So, no matter how much it’s couched in…well, whatever it is he’s trying to couch it in, this is some kind of fetish site for guys who get off on seeing seemingly dead girls, right? Just curious.
Relatively SFW site – no nudity or blood, just…sorta dead-looking girls.
Rule 34.
I think you need to stick with…you know.
I think it’s got to be. If he was really interested in “crime scene recreation”, I think there’d be multiple shots of the same thing, a focus on detail, and, you know, dead people other than attractive young women. Instead, you have dozens of thumbnails of different scenes. Also, I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t use the phrase “my lovely models”.
Dead girls don’t say “no”.
I like how every single shot has the yellow tape stretched across the center of the picture, “CRIME SCENE DO NOT CROSS” perfectly legible like a bunch of Pepsi cans all turned toward the camera, as if he thought we’d forget we were looking at “crime scene simulations” if he didn’t include them in every photo.
I don’t mean to be hyper-critical of what is obviously a labor of…for want of a better word…love, but them girls don’t look particularly dead. Most of them look barely balance on the table or couch, and very tense, like they’re having to hold themselves steady.
The outtakes are a nice touch - “See! They’re not dead! They’re happy!”
That’s an…odd fetish. I suppose it’s one of the more G rated fetishes out there.
If the guy would just spend a couple hours on 4chan he’d get all the pics of dead women he could stand(I wonder if I’m one of the oldest people to have browsed that site).
Wait. If you think about it the guy has it made as far as relationships go. Most guys dread the thought of their wives eventually becoming so disinterested in sex that they just lay their waiting for it to be over. Bill would fucking love that.
Snuff/necrophilia fetishes are not among “the more G rated fetishes”, regardless of whatever impression you might get from these pictures.
I don’t know. It’s the sex that makes a movie R rated don’t ya know.
I guess when you think about the context it is pretty fucked up, but who thinks about the context when confronted with weird fetishes? A pic site with teary-eyed and red-faced girls would be pretty G rated, unless you think of them being choked out while some fat hairy monster masturbates with their shoes.
I mean, I don’t know if that fetish exists or whatever. Honest.
The pictures may be G-rated, but the fetish certainly isn’t.
If you can imagine it, it’s a fetish for someone.
They seem to be more passed out than dead. And it’s not unusual for someone to have fantasies about having their way with someone who is helpless and unable to refuse them. It’s a power thing, and I think is relatively harmless, as long as it remains a fantasy.
So it’s a bit like the OP looking at pictures of a slab of mutton, draped in a pullover.
Interesting question.
[Devil’s Advocate]
Obviously it’s not “relatively harmless” to actually indulge that fantasy with someone who is alive but helpless and unable to refuse.
But what about actual necrophilia? Obviously there’s a large ick factor, but there’s no victim to be injured. So what’s the harm?
[/Devil’s Advocate]
Those girls drop dead anywhere.
It’s like in The Naked Gun (2 1/2? 33 1/3?) when a bomb goes off in a building and later on we see the police on the scene and dozens and dozens of body chalk outlines everywhere, on the floor, up the walls, across the elevator doors, one outline floating in a pond, etc, etc.
Most Goth chicks look much more dead and move in much more interesting fashion - IMHO.
But yeah - I’d call it a fetish.
‘Content blocked - reason: tasteless’
Awesome! That’s the first time I’ve ever gotten the ‘tasteless’ filter.
Sam Kinison on Homosexual Necrophilia. 
That’s part of the fetish! Its to get into the mood.
“Our handsome hero comes upon the prone figure of the dead beauty. Mesmerized, he slips under the police tape and slips off his pants…”
“My wife is so bad in bed that after we have sex, I draw a chalk outline around her!” - Rodney Dangerfield