User talk:Seedfeeder/Archive6

Comments

can you make a man cunnilingus women and women footjob man also women thigh-sex man! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.33.110 (talk) 15:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

These look like nothing but very obvious trace jobs. You're just using Photoshop to trace over and recolor photographs or stills from films. You've even drawn nearly sequential frames from the same film or photo-shoot with near-identical camera placement. You claim that these are "Own work. All original, non-derivative" but that's a patent lie. Anyone who's ever used Photoshop for 10 minutes can tell. I tried to pull this in an art class once and got marked down on the assignment because it was so obvious when I couldn't produce "my" original photographs that I was just plagiarizing someone else's photography. These pictures don't meet the threshold of originality and are violating the copyright of the original works, whatever they are. You might think you're protected by the sheer volume of pornography out there, an amount that makes it next to impossible to find the exact images you stole, but it's obvious enough that these are trace jobs, given their aesthetic qualities. The photographic level of quality in their use of shape and proportion and anatomy coupled with the hopelessly inept paint-by-numbers line and coloring and shading gives the lie to what you're doing. I could walk everyone through step by step how you produced these images from photographs. Well-known Photoshop processes like these carried out on pornographic images stolen from anywhere on the Internet would produce indistinguishable results: http://www.melissaevans.com/tutorials/turn-photos-of-people-into-line-art http://www.melissaevans.com/tutorials/vector-art-with-photoshop http://www.ndesign-studio.com/tutorials/tracing-photo http://vector.tutsplus.com/tutorials/illustration/tracing-a-vector-face-from-a-reference-photo/ http://www.instructables.com/id/Turn-Yourself-Into-a-Cartoon/ It's absolutely undeniable that these are traces of photographic images, and the fact that you'd lie and say that they're not only confirms suspicion as to the non-free copyright status of the photographs you stole. These images should be deleted as copyright violations in accordance with "Wikipedia:Copyright violations".--Photoshop User — Preceding unsigned comment added by Photoshop User (talk • contribs) 14:39, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

What's your point? The pictures are great, useful and high appropriate. An invaluable service IMHO. --Rebroad (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I disagree. Anybody with experience in Adobe Illustrator could pull of images in this style. Perhaps you should just assume WP:GOODFAITH in line with Wikipedia policy and consider her a very talented artist who is providing a valuable service to the Wikipedia project.94.8.255.106 (talk) 22:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File: listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, [[:File:]], has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nomination subpage Photoshop User (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC) Photoshop User (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Seedfeeder. The actual discussion is on Commons. Photoshop user appears to be an SPA so I doubt this will get far. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

UG UG NEW USERS BAD. I may be new, but at least I bothered to read the policy pages before signing up. Something you apprently never bothered to do. Photoshop User (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC).

Picture for Point of view pornography

Is it possible that you could make a picture for Point of view pornography? I have seen your work at Mammary intercourse and Gokkun and I believe that any picture you create could greatly improve the article. Thanks in advance. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:28, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Never mind, I missed the notice on your user page. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

During this brief respite from my retirement from Wikipedia, I may be willing to produce an illustration based upon your request. Unfortunately, I am not particularly well-versed on the subject of Point of view pornography. And as such, I do not know what would be considered an appropriate image for the article in question. As far as I can discern from the article, POV Pornography is produced when one of the participating partners is filming/videotaping the experience. Assuming that we can agree on a definition, please describe the illustration you would like for me to produce for this article. Thanks --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I have uploaded a new illustration, per your request, to Commons. The new image can be found here.--SeedFeeder (talk) 11:17, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Wiki-pegging image derivatives

Hi Seedfeeder; I made some derivatives of your wiki-pegging images and I would like to send them to you so you can take a look at them (perhaps do some changes, not essential) and then upload it. I don't want to upload them myself (I'm mostly engaged on more important topics and I hence don't want the credit of having made these images), yet I feel that the images could make a significant contribution nonetheless. If you can give me an emailadress to sent the images to (or alternatively allow me to contact you at an alternate means), I'll sent them to you, and perhaps provide you with some suggestions/extra images in the very near future aswell. 91.182.126.74 (talk) 08:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

91.182.126.74, I would suggest that you proceed like other Wikipedia contributors and upload whatever images you have created to commons. I have uploaded the illustrations I have created with the full understanding that they may be altered or manipulated by fellow wiki editors. My "blessing" is not required. Though admittedly, to date, I have found derivatives of my work either to be lacking in artistic ability, or needless croppings to suit a particular POV agenda.

