Snowman's Raincoat Reviews

- the lowdown on adult dvd & videos -

[ Home ] [ About ] [ Reviews ] [ Interviews ] [ Discussion Boards ] [ Links ] [ What's New



Kimi Lixx in Adventures of Dr. Fellatio #31.  Photos courtesy of Elegant Angel.

Interview date 10.10.01

Q1.  Recently you have starred in a lot of films that may appeal mostly to raincoaters, such as Lord of the Asses #05 and Cumback Pussy #39.  Are you worried that you will be typecast as "raincoater only" performer and always be required to perform anal, DP and other similar acts in order to get cast in a production?  Do you have any aspirations to star in scripted productions such as those made by Vivid and Wicked? 

A.  I do indeed aspire, so much so that I've already done a few scripted productions for the likes of Wicked (originally titled Restless Spirits, but I've heard it was changed to Phantom Love), Metro (Valley Heat) and Jill Kelly Productions (Blue Angel, Haven's Magic Touch 3).  I was too naive to be worried about being typecast and perhaps that was an asset, it never occurred to me to think I couldn't do both.

Q2.  This is an snip taken from a very popular thread on RAME this month:

"Porn has become a disgusting horror show...[i]n the last 2 years porn has gone from interesting to downright sickening. everything has been taken to an extreme level, resembling downright female abuse. Men are literally using porn to further their perverted ambitious of hurting women, making them scream, cause them pain or at the very least humiliate them."  

You recently wrote on RAME, "I'm there to have a good time. If you don't want to see someone having FUN while they fuck, you should never watch me."

Do you think Ridley99 is correct when he says porn has become a "disgusting horror show?"  Given your comment, do you think you are out of step with the business or at least what a lot of porn viewers currently want to see?

A.  Porn has become more extreme.  Just like mainstream movies have become more violent, gory, and sexual.   The majority of consumers have become desensitized to the "old fashioned" way of doing things, they've already been there and seen that.  Our cultural taboos are changing, as well.  Thirty years ago it was titillating to glimpse two people having sex, and a consumer would pay good money for that thrill. Today I can watch NYPD Blue and the same thing!  No taboo = less thrill. In a culture that promotes feminine equality and non-violence towards women, as well as innocence and purity among young women, is it any surprise that the thrilling taboo breaking of the day is humiliation, violence, and sex with young girls?  As to it being a disgusting horror show, well, I do find it disturbing.

If I were out of step, I wouldn't be able to find movies to participate in.  I wouldn't hear reviewers and fans applauding me for smiling and laughing.  Just as there is a market for Bloodbath #5, there is a market for The English Patient, and those markets may overlap.

Q3.  One of your early appearances last year was for Ed Powers in More Dirty Debutantes #156.  What was it like working with Ed?  A lot of people on RAME seem to feel that it's time Ed should change his long standing formula.  One person on RAME recently wrote, "[Ed should] gracefully start to bow out.  Your cheesy interviews worked, but being in every male/female scene no longer works.  Find a way to start transitioning to behind the camera.   It would hurt his ego, I know, but there is no other way to save this "franchise".  Do you agree?

A.  I had a lot of fun working with Ed, he was very sweet to me, and took the time to chat and be pleasant before the scene was shot.  It was a very short scene because he was squeezing me in at the last minute before I left LA to go home the following day.  I was genuinely disappointed that the scene was over with so fast.  From what I've read, I'm given to understanding that in his earlier days his scenes were shot more elaborately.  I don't know if that is true or not (I haven't seen any), but if it is, I could see where that might be an issue.  A still camera with a single angle during an entire scene would get dull for the viewer.  Ed has a reputation for paying somewhat more than most, perhaps he is trying to cut corners in order to fulfill that expectation.  I can't say I know what his motivations are. There are still plenty of consumers who purchase his product for exactly what it is, new girls being introduced, and a physically average man that they can identify with having sex with them.  I know that when I first started talking to fans one of the questions I heard most often was "Have you done an Ed Powers video?"  If his product is still selling well, there isn't much reason for him to change his formula.

