Sex-appeal palpable en 3D

🛑 TOUTES LES INFORMATIONS CLIQUEZ ICI 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻

Sex-appeal palpable en 3D
Our engineers are working quickly to resolve the issue.

© 2022 Forbes Media LLC. All Rights Reserved
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
New!
Follow this author to stay notified about their latest stories.
Got it!
Audio porn has been steadily growing in popularity over the last 15 years. In the same way that the inscrutability of the eReader was credited for the uptake in literary erotica, audio offers privacy. But it’s more than that: The beauty of audio is its intimacy, the chance to retreat to your personal bubble. That’s true whether you listen to politics, comedy or true crime, but in few genres is it more appealing than with porn.
One third of adults in the U.S. have listened to a podcast in the past month. Credit: Getty
In 2019, audio erotica startups have collectively raised over $8 million. But the platforms aim to do more than simply titillate. These new sextech entrepreneurs are building products that appeal to an educated, enlightened listener base who want a side of wellness with their wank.
Research by sex education platform OMGYes and The Kinsey Institute found that 90% of women use “mental framing” to turn off distracting thoughts and focus on the pleasure. Many described running through narrative fantasies in their head to get in the mood. As understanding and acceptance of the role of the imagination in female arousal increases, the market for sexy storytelling is surely going to grow.
Websites such as Tumbler, Reddit, YouTube and Literotica have been hosting audio versions of smutty stories for years, but they tended to be user-submitted and varied widely in terms of quality and style. This new wave of audioporn platforms is creating content with high production values and careful curation.
Here are five audio porn stories to try [note: clicking on these links may take you to sites with adult content]:
“Punishment” is a male-narrated monologue which incorporates domination, command-giving, denial, rough sex and name-calling. But it isn’t stylised, it’s actually incredibly well-peformed, convincing and in places haphazard and funny—just like real sex. It’s also narrated with an English accent, which might sound cute to American listeners but for British ones helps make it feel more realistic. English accents regularly appear in polls of sexiest accents, alongside French, Italian, Irish, Scottish and, more recently , New Zealand. So no surprise there is plenty of audio porn out there tagged as being read in an accent. Quinn does a good job of serving up a variety of them without seeming fetishistic, and “Punishment” is a good example of that.
This French audio erotica site is a collaboration of feminist pornographer Olympe de G. and porn star Lélé O. Available in both French and English on Apple Podcasts or via their website, it describes its content as “guided masturbation sessions imagined specially for the feminine sex,” and boasts an average of 100,000 listens a month.
There are currently 23 episodes in French, of which just four have been translated into English. Of these “The Hands” is an exciting sign of things to come. Be warned: This isn’t one to listen to on your commute. It is a simple story of touch that manages to be both kinky and calming. The narrated instructions are just the right side of playful. Oh, and it’s all done in a French accent, too. 
Dipsea is an app-based platform for short-form erotic audio stories for $8.99 per month or $48 per year. The female-founded startup, which officially launched in December 2018, has been valued at at $17 million. Stories are arranged in categories, such as: "Queer," “BDSM," "Exes and Friends," and even "Chill Stories," and feature strong writing and high production values.
“Salty” is a simple tale of how tequila shots on a hot day leads to sex between two female friends. It’s a straightforward enough fantasy—one you might see on any mainstream porn site—but in Dispea’s hands it is anything but basic. The nuanced build-up and contextualisation, palpable sexual tension, and the explicit (but still realistic) descriptions of sex serve to turn it into something special.
4. “Spit-Roasted By Spock?” Bawdy Storytelling
Podcasts are also great platforms for audio porn. One third of adults in the U.S. have listened to a podcast in the past month. According to research company Ovum, global podcast advertising revenue reached $490 million in 2017 and is expected to be worth $1 billion by the end of 2020.
“Bawdy Storytelling” is a free podcast that features real, submitted stories, developed and curated by host Dixie De La Tour before being told in front of a live audience. “Spit-Roasted By Spock?” is a perfect example of how Bawdy Storytelling combines humour, sex and memoir to create a narrative that’s sexy and silly while still being thought-provoking. The Trekkie dream come true is the account of what happened when burlesque performer Alotta Boutté revealed her fantasy of having a threesome with Captain Kirk and Spock while dressed as Lieutenant Uhura.
The Bawdy Storytelling podcast features real stories, developed by host Dixie De La Tour, and told ... [+] in front of a live audience.
Sex blogger Girl On The Net started recording her narrative blog posts after a visually impaired follower told her that using a screen reader resulted in the post being read out in a really unsexy monotone. She began recording the stories herself, and has since discovered that many of her sighted fans also prefer the audio format.
Her stories are based on real thoughts, experiences and fantasies—both her own, and those of her guest bloggers. That adds a voyeuristic edge to them. Her frank, explicit style manages to be both arousing and warmly familiar—like a friend telling you a dirty story down the pub.




