Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Feminspire | April 18, 2014

Scroll to top



PornHub’s Breast Cancer Donation Rejected By Charity

PornHub’s Breast Cancer Donation Rejected By Charity

For the month of October, Pornhub (exactly what it sounds like) has pledged to donate 1 cent for every 30 porn videos watched. However, the videos have to fit into one of two categories – “big tit videos” or “small tit videos”, which is where the charitable donation begins to seem quite problematic. At the time of writing this article, the most recent screencap I found was at 9,364,609 views – amassing to $3,121.53 that would be donated. According to Pornhub, these categories reach $70-90 million per month, meaning that the donation could total up to $30,000.

In a surprise twist, the intended recipient, Susan G. Komen’s For the Cure Foundation, has rejected their donation, stating that they “are not a partner, not accepting donations” from Pornhub, and “have asked them to stop using our name.” At first glance, a charity rejecting donations seems bizarre. But after reading the pre-controversy press release from Pornhub, the decision of the For the Cure Foundation starts to make a little more sense:

It doesn’t matter if you’re into itty-bitty-titties, the perfect handful, jumbo fun-bags or low-swinging flapjacks, what matters most is that your kind and selfless gesture will go a long way towards helping our sisters to find a cure.

This isn’t the first time Pornhub has taken action to combat breast cancer. Six months ago, the website brought their “Save the Boobs” bus to NYC to rescue Manhattan’s mammories by spreading awareness. So how can you help save the boobs this time around, you bravely ask?

Simply visit the landing page on Pornhub’s site (link available upon request) and follow the prompts, or head to the ‘categories’ tab on’s home page and choose either “Small Tits” or “Big Tits” videos, then sit back and let the good times bounce.

The Save the Boobs web page will keep track of the total unique visits for the month so be sure to encourage your red-blooded friends and family (yes, tell your fathers too) to become a hero of the headlamps and a champion of the cha-cha’s!

The language is clearly problematic – “letting the good times bounce” isn’t possible for women who have undergone a mastectomy,  and “letting the good times bounce” sounds more like a taunt than a call to arms. Let’s not even talk about how the press release implies that only men watch porn.

Additionally, the Bree Olson Boobs Bus was a highly sexualised event, with half the website’s page about it emblazoned with images of porn stars and sexual euphemisms. Being open and positive about sex is something our society could benefit from, and donating to these foundations is noble. The issue in this case is that Pornhub’s attempts at charity continually appear to objectify women and their breasts, and breast cancer should command a little more respect than that. A few comments on the Reddit thread about Pornhub’s donation further illustrate the point:

“Oh my god. Time to fulfill my destiny and cure cancer by watching lovely little titties.”

“I’ve dated girls with all different sizes, and I have to say that the smaller breasted girls have been more fun. Maybe that’s because the larger breasted girls have been psychotic.”

“Sometimes smaller packages offer greater reward. I’ve personally had much better experiences with petite breasts than with large breasts, though the happy medium is pretty fantastic.”

Instead of a polite discussion about the benefits of raising money for breast cancer, the discussion dissolves into a debate about whether women with small breasts are better than women with big breasts. Again, there are only two available options. It’s clear that while Pornhub’s intentions may be to help, they’re really only bringing attention to breasts – and only the select kinds that are allowed, as per the regulations of the male gaze.

The male gaze does not need to extended to the idea of making cancer survivors sexy. I doubt women who have breast cancer, or are survivors of breast cancer, want to be represented by ample-bosomed porn stars that have not suffered from cancer.  Additionally, only donating when videos in the categories of “big tits” or “small tits” just screams “objectification!”. Women don’t just have big tits or small tits. Women have medium breasts, and sometimes their breasts have scars and lumps and sometimes they have ample stretch marks, often one is bigger than the other. Often, women with breast cancer have mastectomies. And that’s okay.

Trying to be charitable is not the time to start making women feel insecure about their own bodies, and indirectly shaming those that do not fit into either of these fetishized ideals – especially if the women Pornhub are attempting to support have suffered something as traumatic as breast cancer, and have potentially undergone mastectomies.

My advice to Pornhub: donating money to the breast cancer cause is a noble, and wonderful thing to do. But bringing in sex, objectification, and making it all about the breasts of porn stars is not the way to achieve breakthroughs for breast cancer.

What are your views on this? Do you think it matters HOW money is raised for charity as long as it’s raised? Do you think the Foundation was right to reject the donation?

Written by Jessica Bagnall

  • Louise

    To me, all this comes down to is money. Money rules the world and money is powerful. I think it’s absurd to reject a donation from anyone. While I understand the reasoning behind rejecting the donation, it’s ironic for a foundation like Susan G Komen (which is very questionable in and of itself) to be taking a stand now. I’ll reiterate: money is money. I volunteer at a women’s shelter and we get donations from a group of men who are “ex-abusers.” Hell if I care to get into what that means, or how their therapy-like group works. I just can’t care when their donations of thousands of dollars will literally save lives.