Q4.  I've seen where you stated that you enjoy anal sex.  If you had to choose one of the following features to star in, which one would you pick and why?  (1)  Jean-Yves Le Castel's Assman #25, (2) Max Hardcore's Extreme #25, or Rocco's True Anal Stories #25?  Any chance you might actually appear in an production by one of these directors, who seem to push the actresses to their sexual limit?


[These titles with intense anal action do not feature Kimi Lixx!  For more information or to purchase a title, click on the box cover!]

A.  If I HAD to pick any of these titles I just might leave the industry.  I've spoken with Max Hardcore a few times, and while he always is a perfect gentleman, I've heard about and scene enough of his work that I've already told him I'm not interested in working with him.  I haven't seen any of Rocco's work, although I've read plenty about it, I've read a couple interviews he's done as well.  I don't think I'm inclined to work with him.  I didn't know anything at all about the Assman series until I just now went and looked it up on the net.  I don't mind a good anal workout, but I really am not interested in being sexually battered.

Q5.  The following excerpt is from a longer post by Ridley99 on RAME.  This summer, it was the most popular thread on RAME, generating over 112 responses as of July 13th.  

"The more I think of it the madder I get.  Really how can they let 18 years old girls star in porn? What 18 year old can make a rational decision about being in a porn movie, or can seriously calculate the effect this will have on their lives?  Now 21 is a whole different age, the mind has caught up with the body so to speak.  The average life span of these 18 year cup cakes is 6 months to a year, in that years time they can be assured of being introduced to drugs, passed around like Marilyn Monroe at the Kennedy compound, being gang banged, ass fucked, ass to mouthed and just about being treated like garbage.  21 is the age.  18 not only is barely legal it should be definitely illegal and that's only morally right."

Where do you weigh in on this issue?  If you were to decide the legal age consent, what age would it be?

A.  I'm not a good person to ask this question of.  I have been operating as an adult since I was twelve years old, and I deeply resented not having access to the prerogatives of adulthood while I was a teen.  I do understand that I was the exception, not the rule, but being the exception shouldn't be a castrating experience.  We, as a culture, take advantage of young people when what they want to do is productive.  We send 18 yr. olds to war, we give them driving privileges so they can get jobs and leave mom and dad free from taxi service, we encourage them to excel in scholastics so that they will be in college that much sooner.  We withhold those things from them that they might be counterproductive with, alcohol, voluntary sterilization, etc.  What sort of culture sends a young man out to defend his country, and then won't let him celebrate with a beer when he is successful?  Teenagers are allowed to have sex, most of the states have an age of consent around 16.  If it is legal to do it in the first place, then why shouldn't it be legal to do it in front of a camera? 

Do I think all teens are capable of making the decision to do porn, fully understanding the impact it will have on the rest of their life?  Absolutely not.  Most adults aren't capable, either. That doesn't mean there should be a governmental nanny.  Those who make good choices will do well, those who don't, will not -- let the chips fall where they may.  The legal age should be whatever age a person can actively make a choice at -- probably closer to 16 than to 21.

Q6.  If you had to name the greatest sexual advantage that women have over men, what would it be?

A.  Oh now this is just silly.  We have the pussy!  Seriously, the penis, as a sexual tool, is fairly easy to mimic.  The vagina isn't that particular (doesn't have all that many nerve endings wired for pleasure and texture).  The clitoris is a bit more fussy, but generally speaking, it has to be manipulated outside of copulation in order for a woman to achieve orgasm ANYWAY.  Men, though, you guys are stuck.  If you don't want to use your hands, there really isn't a good substitute out there for you.  You want the pussy!  We have it!  Not only do we have it, but we can use it over and over and over, pretty much as long as we want to.  Don't have to worry about erections, ejaculations, nothing!  No worries, well, except maybe getting a tad sore after a bit.