With that being said, upload your images (using an anonymous IP account like you have done here), and let the consensus of editors decide if your images should be added to pertinent articles or not. Since I am no longer actively participating in the Wikipedia project, I will most likely not be available for further discussion on this matter. Thanks. --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Professional services

Do you offer your services professionally? We may be interested in hiring you for a specific illustration job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.201.189.238 (talk) 16:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I have been approached by numerous individuals about securing my services for various purported projects. Ranging from flyers, to album covers, to calendars. Heck, I've even had an enthusiastic fan who wanted to pose for one of my illustrations. Yet, to date, all of the proposals (save one), have been an exercise in time wasting. Namely mine. Now, if you can think of a particularly convincing argument- that will persuade me to think that you are not simply the latest iteration of time-wasting individual- then plead your case below. --SeedFeeder (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

It's not for an individual but a company working on a software which content matches perfectly with your illustrations. I have two convincing arguments: really nice project + some money. I hope it's sufficient.

Sorry, but you're not very persuasive. I have been fortunate enough in life to have had a moderate amount of financial success, so it's unlikely that you would be offering me a dollar amount that would motivate me for purely fiscal reasons. Secondly a "really nice project" is not nearly enough information to pique any sort of intellectual interest. --SeedFeeder (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

If you provide me with a way to contact you in private, I'll give you more information

I will provide you with nothing. Post an acceptable argument for your proposal here, or do not post it at all. I apologize, but that's the new rules.

--SeedFeeder (talk) 09:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

We are developing an application to help couples develop (or solve problems) in their sexuality. So there is the fun part and a more serious one. Sexologists and sex specialists are involved. We need up to 200 illustrations for a start. We have the opportunity to use pictures of real people but we think your drawings will provide more softness in the application.

Sorry, but I am not particularly interested in your project. Evan if I was, there is no way I could commit to producing anywhere near 200 illustrations. With that high number of illustrations, it will be far quicker, not to mention, more cost effective, for you to hire models and make use of still photography. To put it in perspective, a professional graphic design firm would bill you at an hourly rate, and would take 2-12 weeks to deliver each illustration (depending on the level of detail required).

As far as my illustrations lending some sort of "softness" to your project goes... I would think that any person who was squeamish about viewing images of a couple engaged in sexual activity, probably won't be viewing your product.--SeedFeeder (talk) 17:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

---

(This section is so nice to read : ) Yug (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC) )

What are you talking about? --SeedFeeder (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Article

Hello Seedfeeder, I would love to ask you some questions for an article I am writing about your artwork and the wiki sexuality project. I have been interested in your illustrations for some time and understand you have been bombarded with numerous questions and requests, but if you are willing I would greatly enjoy to have an email conversation about your experience working on wikipedia. If you are not repulsed by the idea please let me know and I can supply an email. Thanks! Mjne01 (talk) 04:06, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Mjne01, I can't think of any question you could ask me over email, that you can't ask here. --SeedFeeder (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. So here goes. You've had an on again off again relationship with wikipedia, saying at one point that "though I like the stated goals of the Wiki project, I have grown a firm distaste for the actual process.” Do you still feel the same way? What was it that drew you to work on wikipedia in the first place, and why have you recently become active again? Any reason you chose to work on the sexuality project in particular? Are you working on any new illustrations at the moment? I definitely have more questions I'd love to ask, but I'll leave it at that for now. Mjne01 (talk) 19:27, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Mjne01, yes I still have a distaste for the Wikipedia editorial process. Why have I become active again? I will not be returning to my previous level of participation, but I will be making contributions from time-to-time. Why did I choose to work in the sexuality project? Why not? Am I working on any new illustrations? Yes. Well there you go.--SeedFeeder (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Seedfeeder, thank you for your answers. I understand from the tone of your response that you are - justifiably - not exceptionally interested in discussing these sorts of things with a complete stranger. No doubt you have a real life, filled with numerous non-internet related concerns. But I cannot help be feel unsatisfied with your explanation of "why not?" in regard to your illustrations and the sexuality project. Maybe I am too hung up the sexual content of your art, but there must be more to the story than simply "why not?" Would you be willing to elaborate any further? Respectfully, - Mjne01 (talk) 00:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you did not find "why not" to be a particularly satisfying answer. Unfortunately, I do not know what would constitute a soul-stirring, heart warming, deeply satisfactory answer. The type of answer that changes a man's perspective of the universe and his place in it. Don't get me wrong, you are not the first person to ask this... but I still find it an odd question. If you happened to stumble across some articles about knitting, and after a brief view of the edit history you found that a large percentage of the content was provided by a single editor, you wouldn't be asking yourself "gee I wonder what made that editor contribute to knitting articles?". You wouldn't ask, because you already know the answer. Editors tend to contribute to subjects they are interested in or feel that they are knowledgeable about. And for the most part, that holds true with me as well. Save for the fact that since a number of the illustrations I have created have been by request, I am not particularly interested in the specific content of many of my images. But I do find the topic of human sexuality as a whole to be extremely fascinating. I find it interesting that one person's all-consuming fetish, can be greeted with complete contempt by another.