    • Kaya


    • Elizabeth


  • Sully

    Yeah, their messages are definitely really distasteful, and they seem to only care about breasts and not the women attached to them, but I don’t think they should reject the money. They can take the money and also use it as an opportunity to start a conversation about how their mission is about saving women, not just select body parts.

  • Jessica Elise

    While money may be money, let’s consider the possibility that this organization is very good at marketing and fundraising and may actually know what it is doing when it rejects donations. Could this press ultimately resort of loss of funding, bigger funding, from other sources? YES, actually. Money is money, except that some money also comes with bad press or compromises your brand. The fact that breast cancer fundraising is a “brand” is a separate issue, but anyway. I think that the “money is money” argument is simplifying the issue a little too much. Let’s be real here: this organization is really good at fundraising, and we are not (maybe a few of you are, but I doubt you’ve started a campaign where nearly every single thing sold that is pink supposedly raises money for an issue) SO maybe we should consider that in our analysis of whether or not it was right for them to not take the money.

    What is problematic about this sort of fundraising, and the “SAVE THE TATAS” / “SAVE THE BOOBIES” type “awareness” raising campaigns is that it actually just seems like yet another way specific parts of the female body are objectified and disassociated from the actual humans they’re attached to. It also makes it super obvious that cancers of parts that aren’t sexualized are pretty much ignored in terms of cutesy fundraising. Or even other actual sexual parts that just aren’t traditionally objectified like breasts — such as penises — will never be marketed for fundraising like this. Did you know penis cancer is a thing? Because I didn’t until I looked it up when I wanted to make a joke about an “awareness ribbon” car magnet that was a penis bent like a ribbon. Anyway, no one wants my penis cancer awareness ribbon and NOT JUST because it is tasteless and weird.

    • Abigail Lewis

      I agree with you totally! Money is money but charities are trying to make as much money as they possibly can. There could well be a religious organisation, for example, donating millions to this charity every year that would refuse to have their name on the roster with PornHub.

  • Liz

    You chose to take comments from REDDIT?! And you’re acting like the discussion devolving into a debate over whether large or small boobs are better is something strange?! That’s just ridiculous… Of course, I agree on every other account, but seriously, bad choice.

    • Jessica Bagnall

      My reasoning for this was:
      1. There were no other discussion-based forums I could find with public comments on the matter.
      and 2. it was a good example of the general male reaction to the pledge – instead of commenting about how awful cancer is, the comments were objectifying women and reducing them to a body part, which isn’t what we want when the discussion should be about health, survivors, research, etc.

      • GreenAlbatross

        I’m a female user on reddit, and I have to say…you should know better than to quote them for much of anything. Keeping in tune with our current topic, that’s like sticking a biopsy needle into a tumor and being horrified that cancer cells came out. You artificially selected for a bad sample, and that steals credence from the rest of your words. If you want to write anything worthwhile about current events, you need more than one source. The fact that you only had one makes your work look sloppy and lazy.

        • Abigail Lewis

          I don’t know why people who use Reddit think they are exempt from being used and quoted. It might be a horrific to face up to this but that website represents a real slice of society. You say you’re a female user on reddit, and obviously care enough about this topic to read our article on it – and there are many reddit users like you I am sure – but where is their input on reddit about this issue? Not all reddit users are loudmouthed bigoted straight white males, so why aren’t the rest of you speaking up?

          • GreenAlbatross

            Because there’s not that many of us. Or we frequent other forums. Or we don’t speak up because we’ll be quickly drowned out.

            I’m not saying that reddit is exempt from quotation, but I am saying that I think this article is of rather low caliber if it only sites one source that it knows will be inflammatory. It’s just poor workmanship.

          • Emma

            I don’t think that’s necessarily a fair comment. If Reddit is one of the few sites talking about it, and is a well known presence on the web, why not quote them? If Redditors want a better reputation, then create one. Reddit self-creates, and this is the image/mentality its created for itself.

            And if you’re afraid to speak up because of fear of being drowned out, that’s probably not an institution worth defending.

          • Marlena Carcone

            Jessica didn’t cite Reddit because it was going to be inflammatory and she wanted to manipulate people; she cited it because people aren’t talking about this elsewhere. At least on Reddit, people show their true colors. I see very little difference between taking things from Reddit and doing a street poll, except redditors are probably going to be more candid, which makes for even more honest and accurate journalism.
            And if you care so much about this issue, maybe you should have said something on Reddit instead of shrinking away and then yelling at people for negatively portraying commenters.

          • Alicia V. Perez

            I don’t think Reddit is a reliable website to be siting either simply because the lack of seriousness there, serious discourse doesn’t exist on reddit and quoting it in a serious article really mocks the real problem here.

          • GreenAlbatross

            Of course you should quote them. But one should do enough research to find multiple sources before writing an article.

