obtain such decent consistently sized stills from films you have yet to see?

Do you have the facilities to rip the material you are reviewing?..... You would be one great releaser here at FLM!.

I don’t know why no one is commenting on the blog.
Perhaps no one wants to be the first to write something.

[billanben]

Film reviews are fine. Film reviews which glorify/advocate sex with minors have no place here RomanGuy. I have no problem with you putting these views in your own blog, but here (for me) is a no no. The last thing we want is any hint of wrong-doing in terms of the p word (which from everything I have seen- there isn't), as this is almost guaranteed to create the wrong kind of interest, and attract people to this forum looking for something which this is not about. Worst case scenario is closure or worse.

So, for me, you bring to attention some great films, would be great if you could also post E2Dk links, but anyway, bringing to our attention is cool, but maybe stick to moderated IMDB-style reviews.

[Roman]

Point taken. And I agree, your approach is prudent. Which is why I generally limit my discussion to movies in movie forums like this. It was unwise and provocative to even mention anything that could bring adverse attention to your site. Or mine. In a forum about sex I focus on sex. On forums on travel or politics I do likewise. The lion's share of my own blog (I remind *my own* blog) is also about film. Like what, 95%? But writing about films only is darn boring. So I spice it up.

Some day I might expand my blog to tangents on where to get the best hashish (not a great interest of mine, but it is illegal in the USA to direct persons to where to get prohibited recreational drugs - so just on principle I might make a point to 'promote' some Amsterdam cannabis cafes), or question the holocaust (a looney idea, many conspiracy theories that is - but in France and Canada the expression of crackpot ideas are not just stupid, but actually illegal). F*&k 'em. I like the shake the gorilla in its cage. For me, my blog is not just a film hobby, its an ongoing action against censorship.

Best would be to create separate blogs for separate subjects, rather than to publish on unrelated topics. But I'd say girl films and girl sex are indeed related. And as you have indeed noted all of my raunchy episodes are about liasons with teenage professionals, not seducing children, anyway. I will avoid the temptation to turn this into a dialogue on the real purpose of Anglo nations sex travel laws. I might do so on my blog though.

My question now is what jurisdiction is very liberal about forum/blog content? In some ways the USA is liberal, but in other ways it's conservative, so it's schizophrenic. The word is almost sacrosanct, but one image crosses the line and the shit hits the fan. Second world countries like Russia and ex-USSR states seem to be more a matter of lax law enforcement more than entrenched civil liberties. Third world jurisdictions 'tolerance' are more about corruption than law. Basically, I am looking for a secular nation-state with attitudes and laws like the 1970s. Still looking!

Oh, and to those who are afraid of visiting girls-in-film. You ain't seen nothin' yet... There's always anonymizer (but not for mac and linux)

[Roman]

Debaser wrote...

"I find myself visiting Girls-in-film before CIC & CVMC etc in my search for new OT movie info."

I am flattered. Now get your ass over and post some comments on my blog!

"How do you obtain such decent consistently sized stills from films you have yet to see?"

Two part answer:

1) I use DVD Capture software. I am selective about what images I choose. Some, who shall remain unnamed, seem to snap randomly. For me, selecting stills is an art. I enjoy that part of the project. I once made an entire LEGAL video for sale of dozens of stills of 12-18 years of age scrumpdilicious girls, dancing and bathing. It was marketed as the 'Doll Essence' series and sold by Alessandra's Smile. No 'lascivious display of the genitals' (which means in US Supreme Court speak, inner thigh or undies with an 'unnatural' focus and a few dozen other no-nos.) Which by the way boys, is why those Russian child/teen model sites are often illegal for Americans. Their legal notices about being wonderful and totally legal art are HORSESHIT. They are either incredibly stupid or don't care. Do not be fooled. Clothed images can very easily be cp in Amerika. It's essentially about controlling desire. Something the puritans were very good at. And it hasn't gone away.

2) 'Have yet to see' I don't understand. I see everything I review. Sometimes it was four years ago, and I am using stills I made then.

"Do you have the facilities to rip the material you are reviewing?..... You would be one great releaser here at FLM!."

No interest in being a collector. Just more junk to haul around the world or stash. I am not familiar with computers. I view and return/give away/chuck. You may be surprised to know that I am really not that interested in films.

> I don’t know why no one is commenting on the blog.
Perhaps no one wants to be the first to write something.

Again, everyone is welcome to comment (but not post). Sometimes I accidentally erase comments, so don't take it personally. And do try again.

BTW, I think that debaser should be banned until he changes his user name. Encouraging such abusive names will only encourage serial child killers on this site. 'Degrader' won't count. '-) But maybe he means Barbados gentleman who lives on an inlet?

[Debaser]

Thanks for the info, I will post there in time.
For someone with little interest in cinema, you certainly scrutinize them well.

BTW, I think that debaser should be banned until he changes his user name. Encouraging such abusive names will only encourage serial child killers on this site. 'Degrader' won't count. '-) But maybe he means Barbados gentleman who lives on an inlet?

I mean three things by that name:

1. Its the title of a song I love - Pixies - Debaser.

2. I like that the name occasionally upsets people.

3. I love films that corrupt & degrade

[Roman]

Now, this isn't going to happen over the weekend, but... I finally found my old records of obsessively detailed analysis of many of the films I viewed 2002-2004. I am adding them as comments on my blog. Search under the term "old*notes".

So far, only that great Russian musical with one of the cutest Russian gals to arce the screen; one of my all-time favorites - 'Alice in the Cities' (by Wim Wenders); and another one. Hey, it's going to atke weeks just to get through the A's!