So there you have it. Hopefully that answer will enable you to sleep tonight. (And since 'tone' doesn't always translate directly into written form, my response is light-hearted jest)--SeedFeeder (talk) 18:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Sleeping fine Seedfeeder, thank you for your response and taking the time to read my questions. Keep up the good work! Best, Mjne01 (talk) 02:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I have no qualms with answering questions from other editors, if I don't like the question... then it receives no response. I only get annoyed when such questions are posed under false pretenses. So, for anyone else who may be reading this reply, keep the following in mind: If you would like to ask me a question... then just ask it. Don't post it under the alleged guise of "writing an article", "business proposal", or for a "research paper". And not to single you out Mjne01, but I also find it disappointing when a user chooses to pose their question using an alternate account. It is quite clear to other editors when someone is already well-versed in wiki editing policy and practices.

So if you (or anybody else) are asking me things out of idle curiosity, or to post the resultant answers on some forum somewhere, then just come out in say it. Sleep tight. --SeedFeeder (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Quite honestly I have never edited on Wikipedia, nor do I have any other account, but I suppose thinking otherwise is a compliment. It's always good to do your homework first. Gracias! Mjne01 (talk) 18:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

De nada. --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hairjob illustration

Hello, your images are amazing. Can you draw a hairjob illustration when you will have time? We miss one on czech page about that sexual practice Hairjob --AlfaJunior (talk) 08:33, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Hairjobs? Damn, and I thought I knew all the strange sexual acts possible. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

LOL. I wasn't going to say anything, but... yeah it's a new one to me as well. I don't mind creating illustrations for Wikipedia but, this is a request that covers a subject matter that is too rarefied for me to tackle at this time. --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:31, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Well if you'll have free time sometime, you can draw a picture of cum snorting too. We miss it also. --AlfaJunior (talk) 00:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I could, but I am not going to. Even though my illustrations are used on wiki projects in every language, I will not create illustrations for articles that do not exist in the English language wikipedia.--SeedFeeder (talk) 19:19, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Illustration request