            At this point, I’m not so much defending them as I am lambasting the author of this article for their abysmal work. I’ve known how to site multiple sources and do my research since I was in the 3rd grade. It is difficult to trust the words of anyone who cannot do the same.

          • Jessica Bagnall

            I’m not sure why you see the need to continue insulting me despite my lack of presence in this thread. I’m sorry you didn’t enjoy that decision, but there’s no need to resort to insults. If you hover over the orange text, it’s a hyperlink to the press release, and comments from the charity. Reddit was not the only citation used, and I’ve already explained that there were no other communities or comments on this issue at the time I submitted this article.

          • Abigail Lewis

            But you didn’t learn that it’s spelled “cite”?
            The author cited the charity, the donor, and the only place on the internet discussing this issue (until now). Citing Reddit is a social point in itself.

  • Michelle Helms

    My opinion is that while their objection to the manner and source of the money is understandable, the refusal of the money is stupid. The bottom line is, let the religious groups wage the war against porn and objectification of women and the fight to find a cure to: Susan G. Komen’s For the Cure Foundation,

    • Alicia V. Perez

      I agree. Money is money and it wasn’t good business to say no to Pornhub.

      • Abigail Lewis

        You don’t know that! The whole ethos of business is that money is not just money. Charities make most of their money from affiliated donors who donate regularly and heavily. My guess is the same as @twitter-705922974:disqus ‘s – it’s likely there’s another donor floating the charity that have told them they’re not happy about the PornHub business.

  • Jen

    Here, have some money to help breast cancer.
    Refusing a donation like that is the FIRST thing wrong with this
    Why campaign to spread awareness and and raise money for research if you’re not going to continually do so? Idiot woman.

    She’d rather not have money to do research… but instead would rather create a mild… ineffective stir about the sexualisation of women instead.

    To Susan G. Komen, I say~ WELCOME TO THE INTERNET.

    SECOND. Who cares if the ad is aimed at men? We all know men are wayyy more open about porn and are actually more likely to share it and discuss it.

    If a woman that got her boobs removed, got angry about “letting the good times bounce”
    First of all~ Did she get her ass removed too? Asses bounce……
    Second of all~ Why don’t you just get silicone boobs and bounce those?
    Third of all~ Get the fuck over yourself and click off the page if you don’t like it.

    I’m sorry; but Pornhub isn’t the only person to associate women and boobs with sex… EVERYONE DOES.
    Women should be flattered that people admire thier boobs, or figure… or what ever.

    Porn tries to do something good and you just throw it back in their face.
    So ok… the porn industry will keep their billions of dollars and their millions of sexy women….. and they’ll fuck off to Russia to make more fucked up porn……. and forget about ever giving to charity again.

    PS: I’m an adult woman, with boobs, who knows people with breast cancer, who loves porn and we think Susan is an idiot.


    • Jessica Bagnall

      I’m sorry, but I don’t think telling a breast cancer survivor to “get the fuck over yourself” in regards to body issues they may have developed as a result is EVER okay.

    • Trillian

      Dude, you’re seriously screwed.
      1. Boobs can be associated with babies and breast-feeding too, not just sex.
      2. They try to do something good? They’re trying to boost views by pretending to be charitable by trying to donate pittance to charity.
      A charity which would probably lose revenue if it was on public record that a porn site donated to them. If they wanted to do something good, they could keep it private and not cause a ridiculous stir, and donate as anonymous donors. That way the charity wins both ways. But instead they make a spectacle of it to make themselves seen so righteous.
      3. ‘women should be flattered people admire their figure’- Hmm, interesting when we live in a society that worships a very small section of particular body types, particularly on a site that divides cup size into two categories. This isn’t a collective “woman’ thing, porn stars body types and breast types represent a small minority of women everywhere.
      4. Good on you for having big titties, but as someone with middle of the run breasts, I’m a little bit tired of the black and white categorisation when I happen to be in the grey.

      Use your brain.

      • Abigail Lewis

        @adbeb71dcf1d273ad638879bd733839f:disqus Thank you so much for your logic haha seriously!

    • Marlena Carcone

      Saying that you “know people with breast cancer” in defense of your statement that people who have gotten masectomies should get over their body image issues is like saying that you have a black friend so you can’t be racist; sorry, not buying it.
      (By the way, not everyone can afford to get “silicone boobs,” especially after incurring the massive medical bills that often follow a cancer diagnosis.)

    • Ennoia

      You are so
      not ‘an adult woman’, even if the other points in your ‘PS’ are true. Except
      for the people with breast cancer bit, I’m thinking that’s also a lie. How am I
      doing as a psychic here, ‘Jen’? I’m not going to list all the things that give
      you away, mostly because I’d have to just quote the whole thing.