Q7.  I believe you have mentioned that you like watch your sex scenes on video or DVD after the feature is completed.  What kind of thoughts go through you head when you see yourself on the silver screen?  Do you critique your performance or appearance?  Do you critique the director or editor on how the final cut looks?  Which scene so far has surprised you most when you viewed it and why? 

A.  I always watch my scenes.  I actively track down the titles I'm in and watch them.  It might even be considered obsessive.  Not only do I watch them, but every day I get on the internet and hunt for new references to any videos I've done, interviews, appearances, you name it.  I critique myself, of course.  Looks, action, mistakes -- I look for what I could have done better, what I did do well.  I sometimes wonder why certain things I know were taped did get cut, and why others weren't! (Why, oh why, after the scene is over, do they leave in that part where the cameraman says something and I look up going "huh?"?!)  After I've watched a scene once or twice, then I can start to appreciate the sexual content.  I can remember, "Oh yeah, that was good...",  and get turned on by it. 

I think the only scene that has actually ever surprised me was from Panty Hoes 3, I had such a fantastic time shooting it, and I was completely knock-kneed when it was over.  I expected it to be broiling hot.  To me it seemed fairly standard when I watched it.  I was disappointed.

[Kimi in Panty Hoes #3.  Her first box cover! -- click to purchase!]

Q8.  In your interview with Gene Ross last November, you said you didn't think you were making "big money" yet.  At that time, you were less established and appearing in some movies where presumably you wouldn't get paid as much (such as a BJ only flick).  Are you making "big money" yet?  How will you know when you are making big money?  How will your lifestyle change when you reach that point?  You've stated before that you are a frugal person.  

A.  I don't think I'm making big money yet.  Maybe I never will.  I'll know I am when I have more money than I know what to do with.  At this point I still always know what to do with it, fix the car, fix the house, pay the bills...  When everything is done and I have money left over, then what will I do?  I doubt that my lifestyle will change in any significant way;  I am who I am and I like how I live.  Having more money wouldn't make me want to live a different way.  [It] might make me want to live in a different location (I could move to the country or the suburbs.), but it wouldn't make me a party animal, or a sports car enthusiast or whatever.  I can't abide waste, I get frustrated with even small things I know I could have done less expensively.  I think I'll always be that way.

Q9.  There was a recent thread on RAME titled "Where are they now?" with regard to porn stars of yesteryear" -- of those that responded, most posters seemed to think they were working at McDonald's or some other low pay, low skill job.  It seems to me that porn stars have an opportunity to make great deal a lot of money and with some financial planning, achieve some degree of financial security in the future.  Have you thought how long you want to stay in the adult industry and what you will do after this?  When you do (or if you currently do) make big money -- will you invest any of it?  If so, how and where? 

A.  Yes, I've given thought to where I'll go when I'm done here.  How could I not?  This isn't exactly something you can do forever.  (Yes, I have seen the granny porn, but really, I don't think that's for me.)  I have a college education, [and] I've held regular employment in the past.  [T]here isn't any reason I couldn't return to the mainstream workforce as a skilled worker.  If I ever do make enough money to consider investments, I most certainly will do so! I would most likely purchase real estate for rental purposes, and mostly likely right here in Cleveland.

Q10.  It's pretty well known that you are from Cleveland, Ohio.  Forbes recently ran an article titled "Where to Score as a Single" and Cleveland ranked 34 out of 40 - with 1 Being the Best.  The author writes, "Like its comic embodiment, Drew Carey, Cleveland is a city that behaves like a schlub but underneath is strangely appealing."  Do you agree with this?  Do you think Cleveland is a good place for singles?  How does it compare to the Los Angeles area?  (By the way, Los Angeles ranked #4).