can you make a man cunnilingus women and women footjob man also women thigh-sex man! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tysonflex (talk • contribs) 15:12, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Do you think you could create an image of a couple engaged in the standing 69 position? I'd really like to see that. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seed25 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I typically create illustrations (by request) for specific articles, not for a specific sexual act. While I have no doubt that you would "really like to see that", it doesn't appear to be a subject that is in any great demand. Though I have created other illustrations that could be applied to the 69 (sex position), I'm not sure how your new request would provide anymore knowledge or enlightenment to the relevant articles. Thanks --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:58, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Uh.... Okay, whatever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.181.34.193 (talk) 13:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Anonymous IP, thanks for your detailed reply. You may want to consider using a genuine login account if you would like a serious response. --SeedFeeder (talk) 07:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. And I don't think I'm going to bother logging into my account to reply to you. What would the point in that be? I'm not interested in a serious response from you. You already told me you weren't going to do the requested illustration, so I really don't care what else you have to say. I just posted that "detailed" reply to show that I that I'm confused by your decline. You have an illustration of a woman drinking a glass of semen, was that in great demand? Really? There were a significant amount of people asking to see an image of a person drinking a glass of cum? And yet my request of a simple standing 69 illustration was denied? Because it wouldn't "provide anymore knowledge or enlightenment to the relevant articles"? Who cares about that? I just wanted to see a standing 69 image! I'm sure pretty much everyone else who asked for your services on creating a specific sex image just wanted to see it for the sake of seeing that sex act illustrated. And by the way, the wise ass remark on my above comment wasn't necessary. I was simply confused by your boring reasons for not accepting my request. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.181.34.193 (talk) 20:04, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Uh.... Okay, whatever. --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Come on, author of the previous unsigned post! What were you expecting from a douche called "SeedFeeder" who gets off retracing dirty pics for their "educational" value? (This is another anonymous guy, by the way) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.67.185.58 (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Please, you are the right one to illustrate this dinosaur: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erectopus Your work would make my life better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.80.50.1 (talk) 18:49, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Done.--SeedFeeder (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Seedfeeder, I'm a french student, and I develop a new website for european teenagers (to help them about their new seuality life). I find your drawings amazing, and I would be very pleased if I could use them in my website for teenagers. I also be very pleased if you could add some other pictures for others aricles (probably about 20 new ones...). Do you feel ok with this ? I've no money to pay this, but I will put your signature under all pictures on the web site. Aroe you ok ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunojager (talk • contribs) 13:37, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Brunojager, forgive me for relocating your comments to the bottom of my discussion page. With that aside, the illustrations I have uploaded to Wikipedia have been released into the "public domain". Which means, you are able to reuse them for whatever purposes that you see fit. I do not have to approve of, or condone, the reuse of the images I have created.

Regarding your request to create roughly 20 new images for your "website", I am very disinclined to do so. Given the time it takes me to create images, and the main subject matter of your site.--SeedFeeder (talk) 09:25, 16July 2011 (UTC)

Hello Seedfeeder. I want two picture please. :) One is illustrate two female using Double penetration dildo for having sex each other and the other picture is one female is using dildo masturbating. Thank you very much. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.246.31.53 (talk) 14:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Keep up the great work and keep doing what you're doing. Wikipedia and Wikimedia both need more people like you. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 03:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the message of support. Barnstars, and other tokens of encouragement, are always appreciated. Again, thank you. --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem! Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Award

	XXX Graphic Design Award
	Congratulations Trinjac (talk) 20:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks... though I'm not quite sure what a "XXX Graphic Design Award" is, but I'll take it anyway! --SeedFeeder (talk) 18:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	good job Trinjac (talk) 05:17, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm glad editors like yourself appreciate the contributions I've made to Wikipedia. Encouragement does make the job a whole lot easier. --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

no prob ;) --76.28.206.52 (talk) 00:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Docking

You know what to do. Theres a giant foreskin Barnstar in it for you. --206.248.181.2 (talk) 04:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

An additional tribadism image

Hello, Seedfeeder. Good to see you back and active. Do you remember what I stated at the Why? discussion when it seemed you would be leaving for good? Would you be willing to take on my request now? Flyer22 (talk) 14:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Flyer, I do remember your request, and actually did a couple of test sketches along those lines. The problem that I encountered was that I have never seen the act performed in that particular position and couldn't make it "work" in my head. It's easy enough to illustrate two women lying in a missionary position, but it's difficult to convey that any "tribbing" is going on. Does that make sense? Anyway, I'll give it another shot. --SeedFeeder (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

There are images on the Internet that show it, but they are only porn images/videos. If you Google "tribadism," or, more specifically, "missionary tribadism," you'll find them. You can demonstrate that tribadism is going on by having "the camera angle" show us that the vulvae are actually meeting. But, anyway, thank you for having given it a try and for trying it again. Feel free to email me if you think that I could help in pulling together the imagery in your head. Flyer22 (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I have responded via email. --SeedFeeder (talk) 21:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll check soon. I may have to get back to you (respond via email) later tonight or early tomorrow morning. Flyer22 (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