      Pornhub is a person? Uh…well, nevermind. Neither this site nor Susan G. Komen are
      complaining that people ‘associate women and boobs with sex’, but as you and
      other fans of Pornhub have so nicely demonstrated, for some people, these words
      already sum up the range of thoughts they are capable of thinking with regard
      to women. And you’re so immersed in this that you don’t realize that
      “EVERYONE DOES” is utterly untrue as well as irrelevant to the matter
      at hand.

      ‘They’ will take their ‘billions of dollars and their millions of sexy women’
      will ‘fuck off to Russia to make more fucked up porn’ now, are they? That’s
      interesting, ‘Jen’. Maybe you should tell us more about why a rejected donation
      would prompt them to make more fucked up porn (in a country you probably named
      gleefully imagining the extra-fucked up material that can be produced in
      Eastern European ruins a la Hostel). Is that your charming way of saying that
      porn will now take revenge on women because of the nerve these people had to
      reject their one attempt at charity? Ah, and the industry will ‘forget about
      ever giving to charity again’. You seem to hope that this will be the case. Those
      ungrateful bitches, to think they would not even want the *monetary* emissions
      of your selfless libido! No more help ever for nobody, this time ‘they’ went
      too far.

      Seriously, your leap from this story to ‘the entire porn industry vs millions
      of women and all charities’ is pretty chilling. It reads like, “I and
      Pornhub, we tried to get laid/donate, and the women we tried it with didn’t
      want us. Now we’ll REALLY show them! Porn will punish all women for how they
      rejected us. Not like violence and superiority are what porn is about, but
      *they* leave us no choice.” And if you don’t like my eyes on your brain,
      well, you should be grateful people are contemplating your mental health, or

      Susan G. Komen died of breast cancer in 1980, ‘Jen’. It is the name of the most
      well known breast cancer foundation, not a person. You and your imaginary
      breast cancer friends should really educate yourselves before ridiculing and
      disparaging everything in sight. And maybe, if you dare, go out into the real
      world and take off those porn goggles. Then you may discover wondrous insights
      such as that women don’t see their own breasts and asses and silicone implants
      as interchangeable objects because they can ‘bounce those’ and look ‘fuckable’ to a man.
      No woman in her right mind will ever be flattered by the way you look at her
      when she might as well be plastic from head to toe as long as she has the
      fuck-prop parts you’re jonesing for at the screen like a Pavlovian cash cow.

      Peace, indeed.

      • Jessica Bagnall

        WOW. Wonderful comment, thank-you for articulating what I could not about this article. I have some survivors close to me, in my family and to be honest I shudder to think how they would react in response to comments like this.

  • Jen

    Oh and if this organisation was soooooo good at fundraising… how come nobody has heard of them yet…

    • Emma

      …what? Nobody has heard of Susan G Komen’s, or Pornhub? Both are fairly well known in their respective fields.

  • Jen

    I think we’re lucky that boobs attract so much attention…. and in turn….. profit.

    I mean, there are plenty of companies raising awareness for ass cancer… but you don’t see people rushing to their websites….

    • Marlena Carcone

      I wouldn’t call myself lucky to be a part of a societal standard of beauty that oppresses women without boobs or with boobs that don’t fit the industry standard. Especially when most of the time, the people profiting off of boobs and women are white, rich men who don’t give a damn about cancer or women as autonomous beings.

  • Jen

    Women should stop being bitchy about men looking at them and being ‘objectified’
    Stand up. Make yourself known.
    So that you become a woman and no longer an ‘object’.
    Then use your beautiful figure to your advantage!
    thats it haha

    • Alisse Marie

      lol no tbh.

      Breast cancer, just like any cancer, should not be sexualized. Plus men can get breast cancer so I mean good job ignoring them :D

    • Marlena Carcone

      Oh, okay, so unless I constantly defend myself every second of the day, it’s totally valid for someone to look at me and think of me as an object? Should I start reciting Audre Lorde quotes the next time I get harassed in the street? Will that just make everyone do a double take, shake my hand, and offer me the fair pay and reproductive rights that I’ve been denied for centuries? Cool, thanks for letting me know.
      (Also, what about people who don’t have a figure that society considers “beautiful?” Are we allowed to be objectified still? Or do we just not count at all? Plz advise, I’m hanging on your every word.)

      • Abortion SUCKS

        “Reproductive rights” is a code word for abortion? No thanks!

        • Marlena Carcone

          Yeah, abortion. And also sex education, birth control and other forms of contraception, healthcare, and lots of other things that are incredibly important.

        • Jess Mary


    • Ennoia

      “So that you become a woman and no longer an ‘object’.”

      you, ‘Jen’, for saying it so clearly here for everyone to see. You don’t
      see women as actual people by default. They start out as objects, and
      should not be ‘bitchy’ about it, because when men only see them as objects, women are obviously not trying hard enough to be seen as humans. We can’t possibly expect someone to just see women as people unless women BECOME people first, because they’re actually not. Gotcha.