A.  "Behaves like a schlub but underneath is strangely appealing."  Yep, that's Cleveland!  Cleveland is really a fantastic place to live, there is so much here, but nobody knows it except us Clevelanders.  As a single [person], I think it is probably more difficult to meet other singles in Cleveland than [in] a city like L.A. The Midwest is more conservative, and a lot of ethics and attitudes aren't conducive to meeting potential single partners.  Most people here don't date people they work with.  Cleveland isn't brimming over with social clubs.  Cleveland is one of the most overweight cities in the country (go to the gym.. yeah right).  If you don't hang out with people you went to school with, if you don't pick up strangers in bars, and if you don't meet people at a church social -- you don't meet anyone.  Add to that our 3 month long winter and 2 month long slush season (pre-spring) when nobody leaves the house if they don't have to, and you get a whole bunch of people who buy porn!  Yep, single no prospects - that's Cleveland.  Still, it is strangely appealing.

Q11.  I imagine that you have to travel frequently between Cleveland and Los Angeles in order to work in adult movies.  In light of the terrorist attack of September 11th, do you still feel comfortable flying?  If not, have you considered leaving the business because the air safety situation?

A.  I was supposed to be on a flight September 15th.  I still haven't returned to L.A. (it's [now] Oct. 10th).  After the initial shock, one of the first things that crossed my mind was, "I've flown the connection flight Boston to L.A.  That could have been me."  I was never comfortable flying to begin with, (No, I don't freak out, I just don't like it.) and I really dislike traveling altogether.  This has not made it any easier.  I'm not considering leaving the business, but I am worried more about the cost of flying, and the impact of the new safety regulations on my schedule and my privacy.  I doubt that similar terrorist attacks will happen in the near future, but I wonder about attacks from other sources. Airplanes have always been vulnerable, they are good targets -- a lot of people on each one, a spectacular disaster when they crash, a media opportunity that will not be ignored.  Any organization that wanted to cause trouble would be wise to pick on them.

Q12.  I read in another interview that you like to read a lot.  What were the last three books you read?  Do you mostly shop for books in new or used bookstores or someplace online?  Finally, if you could make a film from any book never produced as a film, which book would you pick and why?

A.  Are you stalking me?  (Just kidding)  You really do your research. 

The last three books I've read:   Xenocide by Orson Scott Card, Never In Anger by Jean L. Briggs and God's Other Son by Don Imus.  Primarily used book stores, almost exclusively used book stores.  I've ordered a book online once, and was frustrated and ended up getting the book (and paying for it) twice.  I only purchase books new when I'm reading a series and I just can't wait until it hits the used shelves. 

I wouldn't make books into films at all.  I don't really like watching movies very much, it's tedious and you never get the whole story.

Q13.  You once said that you read the works of Ayn Rand -- do you find her objectivism philosophy appealing?

Under Rand's philosophy, "For every new law that makes some peaceful action between consenting adults a crime, the state loses its moral legitimacy and its ability to encourage law-abiding behavior. From prohibition to "the war on drugs," every new law that infringes on people's right to trade freely (whether it is in guns, pornography, or narcotics), generates a lack of respect for the police (and encourages police corruption), the court system, and the political process."  

However, "Rand envisions a world in which businessmen have such a high sense of honor they would not pursue material wealth by flattering and corrupting the mob. Instead, they truly would strive continually to raise "the knowledge of the citizens, the caliber of their tastes, the discrimination of their pleasures, the sophistication of their needs." They would have too much pride to produce inferior products and rely on slick and deceptive marketing to sell them. They would have such good taste that they would not sell gangster rap or pornography or Jerry Springer." 

Was Rand reasonable to expect the masses to accept her new moral code? Did she expect to sell this ethic to the Larry Flints of the world?

A.  Rand appeals to people who enjoy complacency. That isn't me. 

Any time the government makes a policy dictating morality those who are not included in that moral code are offended and lose respect for the governing body.  The law doesn't apply to them.  Any time the government creates a victimless crime, those people who indulge in said crime lose respect for the policing authority.  It doesn't take a genius to see this.

