>> |
Anonymous File :-(, x)
>>1390989 You're not getting it. The video is apparently teacher-fuck themed yet the logo is absent and the ratio is an amateur's crop away from 16:9, a standard ratio. Coincidence? I think not. I'm not being skeptical, i'm being inductive, and in all probability, this video is of Lily Saint, a 'Hot' English Professor who would be fired if it was found out she was a pornstar in her free time.
So, as a tease in which she couldn't be implicated on judicial grounds but still would serve to get her more boys trying to get in her pants, she gets a .gif of a private non-porno company video original content of no more than her, the fucker, the camera-person and the lighting fixtures to shoot a porno where her pussy is untouched ( for forensic reasons ) and she is wearing a lot of things that make her look like someone she's not - blue eyeshadow? How rare. Nipple Ring? Meh. 2 inch earring? We know you're a pornstar, you don't have to tear your earlobe down to prove it. 4 Gold Bracelets? You're not an ignorant black, be thankful. Also, the anal looks, and most likely is, painful. Try some personal hygeine on your own anus by trying to not only clean the outside but the inside too, the sensation of skin movement over the actual anal muscles is what you will in all probability feel, and that same sensation indicates the same movement that her anus is making in this .gif. Thus, she is new to anal, and can claim that she couldn't ever do such a thing. Look at when she shows her face, the cameraman eerily moves toward her to coincide with the exact moment at which she moves her face, but her eyes are open, not because of the blinding lighting ( which would actually be counter-productive), but to not show her eye-color.
Everyday in the news there's another reported teacher-sex scandal, why are we so reluctant to accept the possibility that this is another such case, but perhaps one of the many more that don't get reported?
|