      “Then use your beautiful figure to your advantage!”
      (let’s remember this is preceded by “…no longer an object”)
      You don’t understand what objectification even is. You are doing it right here and in other posts.

      Another thing you don’t understand is what it looks like when someone does stand up and tell the world exactly who they are and what they want and don’t want. Because when you see it, you apparently call it ‘being bitchy’. Probably because it’s your own thinking being called out.

      Don’t tell women to be quiet and change their attitude when you can’t even understand what they are talking about. You are obviously miles away from being able to empathize with an oppressed demographic, much less one whose oppression you find so arousing and entertaining, so stop taking up space and telling people what to do. You are no teacher, so stop teaching and sit down and learn instead.

  • Eartha Lee

    OK first off I am a woman. Moreover I am a woman with a long history of breast cancer in my family. My mother, Grandmother, two cousins and an Aunt died of it or are currently battling it. I have a daughter. There is also a long history of breast cancer on her father’s side. In the past 12 months she has lost her Grandmother and her 41 year old aunt to the disease. Personally, I have little or no interest in self righteous and pedantic objections to “language and images employed” which I see being raised by people here who quite probably have given far less money to the search for a cure of this scourge than the blokes who run that website.

    They used humour and an advertising strategy they knew would gain the attention of their user base to try and do something good, selfless and productive. They did not in any way try to make that donation with the condition imposed “Only use this to save hot women with great looking tits”. now did they? That charity needs need to get over themselves. And may I just say of the attitude displayed by certain feminists: moralistic, anti male rhetoric is doing far more harm than good in terms of spreading the message about equality of the sexes. And precious little at all to stop the appalling toll being taken by this rampant disease.

    • Andy

      That was the perfect response to this bumbling attempt at an article.

    • Abigail Lewis

      I don’t think anyone is arguing that finding a cure for breast cancer isn’t a mammoth and important task. I think what many people are trying to say is that big charities have extensive experience in marketing. A donation from PornHub could decrease their overall revenue if they make most of their money from one or two regular big donors – companies or organisations – as most charities do.
      Charities aren’t being pedantic or self-righteous when they refuse donations – they only do so when it would harm their revenue as a whole. What other possible reason could there be? Would you turn around and support the rejection of this donation if the charity released a statement (which they are under no obligation to do) explaining that it would have lost them money?
      RE your final dig – feminism isn’t anti male. This article explains it in full:
      And as for moralistic, I don’t see it as an insult that I have morals. So, thanks. :)

  • John Baverstock

    I see it this way, the porn site objectifies women anyway, because it’s a porn site, that’s what it does, that’s it’s brand, If while doing that they want to raise some money for cancer research, fair enough.
    Could they have worded it better? – Yes
    Is the choice of donation style tasteless? – Yes
    Does that make them bad? – No, because they are already in that market, and they are trying to do something good, imagine how “badly” worded a description of a pornographic video would be if it was written by say a Christian Nun, It would probably be full of words like “sinfull” and that is (Hopefully) unlikely to entice a viewer.
    SO the website did the best they good with the writters they had (and their small porn based minds) Perhaps instead of saying “Thanks but no thanks” They could have said “That’s great, but can you please reword your article bumpf so it isn’t so tactless and grass” – Also, I suspect the cheque would have come from “Pornhub” and the declarable wouldn’t be obvious, and to anyone who says “I won’t give money if you accept money from a pornographic site” I would argue is giving money for the wrong reasons, the point of charitable giving is to help the charity, not dictate ethics.

    Anyway, that’s how I see it, although I do agree using Redit was a bad choice, those commentors are best known for their baseless, tactless comentary…maybe they wrote the bumpf for Pornhub!

  • Jack

    The society is a charity that seems more concerned with spreading feminist propaganda than raising money.

    If PornHub, gave them enough money to cure cancer, they would probably deny that too out of “decency.”

    The ones supporting the charity are idiots.