Who is damaged when a john sees a pro?  The john's wife (if he has one) -- but probably nobody else.  Better to make a law policing the obligations of man and wife than regulating the sale of sexual favors.  If it is legal to give it away, there isn't any reason it should be illegal to sell it.  Most people don't want shabby women walking up and down their streets accosting passersby and motorists, but only the illegality of the business has made a place for those streetwalkers.  The artificial crime has created the artificial environment for the crime to occur in.

Rand sees a world with no true competition.  If everyone is the best they can be, if everyone creates the best product they can create, if everyone markets their products and images honestly -- who buys it?  By definition all products would be the best -- nothing would be better than anything else.  The car I drive would be no different in intrinsic worth than the car a multi-millionaire drives.  Oh sure, he might gold plate his car, but it wouldn't be a better car.  

All complex social groupings have social ranking, as manufacturers people use possessions to demonstrate rank. There is a social demand for products of greater and lesser quality.  As long as there is there will be market pressures to fill those ranks, market pressure means doing whatever you can to make a profit while still filling a demand niche.  I might do porn with honor and pride in my performance, and I might do it for nothing but the satisfaction of accomplishing my best porn performance -- but then what am I supposed to eat?  I have to be paid.  If all performers did exactly what I did, what would set us apart?  Our appearance, certainly.  Should I be paid less for my appearance than someone else?  Perhaps, I should.  Okay, how much?  Well, that depends on how much the more attractive performer sells, right?  What if she sells more and doesn't perform as well, even though she is doing her best?  Ah, that's the bite.  I'm going to be paid less anyway, no matter how well I perform, why should I knock myself out?  For the satisfaction of doing your best (Rand says) -- phoo on that, satisfaction is hard work and doesn't put bread on the table.  The human psyche says "do the least you can for the greatest profit" not "do the most you can for any profit".  Rand is an idealist, reality doesn't work that way.

Q14.  If you were asked to define what a feminist is in one sentence, what would your response be?

A.  An activist who promotes women's rights and interests.

Q15.  In an online discussion about music videos, you recent wrote, "Music video also supplants the consumers imagination, once you see the artists (or managers) idea of what the song "looks" like, its much harder to form your own imagery, the song becomes less personal, you lose something critical."  Do you think there's a danger that porn can have a similar effect on viewers?  Could frequent porn viewers lose the ability to form their own sexual fantasies and the accompanying sexual imagery in their mind?  If so, maybe a whole generation of men won't be able to get off unless they are watching a video or DVD.  

A.  Certainly, if all your visual fantasies are boxed up sitting on a shelf, why create new ones? You won't have to actually view the video, just remember the images that aroused you.  Porn is also something of an artificial sexual portrayal.  I worry that the frequent viewer will lose the ability to be aroused by a real sexual situation.  It wouldn't match up with what he has trained himself to be aroused by.

Q16.  You've mentioned before that you are a home improvement "do it yourselfer."  The two giants in the industry, Home Depot and Lowe's, are currently engaged in a death match for your business.  Though most agree that Home Depot is still clearly the more efficient and dominant force in the industry, Lowe's is growing rapidly while making inroads.  Which do you prefer to shop in and why?  Are you concerned about the way these giants roll over the local mom and pop hardware stores?

A.  (You are stalking me, I can tell.)  Up until very recently I would have said Home Depot, hands down. They were a 24 hour store (very important in my life) and always had oodles of staff on hand even at 3AM.  Then they went over to regular business hours.  The Lowe's store is closer to my house, significantly closer (one whole highway exit and a NASTY intersection), Lowe's is also in a shopping plaza, making it convenient to make several stops nearby while I'm out.  Lowe's doesn't have the selection that Home Depot does for raw materials, but they do have a better selection of finished products.  Unfortunately, I'm often willing to compromise on raw products if I am already in the store buying the finished product I want.  (I'll buy the cheap plumbing while I'm there getting the NICE faucet instead of going to two stores to get what I REALLY want.)