Home

Browse Decisions

S.W.3d

304 S.W.3d

304 S.W.3d 81 (2010)




Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.
Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.
Michelle FLESHNER, Respondent,
v.
PEPOSE VISION INSTITUTE, P.C., Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc. https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Robert A. Kaiser, Thomas B. Weaver, Jeffery T. McPherson, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, St. Louis, for Appellant.
Jerome J. Dobson, Michelle Dye Neumann, Jonathan C. Burns, Gregory A. Rich, Dobson, Goldberg, Berns & Rich, LLP, St. Louis, for Respondent.
J. Bennett Clark, Emma Harty, James M. Weiss, St. Louis, for Amicus Curiae Anti-Defamation League.
John D. Lynn, Sedey Harper, P.C., St. Louis, Marie L. Gockel, Bratcher Gockel & Kingston, L.C., Kansas City, for Amicus Curiae St. Louis and Kansas City Chapters of the National Employment Lawyers Association.
Michelle Fleshner sued her former employer, Pepose Vision Institute, P.C. ("PVI"), for damages resulting from its wrongful termination of her. A jury found PVI liable on Fleshner's claim and awarded her $30,000 in actual damages and $95,000 in punitive damages. This Court granted transfer after disposition by the court of appeals. Jurisdiction is vested in this Court pursuant to article V, section 10 of the Missouri Constitution.
Among its allegations of error, PVI claims that the trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing on its motion for a new trial based on juror misconduct. PVI contends that one juror's anti-Semitic comments about a defense witness deprived it of a jury of 12 fair and impartial jurors. This Court finds that if a juror makes statements evincing ethnic or religious bias or prejudice during jury deliberations, the parties are deprived of their right to a fair and impartial jury and equal protection of the law. Accordingly, the trial court should have held a hearing to determine whether the alleged anti-Semitic comments were made. The overruling of the motion for a new trial was error. The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.
Fleshner worked for PVI, a refractive surgery practice. During the course of her employment, the U.S. Department of Labor investigated PVI to determine whether it failed to pay its employees overtime compensation when they worked more than 40 hours a week. Fleshner received a telephone call at home from a Department of Labor investigator seeking background information about PVI. Fleshner told the investigator about the hours worked by PVI's employees. The next morning she reported her telephone conversation to her supervisor.
Fleshner's employment with PVI was terminated the day after she reported the telephone conversation. Fleshner filed an action against PVI, asserting wrongful termination of employment in violation of public policy and failure to pay overtime compensation in violation of section 290.505, RSMo Supp.2003. 1 As noted, the jury found in favor of Fleshner and awarded her $125,000.
PVI filed motions for a new trial on several bases, including juror misconduct. After the jury was dismissed, a juror approached PVI's attorneys and reported that another juror made anti-Semitic statements during jury deliberations. According to the juror's affidavit, another juror made the following comments directed at a witness for PVI: 2 "She is a Jewish witch." "She is a Jewish bitch." "She is a penny-pinching Jew." "She was such a cheap Jew that she did not want to pay Plaintiff unemployment compensation."
According to an affidavit by one of PVI's attorneys, another juror approached PVI's attorneys and indicated that several anti-Semitic comments were made during deliberations but did not specify what was said. In overruling PVI's motions, the trial court concluded that jury deliberations are sacrosanct and that the juror's alleged comments did not constitute the kind of jury misconduct that would allow the trial court to set aside the verdict and order a new trial.
PVI alleges that its right to a fair and impartial jury trial was denied when the trial court overruled its motions for a new trial because a juror allegedly made anti-Semitic comments about a witness during jury deliberations. PVI contended in its motions for new trial that, as a result of the anti-Semitic comments, it was deprived of its due process rights and did not receive a fair trial.