  • Pingback: Homepage

  • Pingback: ts escorts brisbane

  • Pingback: Online Payday Loans No Credit Check

  • Pingback: binary options

  • Pingback: Twin Peak Profits

  • Pingback: files share

  • Pingback: gta 5 beta key

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Go Here

  • Pingback: our site

  • Pingback: read this post here

  • Pingback: νυφικα

  • Pingback: Get rid of bed bugs

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: here

  • Pingback: here

  • Pingback: Twin Peak Profits Bonus

  • Pingback: Package holidays from Thomas Cook

  • Pingback: gelinlik modelleri

  • Pingback: Manziel Information

  • Pingback: bulk instagram accounts

  • Pingback: Aro Moong Dal

  • Pingback: Alteration tailoring

  • Pingback: cheap edu backlinks

  • Pingback: Intense Kettlebell Workouts

  • Pingback: You Can Try These Out

  • Pingback: check here

  • Pingback: Go Here

  • Pingback: go to my site

  • Pingback: go here

  • Pingback: fatcow review hosting

  • Pingback: ipage fatcow same company

  • Pingback: compare hostgator fatcow

  • Pingback: hostgator or ipage for web hosting

  • Pingback: Израиль отдых на море

  • Pingback: Израиль Мертвое море туры

  • Pingback: Туроператоры по Израилю Москва

  • Pingback: Красное море Израиль видео

  • Pingback: Best prestashop themes

  • Pingback: мертвое море

  • Pingback: Professional Photography Site Templates

  • Pingback: Creative Nature Logo Templates

  • Pingback: penis advantage reviews

  • Pingback: penis advantage scam

  • Pingback: penis advantage review

  • Pingback: cheap edu backlinks

  • Pingback: hostgator coupons

  • Pingback: win a free ipad

  • Pingback: best 60 inch led tv

  • Pingback: does penis advantage work

  • Pingback: backlinks services

  • Pingback: xbox giveaway

  • Pingback: cheap portable dvd player

  • Pingback: cheap edu links

  • Pingback: hostgator coupon code

  • Pingback: free ipads

  • Pingback: led televisions

  • Pingback: does penis advantage work

  • Pingback: get backlinks

  • Pingback: free xbox 360

  • Pingback: kids portable dvd player

  • Pingback: buy edu links

  • Pingback: hostgator coupon

  • Pingback: get a free ipad

  • Pingback: best 60 led tv

  • Pingback: backlinks services

  • Pingback: free xbox

  • Pingback: best portable dvd players

  • Pingback: the truth about six pack abs

  • Pingback: buy penis advantage

  • Pingback: hostgator promo code

  • Pingback: xbox 360 giveaway

  • Pingback: portable dvd player reviews

  • Pingback: win a free ipad

  • Pingback: Anisha Huson

  • Pingback: get backlinks

  • Pingback: best led tv brand

  • Pingback: penis advantage review

  • Pingback: does penis advantage work

  • Pingback: edu link building

  • Pingback: free ipads

  • Pingback: best led tv deals

  • Pingback: penis advantage review

  • Pingback: buy backlinks

  • Pingback: free xbox 360

  • Pingback: portable car dvd player

  • Pingback: Cathy Gehrett

  • Pingback: Rayford Bonn

  • Pingback: Ingrid Bieniek

  • Pingback: truth about six pack abs

  • Pingback: edu backlinks

  • Pingback: hostgator coupon 2013

  • Pingback: get a free ipad

  • Pingback: best 42 inch led tv

  • Pingback: penisadvantage

  • Pingback: backlinks services

  • Pingback: xbox 360 giveaway

  • Pingback: portable car dvd player

  • Pingback: penis advantage scam

  • Pingback: Kristine Iams

  • Pingback: cheap edu links

  • Pingback: get a free ipad

  • Pingback: penis advantage scam

  • Pingback: get backlinks

  • Pingback: xbox 360 giveaway

  • Pingback: dual screen portable dvd player

  • Pingback: truth about abs review

  • Pingback: Thalia Vogds

  • Pingback: Jerrell Honokaupu

  • Pingback: Annamaria Gaydosh

  • Pingback: Roxy Goldtooth

  • Pingback: Alexander Braver

  • Pingback: Amberly Mcwayne

  • Pingback: Cassandra Robbert

  • Pingback: Kareem Henton

  • Pingback: Roland Creese

  • Pingback: Willis Morre

  • Pingback: Enrique Tarascio

  • Pingback: Porfirio Hinckson

  • Pingback: Willis Morre

  • Pingback: Michal Liukko

  • Pingback: Randell Cudney

  • Pingback: tao of badass review