Our local mom & pop hardware store, which I frequented as it was RIGHT at the end of my street, moved.  They didn't close up, they even expanded a little bit in their new space, but they moved.  Farther away from the Lowe's and the Home Depot, and consequently farther from ME, not a lot farther, but enough so that I don't go there anymore.  Instead of a walk down the street, I would need to drive or bike (realistically, I COULD walk there, but it would take too long.) to shop there now, and once I'm in the car, I'm going to the Lowe's or the Home Depot. Large chains always push out some small shops, if the small store has something to offer that the large chain doesn't, it will stay in business, even though it may be less profitable.  I don't worry about this, if the small store had nothing to offer that couldn't be gotten at the large chain then they weren't particularly competitive to begin with.

Q17.  I understand that you were a genetics major in college.  A couple of days ago, Dr. Panayiotis Zavos, along with his Italian colleague Severino Antinori stated that research into a human cloning project was going faster than expected and that they believe the first cloned human could be created before the end of the year.  Are you alarmed about this?  Do you consider human cloning a brave new mistake?  Under what circumstances do you believe human cloning might be justified or desirable? 

A.  The question isn't whether we should clone, the question is why shouldn't we? Cloning isn't unnatural, twinning is cloning, parthenogenesis is cloning, in the protists and lesser organisms, budding is cloning. Have you ever taken a cutting from a houseplant and made a whole new houseplant? CONGRATULATIONS - you're cloning! Genetic coding aside, no two living beings are identical, there is no known way to impart the exact same physiological stresses on developing critters of any level of organization, let alone ones as complex as mammals. Identical twins aren't exactly the same, from the very moment they separate they lead individual lives, developmentally and personally. They may turn out very much the same, and they will always look very similar (barring such things as weight or cosmetic surgery), but they won't be the same.

If I cloned myself, gave birth to my clone, and raised my clone - would she be me? Or would she be my child who has the same genetic make-up that I do?  I'll give you a hint, she wouldn't be me.  When we have offspring we share our genes with them, but because we've mixed those genes with someone else's our offspring aren't identical to us genetically.  If it's all fine and natural to share some genes with your offspring, why not all your genes?  What if I want to clone myself to find out what kind of person I would have turned out as if I had a different life?  Gosh, what a terrible reason to have a child, almost as bad as getting drunk at a party and fucking the football team and being too embarrassed to get an abortion.  People don't always have children for high and noble reasons, offspring have been exploited since the beginning of time.  We still joke about it "Yep, Jr's gonna take care of me in my old age". People in the past couple decades have been having babies in order to save older children who are dying of cancer or leukemia, some people think that is ethically questionable.  If I clone myself so that I'll have someone in the world who can donate bone marrow or an organ for me sometime in the future, boy, I better treat them right. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants, to have your ideal genetic match standing over you saying "I wouldn't save your sorry ass if you were the last person on the planet."

As to the question of cloning people who have already died.  Once again, the new person is not the dead person. They didn't "already die", the genes that make the new person didn't DIE, DNA is a molecule - a chemical composition, if you will.  It isn't any more alive than a bottle of hydrogen peroxide you buy at the drug store.  The new person is new, all new, from the ground up, if people have souls, they have a new soul.  They don't have the dead person's soul, because they aren't the dead person - the dead person is dead.  Parents who might want to clone a dead child aren't recreating the child who died, they're making one with the same genetic structure that previous child had, but it's going to be a new child.

Clone away!  Let science advance.

Q18.  Another hot issue in this area involves genetically altered fruits and vegetables.  As you know, these are new versions of familiar foods -- ones that are custom "built" to improve quality or remove unwanted traits. Some examples include insect-resistant apples, long-lasting raspberries, and potatoes that absorb less fat.  On the Food and Drug Administration web site, the agency writes, "[the] important thing for consumers to know about these new foods is that they will be every bit as safe as the foods now on store shelves.  Are you concerned about genetically altered fruits and vegetables?  Should genetically altered fruits and vegetables be labeled?  Will you buy them?

