Gravy and Biscuits

Robert ‘R’ Kelly Might Be ‘Bump N’ Grind’in His Way Into the Big House

Posted by Gravy Guest in Tuesday, May 20th 2008

Notoriety for lacking the proper judgment is not a good thing. R&B artist R. Kelly is having a rather embarrassing time as his child pornography case continues in court. Kelly is on trial for allegedly videotaping sex with an underage girl. The now 23 year-old victim and Kelly both vehemently deny they are the individuals in said video.
The woman, who apparently looks ‘bored’ at many key points in the tape, also asserted a quiet way about her as she spoke infrequently and also when she was requested to call the man in the tape Daddy. Ok, boredom in the bedroom happens. Let’s face it. Sometimes you just aren’t that into it. Depending on who you are with you could just be counting the minutes until you can turn on Letterman. But calling him Daddy? Eew. Creepy. Oh, and gross too.
At one point, Defense Attorney Sam Adam Jr. told the jury that it is not Kelly on the tape and that the girl was “a paid, professional prostitute.”

If she really is/was a hooker, is professionalism a prerequisite when being hired by a pimp? What level of professionalism are we talking here? Was this girl a non-biting, compliant, and courteous lady of the night? Did she say please, thank you and use a mint when she left? Something to ponder.

After a variety of sex acts including oral sex, masturbation and urination, the video ends with the man appearing to tenderly wipe the girl off with a towel and then hand her some money.

Tenderly?! WTF.

Romance on celluloid plays quite different. Maybe on a cold and lonely night Ricardo the stable boy and Vivian the desperate housefrau get all hot and bothered. They must have each other, NOW. One lover may perhaps tenderly caress the other’s cheek or tenderly place butterfly kisses. Or is it just common courtesy to wipe off your urine-soaked underage hooker? Is it that they were sharing a private intimate moment and Mr. Kelly wanted to express gratitude to the nubile flesh he was allegedly molesting?
Ok wait, I just assumed that R. did the peeing. I was being presumptuous. What if there was a mutual understanding? You know, a pee for a pee kind of scenario.

Source