http://www.hungangels.com/board/file...tchick_193.jpg
Ok it's not doing it for me!
If she lost like 30lbs...then ok.
Printable View
http://www.hungangels.com/board/file...tchick_193.jpg
Ok it's not doing it for me!
If she lost like 30lbs...then ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SXFX
Fine,
But she's not ugly.
http://www.hungangels.com/board/file...tchick_193.jpg
Ok it's not doing it for me!
If she lost like 30lbs...then ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SXFX
So,
I'm assuming by your tone and such,
You are young and good looking, right?
She's cute.
No not really, "classical good looks" are called that because it is just that, classical. You usually don't see a lot of ancient statues with a lot of body fat, and in the Victorian era the bigger issue was WHERE the body fat was (hence all the extremely tight corsets, rib removal surgeries)- if you had fat in your waist area (including "the pouch") in the Victorian era you were not meeting that era's definitions of female beauty.Quote:
Originally Posted by hingshing
Ever seen old clothing advertisements in newspapers? Even in the illustrations people were tall & thin outside the breast & ass areas- and that was in an era before using movies, tv, or photography for pushing fashion.
A similar mentality that a lot of guys have for transwomen.Quote:
Originally Posted by braveman
not gettin' laid that often, huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by braveman
nuh, no supermodels for me, only "ordinary" non-chubby women, and my right hand on occasion :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by braveman
<--------- Proud shallow bastard.
That said, its shape and total package that get me. Like my fellow ass lover hollywood said, I like big butts and i ca not lie. Skinny girls can get it, but dating em is rare.