A.  Have you ever seen maize?  I mean the original grain that millennia of agricultural breeding has changed into corn. It barely resembles corn.  We eat lots of corn, though, don't we?  How about your pet?  I have a Himalayan cat, she's adorable -- flat little face, blue eyes, 5 inch long hair, seal point markings.  Think she sprang that way from her evolutionary past?  People have been breeding the animals and plants that they want for ages.  Ever since the first person came up with the idea that those things over there look kinda better than the ones of the same kind over there -- I think I'll get the seeds/offspring from that group for next year instead of those sickly ones.  Or maybe when some guy said "Hey, I have this great hound dog, but he's white all over, sticks out like a sore thumb, can't hunt anything.  What say I cross him with your all brown bitch and we see how the puppies turn out?"  It's genetic manipulation, just takes a REALLY long time because you can't get specific about what you do and don't want.  So now we can get specific, I can get into a plant and say this part goes, this part stays, and how about we stick this part in from that plant/animal over there.

I know some people who are allergic to strawberries.  I think we should ban all strawberries from the market because some people I know get really sick when they eat them, and sometimes people put strawberries in certain foods without telling people that they're in there, so it is really dangerous.  While we're at it, I know some people who are allergic to eggs, too.  Do you think anyone would go for that?

I'm not concerned about genetically altered foods, other than their possible impact on the environment, but I worry about that with conventional crops, too. All foodstuffs should be labeled, specifically for those people who do have allergies or enzyme deficiencies. I will buy them! 

Q19.  In a discussion group on AdultDVDTalk you once said, "I'm not the marrying kind."

Here's a passage I found on a newsgroup from someone with similar sentiments:

"Why do we need marriage today? Too many people rush into marriage for the wrong reason (to legitimize sex). Many couples say they want to be together because they love each other, and you don't need a marriage for that. Marriage is for many, an outdated institution based on man's insecurity and need to control and own women.... If you need security you need a better more communicative relationship not marriage. Instead of marriage, why not be together because you love each other and want to be together. There is no need to "own" each other. That is the opposite of love. Love that needs a legal document is no love at all"

Do you agree with the writer's opinion?  Why or why not?

A.  Anything you need a contract for should have a specific purpose.  What is the purpose of marriage?  If you're religious it might be necessary.  If you intend to have and raise children with a specific person and you intend those children to inherit property or rights it might be necessary.  If you get a tax break for being married it would be necessary to get married to get the tax break, same with insurance. If all you want is to make a commitment to someone, to care for them, live with them, and be companions and partners I guess I just don't see the point of marriage.  I don't need a contract with someone, certainly not one that penalizes me when I'm done participating in it, in order to do those things.

Q20.  If you were to devise a test to determine whether people were true soul mates, what would it entail?

A.  First I would devise a test for a soul.

Q21.  I saw that you are now the "proud owner of a DVD player."  What five mainstream movies did you purchase first (or plan to purchase first) for your collection?

A.  I'm not much of a purchaser, I did rent some movies, though. The King and I, The Hobbit, Lord of The Rings, Return of The King, and Antz

Q22 (Bonus!).  If you had a spot on your body that, when touched by anyone else, instantly gave you an orgasm, where would you want it to be?

A.  Somewhere secret, so that it couldn't be accidentally touched.  Maybe behind my earlobe would be a good place. That could be really nifty, actually. 


Kimi hosts a Yahoo! Club here.  She can be contacted at  

Here are some recent adult dvd titles where Kimi can be seen:


For more information or to purchase a title, click on the box cover!

[ Home ]  [ Interviews ]


Page last updated: 03.19.2012.
Send your suggestions or comments to
Copyright 1999-2006, Snowman's Raincoat Reviews, All Rights Reserved.