You know lads mags, mens magazines, Playboy, my dream is Hustler, over here in the UK we have Loaded, I was a big fan of Ice magazine, GREAT big boobs. I'm not into Nuts or Zoo. But I have to say, that either the airbrushing has gone too far or the plastic surgery has in this photo. No big news, I mean come on Playboy, once you look at that the women, I'm gonna call them women and not girls, that's just creepy and I'll leave that to you know the real creeps out there, well once you look at a Playboy, Loaded girls seem wholesome and girls next door.
At least the women here have some shape to their boobs. But I'm pretty sure they are implants or have been made to look firmer. I just don't get how nature can work otherwise.
I think people have REALLY high beauty standards when they talk about girls next door. Most of them look preened and perfected, in reality too, but what do I know about beauty, I'm just a woman, not a man *sasses*
So, imagine taking one of these women in the photo to bed..I mean based on that image, to me it'd be like fucking a doll and I always preferred a flesh and blood human, I know the doll market is thriving but nothing beats flesh when it blushes, when it jiggles a little, when it's soft between your fingers and in your hands.
The women here are stunning, in the sense they get your attention. The smallness of the rest of their body in comparison to their boobs is what clinches the deal. However, I think the naturally beautiful can be stunning and I think there's a an awful lot of damage being done when it's clearly suggested a more doll like appearance is prefered over a human one. It's true some women do have more exaggerated proportions but as a woman with hips, boobs, weight loss, butt, and being around other women and specifically noticing as a woman the differences between me and her, not in a competitive way because I don't have model envy and I like myself (no delusions, I just like myself simple as that), this photo comes across as fake and whilst it's kind of sexy to me, it'd be even sexier to see the real deal, unfashionable flesh across the stomach it's flat or not, there's always flesh to a degree no one goes in like "pnuematically" unless they've had lipo and it's exaggerated because of airbrushing and implants.
I think the world is crazy with its looking a certain way but this is nothing new, it's no different to what I've read about women centuries ago powdering their faces looking white and pale and cinching their waists in. Oh trust me I love corsets, it's hot sexy arousing as fuck to me because I happen to be a pervert, but I also love reality. So what's wrong with having reality in a magazine? And if the answer is, men don't want to masturbate over that or unreality sells more, then that begs the question, what the fuck is wrong with these men?
By the way, the picture is called boob o clock. God love these magazines. It brings me back to the day when I was supposed to be revising but just masturbated over being one of these women and a little also being in contact with her boobs (yeah I love boobs and boob play), I had a whole list of websites I'd check everyday. Oh yeah, I learnt nothing. My sexuality actually built from Erotica. But it's all about the source; is sex just a buisness, or a lifestyle? To me, from the magazines, the former and from the books, the latter.
No comments:
Post a Comment