As per email discussion, your request has been completed. --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Love your work

I've been secretly stalking your uploads for a long time, but I'm not sure if I've ever directly said so: I absolutely love your work. :-) Let me know if you ever need anything or if anyone ever causes you trouble here. You're too valuable to lose. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I genuinely appreciate it. It's always good to know I have a few stalkers admirers of my work. If I need anyone beaten up for me, I'll be sure to let you know. And if you'd like to request an illustration for an article, don't hesitate to ask. --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Please do NOT retire

This is a petition I directly like to sign. The WP needs your illustraions definately. --Christoph73 (talk) 08:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I still haven't made up my mind about retirement, but I am strongly leaning in that direction. It's more a matter of "when" not "if". I have noticed that you have added many of my images to the appropriate German language Wikipedia articles, would you like to make any illustration requests before my inevitable retirement? --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:37, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

You asked for it :-). In fact I have got two requests: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiener_Auster and http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanquette - the second one seems very complicated and I have never tried... Of the first one you already have a gay version. A hetero-version would be more appropriate for the article. Keep the good work going! In adidtion the "Sandwich" on the Page could use an illustration, too... :-) --Christoph73 (talk) 08:58, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will accept your image requests for the "wiener auster" and "flanquette" articles. I'll be on vacation for the next couple of weeks, but I will begin work on both of your requests when I return. If you have any specific details you would like incorporated into the illustrations, don't hesitate to ask. Either by posting the information here, or by making use of the "E-mail this user" feature if you wish to be more discreet. Thank you again for your support. --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The "wiener auster" illustration has been completed and uploaded to commons: HIER --SeedFeeder (talk) 22:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Before I add it to the artikle: The image looks somehow different to your other pictures. Is it possible, that the line are bolder/brader and more "black" then before? Will you change that? BTW: Auster ist german for oyster :-). --62.48.72.6 (talk) 09:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I experimented with using a thicker line width with this image. I'm sorry, but it would be too difficult (time consuming) to change it. --SeedFeeder (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Frot image

I noticed this days ago. Not sure if you noticed, but the images were deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/All images in Category:Sex drawings by User:Rama. I'm confused about there being any validity in them deleting your version of Rama's frot image. Yeah, yours was based off of Rama's, but it was still yours. Flyer22 (talk) 16:26, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I noticed, but I didn't feel there was any point in arguing about it. I was simply caught up in the very wide net that was cast to delete Rama's images. One couldn't help but notice that Rama's non-sexually themed drawings were left untouched, despite being of the same technique and level of detail. It seems that images containing explicit sexual content are treated to a level of scrutiny that more mundane topics are not subjected to. --SeedFeeder (talk) 18:13, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I see. And, actually, no, I didn't notice that Rama's non-sexually themed drawings were left untouched. That does raise eyebrows. I'm just sorry that you were treated pretty much as a cohort of Rama. If you were to upload it again, noting that it's based off a drawing by Rama, do you think it'd be deleted? If that is likely to happen, it sucks (for lack of a better word) that the Frot article now has no image to represent it. I noticed that an IP recently requested an image by posting a request-image tag at the top of the article talk page. Flyer22 (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I doubt uploading exactly the same image (regardless of stated reasons) would result in a better outcome. Perhaps, if time permits, I may produce a completely original illustration for this topic... but I can make no promises. --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Journalistic request

Not sure on best how to contact you, would love to interview you, would this be possible? Sorry for unconventional medium of enquiry, just can't find any other way to contact you. I am also aware this is incredibly bad form, so again, sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshuahaddow (talk • contribs) 17:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You can make use of the "E-mail this user" feature located on the left-hand side menu. --SeedFeeder (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hello,

Big fan of your illustrations!

I was wondering whether you could draw one for Female ejaculation; I realize that it's probably difficult, but I think it would be great to have an image of something so pervasive.

Thank you! Handcuffed (talk) 23:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is a topic I don't think I can illustrate in any meaningful way. There's too much debate in and out of the medical community (not to mention the adult film industry) as to what constitutes female ejaculation. Bluntly put, it just looks like a woman with bladder control issues to me... but I never said I was an expert either. --SeedFeeder (talk) 01:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)