  • Pingback: Deangelo Lomago

  • Pingback: Lela Shamas

  • Pingback: Pedro Hufty

  • Pingback: Flossie Zupancic

  • Pingback: Merle Neagle

  • Pingback: Sophia Kufner

  • Pingback: In Silva

  • Pingback: Jerold Auter

  • Pingback: Elene Luing

  • Pingback: Murray Istorico

  • Pingback: Russ Saglimbeni

  • Pingback: Twila Balasa

  • Pingback: Reynalda Herrman

  • Pingback: Jack Lemke

  • Pingback: Halley Grof

  • Pingback: Cheryll Estel

  • Pingback: Retta Depue

  • Pingback: Edmund Rolf

  • Pingback: Ezekiel Mittleman

  • Pingback: Hunter Ruvo

  • Pingback: Shanae Sodhi

  • Pingback: Daniell Stoecker

  • Pingback: Elwanda Vickroy

  • Pingback: Erika Wilch

  • Pingback: Rickey Langella

  • Pingback: Teodora Trotz

  • Pingback: Taisha Jolissaint

  • Pingback: Oleta Sumbry

  • Pingback: Ailene Stuemke

  • Pingback: Eddie Sayloe

  • Pingback: Leroy Cosio

  • Pingback: Giuseppe Zalk

  • Pingback: Blaine Coffen

  • Pingback: Bernard Hazen

  • Pingback: Glen Dansby

  • Pingback: Christian Elguezabal

  • Pingback: Pasquale Majuste

  • Pingback: Charmaine Semple

  • Pingback: Mohamed Winter

  • Pingback: Terrilyn Oganyan

  • Pingback: Leoma Alterio

  • Pingback: Herma Heckers

  • Pingback: Carin Steinhorst

  • Pingback: Devon Krenn

  • Pingback: Lorenza Nylin

  • Pingback: Rev Genes

  • Pingback: Matilde Levers

  • Pingback: Bert Agnew

  • Pingback: Aleta Alconcel

  • Pingback: Shaneka Turner

  • Pingback: Glen Mallo

  • Pingback: Samara Mrotz

  • Pingback: Paul Haider

  • Pingback: Lance Pietrowski

  • Pingback: Fausto Benford

  • Pingback: See Jackowski

  • Pingback: Sacha Guynup

  • Pingback: Johanne Pore

  • Pingback: Elliott Lampe

  • Pingback: Avril Padron

  • Pingback: Benny Hazim

  • Pingback: Lucius Gumina

  • Pingback: Scot Minish

  • Pingback: Sandy Holley

  • Pingback: Ben Leight

  • Pingback: Pa Bentham

  • Pingback: Noel Eisenmann

  • Pingback: Rogelio Romito

  • Pingback: Santos Zorns

  • Pingback: Caleb Seamster

  • Pingback: Zaida Artale

  • Pingback: Heath Paules

  • Pingback: Star Dewees

  • Pingback: Salome Dimare

  • Pingback: Kermit Belser

  • Pingback: Adolph Villalvazo

  • Pingback: Kris Metevier

  • Pingback: Jarred Lafevers

  • Pingback: Ileen Depaulis

  • Pingback: Ciera Gilcrest

  • Pingback: Erik Soboleski

  • Pingback: Anita Dura

  • Pingback: Chong Garmon

  • Pingback: Jared Sidur

  • Pingback: Paul Emayo

  • Pingback: Dan Lusardi

  • Pingback: Carita Osayande

  • Pingback: Marc Quinton

  • Pingback: Elroy Agbisit

  • Pingback: Nanci Upp

  • Pingback: Grisel Stotz

  • Pingback: Sallie Lichtenfeld

  • Pingback: Ophelia Salvesen

  • Pingback: Kathrin Watts

  • Pingback: Eddy Fetty

  • Pingback: Pearl Connerty

  • Pingback: Donny Twombly

  • Pingback: Kathaleen Brickey

  • Pingback: Brigitte Prioletti

  • Pingback: Kira Dunmire

  • Pingback: Jess Founds

  • Pingback: Heath Kapperman

  • Pingback: Shayne Tidrick

  • Pingback: Karin Preuitt

  • Pingback: Wayne Boglioli

  • Pingback: Lino Houchen

  • Pingback: Domenic Monrow

  • Pingback: Audrea Chon

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Filiberto Deniken

  • Pingback: Kellee Grupp

  • Pingback: Allen Sequra

  • Pingback: Dorotha Luczki

  • Pingback: Freddie Nip

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Don Ryks

  • Pingback: Linda Winkelbauer

  • Pingback: Phyliss Travieso

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Shara Worsfold

  • Pingback: Jeremiah Bastien

  • Pingback: Mitchel Goike

  • Pingback: Marcelene Baraban

  • Pingback: Octavio Bucci

  • Pingback: Scott Boniello

  • Pingback: Alanna Oyen

  • Pingback: Eneida Velthuis

  • Pingback: Geraldo Kozicki

  • Pingback: Ludivina Vollman

  • Pingback: Erma Cominotti

  • Pingback: Pablo Vicars

  • Pingback: Lyle Boren

  • Pingback: Hanna Kostka

  • Pingback: Quentin Jahosky

  • Pingback: Catherin Schinker

  • Pingback: click the next website

  • Pingback: Sparkle Leadingham

  • Pingback: Donnie Schadt

  • Pingback: Tamra Bertus

  • Pingback: Kathlene Kudasik