Both the United States Constitution and Missouri Constitution provide that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." U.S. CONST. amend. V; MO. CONST. art. I, sec. 10. "It is axiomatic that `a fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process.'" Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., ___ U.S. ___, ___, 129 S.Ct. 2252 , 2259, 173 L.Ed.2d 1208 (2009) (quoting In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133 , 136, 75 S.Ct. 623, 99 L.Ed. 942 (1955)). Moreover, the Missouri Constitution provides for the right to a trial by jury for civil cases. MO. CONST. art. I, sec. 22(a). As this Court has recognized, the right to a trial by jury does not simply provide that 12 jurors will decide the case. If the right to trial by jury is to mean anything, all 12 jurors must be "fair and impartial." See Catlett v. Ill. Cent. Gulf R.R. Co., 793 S.W.2d 351 , 353 (Mo. banc 1990); Lee v. Balt. Hotel Co., 345 Mo. 458, 136 S.W.2d 695, 698 (1939). Each juror must "enter the jury box disinterested and with an open mind, free from bias or prejudice." 3 Catlett, 793 S.W.2d at 353 (internal quotation marks omitted). While every party is entitled to a fair trial, as a practical matter, our jury system cannot guarantee every party a perfect trial.
Over the years, an exception to the rule prohibiting juror testimony has been adopted. Jurors may testify about juror misconduct occurring outside the courtroom. Travis v. Stone, 66 S.W.3d 1 , 4 (Mo. banc 2002). This exception has been used to allow jurors to testify as to whether they gathered evidence independent to that presented at trial. See id. at 3 (where juror visited accident scene during a trial recess); Middleton v. Kansas City Pub. Serv. Co., 348 Mo. 107, 152 S.W.2d 154, 156 (1941) (where juror visited several used car dealerships measuring the type car involved in the accident). When a juror obtains extrinsic evidence, the trial court conducts a hearing to determine whether the extrinsic evidence prejudiced the verdict. See Travis, 66 S.W.3d at 4.
Here, PVI did not allege juror misconduct occurring outside the courtroom. Instead, PVI asked for a new trial on the basis of juror misconduct occurring inside the jury room. PVI alleges that comments made by a juror revealing religious and ethnic bias or prejudice during deliberations prevented it from receiving its constitutional right to a trial by a fair and impartial jury.
Specifically, PVI alleges that, during jury deliberations, a juror made the following statements about the defense witness, who is also the wife of the president of PVI: "She is a Jewish witch." "She is a Jewish bitch." "She is a penny-pinching Jew." "She was such a cheap Jew that she did not want to pay Plaintiff unemployment compensation." Those alleged comments, PVI claims, demonstrate it did not receive a trial by a fair and impartial jury.
While jurors' mental processes and innermost thoughts or beliefs may not be examined, see Baumle, 420 S.W.2d at 348, this Court has never considered whether the trial court may hear testimony about juror statements during deliberations evincing ethnic or religious bias or prejudice.
Other jurisdictions that have analyzed similar situations have decided that juror testimony is admissible. The Wisconsin Supreme Court in After Hour Welding, Inc. v. Laneil Management Co. determined a trial court may hear juror testimony if it learns that the verdict may have been a result of racial, national origin, religious, or gender bias. 108 Wis.2d 734 , 324 N.W.2d 686 , 690 (1982). In that case, the defendant moved for a new trial on the basis of jury misconduct. Id. at 688. The defendant supported its motion with a juror's affidavit stating that other jurors called a witness who was an officer of the defendant corporation "a cheap Jew." Id. In making its decision, the court recognized that "[w]hile the rule against impeachment of a jury verdict is strong and necessary, it is not written in stone nor is it a door incapable of being opened." Id. at 689. The rule "competes with the desire and duty of the judicial system to avoid injustice and to redress the grievances of private litigants." Id. The court balanced the interest of privacy for juror discussion against the right to a fair trial and found that when the right to a trial by an impartial jury is impaired by a juror's material prejudice, the interest of juror privacy yields to the right to a fair trial. Id. at 739-40, 324 N.W.2d 686 .
In Evans v. Galbraith-Foxworth Lumber Co., the Texas Court of Civil Appeals found that when jurors made anti-Semitic comments during jury deliberations, litigants did not receive a fair and impartial trial by jury. 31 S.W.2d 496, 500 (Tex.Civ. App.1929). During deliberations, a juror stated that one of the plaintiffs was "a Jew," that one of the jurors was "a Jew," but that he could not understand why other jurors would be "partial to a Jew." Id. at 499. The court explained that, in a situation where jurors make anti-Semitic comments during deliberations, setting aside the verdict is proper:
Id. at 500 (internal citations omitted).
When a juror makes statements evincing ethnic or religious bias or prejudice during deliberations, the juror exposes his mental processes and innermost thoughts. What used to "rest alone in the juror's breast" has now been exposed to the other jurors. See Baumle, 420 S.W.2d at 348. The juror has revealed that he is not fair and impartial. Whether the statements may have had a prejudicial effect on other jurors is not necessary to determine. Such statements evincing ethnic or religious bias or prejudice deny the parties their constitutional rights to a trial by 12 fair and impartial jurors and equal protection of the law. See Powell, 652 So.2d at 358. The Florida Supreme Court, in criticizing a juror's expression of racial bias, commented, "neither a wronged litigant nor society itself should be without a means to remedy a palpable miscarriage of justice." Id. at 356.
Jurors are encouraged to voice their common knowledge and beliefs during deliberations, but common knowledge and beliefs do not include ethnic or religious bias or prejudice. The alleged anti-Semitic comments made during deliberations in this case are "not simply a matter of `political correctness' to be brushed aside by a thick-skinned judiciary." Powell, 652 So.2d at 358. As stated in United States v. Heller, "A racially or religiously biased individual harbors certain negative stereotypes which, despite his protestations to the contrary, may well prevent him or her from making decisions based solely on the facts and law that our jury system requires." 785 F.2d 1524 , 1527 (11th Cir. 1986). Such stereotyping has no place in jury deliberations.
The ethnicity or religion of any party or witness unrelated to the evidence should have no bearing on the outcome of a trial. To allow the verdict to stand without holding a hearing to determine whether the alleged comments were made undermines public confidence in the justice system. The courts must zealously guard the right to a fair and impartial trial and equal protection under the law.
The trial court abused its discretion in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the alleged juror misconduct occurred. The trial court's judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.
PVI also argues that the trial court improperly instructed the jury on the causal requirement for wrongful discharge under the public-policy exception. PVI claims that the trial court's failure to give its proffered instruction constitutes prejudicial error requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
Both PVI and Fleshner proposed verdict directors with different causal standards. The trial court rejected PVI's proffered instruction, which would have directed the jury to find for Fleshner if it found that her communication with the investigator was the "exclusive cause" of her discharge. 5 Fleshner offered two verdict directors. The first instructed the jury that the communication with the investigator was a "contributing factor" to Fleshner's termination. 6 The trial court rejected the instruction. The second instructed the jury that Fleshner was fired "because" she communicated with the investigator. 7 The trial court gave this instruction.
The issue before this Court is how the jury should be instructed as to the appropriate causation standard when an at-will employee is discharged in violation of the public-policy exception.
Fleshner was an at-will employee at PVI. Generally, at-will employees may be terminated for any reason or for no reason. Johnson v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 745 S.W.2d 661 , 663 (Mo. banc 1988). As a matter of law, the discharged at-will employee has no cause of action for wrongful discharge. Id.
Since Boyle v. Vista Eyewear, Inc., 700 S.W.2d 859 (Mo.App.1985), the court of appeals has recognized the public-policy exception to the at-will-employment rule. The Boyle court described the public-policy exception as "narrow" and articulated it as follows:
Id. at 871, 878. Further, the court explained that public policy "is the principle of law which holds that no one can lawfully do that which tends to be injurious to the public or against the public good." Id. at 871.
This Court has never explicitly recognized the public-policy exception. See Dake v. Tuell, 687 S.W.2d 191 , 193 (Mo. banc 1985) (holding that the prima facie tort t
Baise anale interraciale brutale
Bianca Lopes est une bonne baiseuse
Double pénétration sur Veronica Leal