  • Pingback: Eleonor Lebowitz

  • Pingback: Trudie Zamperini

  • Pingback: Sterling Fuentes

  • Pingback: Elden Virella

  • Pingback: Carry Venus

  • Pingback: Manual Griffies

  • Pingback: Damon Journell

  • Pingback: Zachery Tompsett

  • Pingback: Tatyana Recher

  • Pingback: Ardell Gitter

  • Pingback: Youlanda Tynes

  • Pingback: Elaine Kinnion

  • Pingback: Sherita Youssefi

  • Pingback: Darwin Stoiber

  • Pingback: Armando Rooker

  • Pingback: Beatris Shina

  • Pingback: Kristian Torreson

  • Pingback: Esta Bermingham

  • Pingback: Harley Strauss

  • Pingback: Ernie Ownby

  • Pingback: Rich Innocent

  • Pingback: Angelo Leven

  • Pingback: Chris Tronzo

  • Pingback: Bernie Fillers

  • Pingback: Domitila Meridieth

  • Pingback: Armand Coram

  • Pingback: Rutha Jardell

  • Pingback: Christoper Dandrea

  • Pingback: Marilou Burnstein

  • Pingback: asidehand initial amphicarpa

  • Pingback: Jeraldine Serramo

  • Pingback: Todd Minneweather

  • Pingback: Jeanna Zahnke

  • Pingback: Tessa Burgh

  • Pingback: Osvaldo Barsotti

  • Pingback: Eladia Kothakota

  • Pingback: Clyde Maniar

  • Pingback: Hye Jansky

  • Pingback: Micheline Flatness

  • Pingback: Quinn Mengwasser

  • Pingback: Kary Zimmerman

  • Pingback: Tierra Curameng

  • Pingback: Debora Tetter

  • Pingback: Margaret Krisman

  • Pingback: Francis Quelette

  • Pingback: Willie Balaz

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Kitty Hesch

  • Pingback: Tommye Glavin

  • Pingback: Taylor Massingale

  • Pingback: Dino Dotson

  • Pingback: Andra Ogrodowicz

  • Pingback: Glenn Hammerlund

  • Pingback: Brain Lindsley

  • Pingback: Odilia Broschinsky

  • Pingback: Daysi Adank

  • Pingback: Clementine Mcgahan

  • Pingback: Sebastian Astolfi

  • Pingback: Tabetha Gicker

  • Pingback: Vena Coaster

  • Pingback: Jonah Kurtzman

  • Pingback: Bennie Fluegel

  • Pingback: Shu Meritt

  • Pingback: Ivan Giroir

  • Pingback: Roseanne Hosang

  • Pingback: Hilton Lamberton

  • Pingback: Lean Drape

  • Pingback: Morton Payson

  • Pingback: Junita Lambeth

  • Pingback: Dennis Durough

  • Pingback: Carmen Freeman

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Julio Berentson

  • Pingback: Reynalda Hollett

  • Pingback: Glenn Steindorf

  • Pingback: Dion Delawyer

  • Pingback: Lucas Gurr

  • Pingback: Thaddeus Kunau

  • Pingback: Wm Blackwell

  • Pingback: Francis Wardrip

  • Pingback: Mathilde Holyoak

  • Pingback: Osvaldo Attilio

  • Pingback: Lawerence Chambley

  • Pingback: Natacha Giarrusso

  • Pingback: Elvis Pigue

  • Pingback: Anastasia Basford

  • Pingback: Keli Laitila

  • Pingback: Clay Thielemier

  • Pingback: Elbert Main

  • Pingback: Tania Oberdier

  • Pingback: Eleonor Dahlheimer

  • Pingback: Jody Nwakanma

  • Pingback: Katrina Gladfelter

  • Pingback: Celine Hovda

  • Pingback: Vergie Rogg

  • Pingback: Filiberto Veysey

  • Pingback: Kassie Homer

  • Pingback: Latisha Mckeehan

  • Pingback: Shante Archila

  • Pingback: Gilda Blain

  • Pingback: Joseph Rizzuti

  • Pingback: Bernetta Truxillo

  • Pingback: Chance Conkright

  • Pingback: Rich Birely

  • Pingback: Sebastian Amedeo

  • Pingback: Jonathan Parihar

  • Pingback: Lakeshia Hyler

  • Pingback: Shantay Georgevic

  • Pingback: Albert Landgren

  • Pingback: Renato Peduzzi

  • Pingback: Elbert Zieman

  • Pingback: Marcia Behanan

  • Pingback: Cherish Mormino

  • Pingback: Frank Leah

  • Pingback: Joya Unglesbee

  • Pingback: Ela Torchia

  • Pingback: Wilfredo Muhs

  • Pingback: Marianne Sykes

  • Pingback: Kyoko Ogletree

  • Pingback: Kallie Kaetzel

  • Pingback: Tracee Theuret

  • Pingback: Slyvia Tsakonas

  • Pingback: Brittany Dillen

  • Pingback: Jimmie Weirich

  • Pingback: Sergio Szuch

  • Pingback: Deandre Barnacle

  • Pingback: Loan Howles

  • Pingback: Errol Staudenmeier

  • Pingback: Jarvis Marschel

  • Pingback: Hisako Sandine

  • Pingback: Elia Kornbluth

  • Pingback: Florencia Sermania

  • Pingback: Miguelina Spurling

  • Pingback: Clifford Mantifel

  • Pingback: Remona Farren

  • Soki

    What a joke of an article