e petition asking for internet constrols on !!!!!! etc

MissMitch

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

not entirely true. We don't look at our footballing idols and decide that we want a girlfriend like that. We just prefer slim fit birds over fat rotters; it's not exactly science.
women just struggle to understand that concept because they're shallow and are quite happy to marry men who have money - unless of course Mick Jagger, Jack Nicholson, Mick Hucknell, Rod Stewart, Peter Stringfellow, Gene Simmons, Lemmy, Stephen Hawkin etc etc are fine figures of manliness with looks to die for.

SOME women! But yeah, I agree, (although nowt wrong with Mick Jagger in his heyday...now Paul McCartney on the other hand...). And I agree about footballers too, although it kind of started with George Best & tbf he'd still have been sexy and charming if he'd stayed working in the Belfast chippy!

I guess the real difference now is that the media focus on it more and it has become the prevalent culture...same as slim women over 'fat rotters', that's the way it is in the western world now, but not all over the world and it's not always been the case.

adouglasmhor

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

not entirely true. We don't look at our footballing idols and decide that we want a girlfriend like that. We just prefer slim fit birds over fat rotters; it's not exactly science.
women just struggle to understand that concept because they're shallow and are quite happy to marry men who have money - unless of course Mick Jagger, Jack Nicholson, Mick Hucknell, Rod Stewart, Peter Stringfellow, Gene Simmons, Lemmy, Stephen Hawkin etc etc are fine figures of manliness with looks to die for.

Just pointing out you often see a bigger lass who is good looking.

MissMitch

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Just pointing out you often see a bigger lass who is good looking.

I look like a !!!!!! star tbh....Ron Jeremy!

scheming_gypsy

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Just pointing out you often see a bigger lass who is good looking.

you might, i don't

adouglasmhor

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

you might, i don't

FatVonD

check wrote: »

Haven't such views always existed to an extent "I must I must improve my bust" ?

True but the women weren't as likely to be surgically enhanced and the images so heavily retouched. The images portrayed nowadays are more unattainable because, in all likelihood, the woman wasn't born with that body either!

check wrote: »

This petition is silly, pornography has existed long before the internet and was accessed by children/teenagers.

It existed but hard core stuff wasn't as easily attainable as it now is on the internet.

scheming_gypsy

adouglasmhor wrote: »

i'll have to wait till i get home and not got a webfilter blocking that

adouglasmhor

FatVonD wrote: »

True but the women weren't as likely to be surgically enhanced and the images so heavily retouched. The images portrayed nowadays are more unattainable because, in all likelihood, the woman wasn't born with that body either!



It existed but hard core stuff wasn't as easily attainable as it now is on the internet.

Well we will just have to put up with it, becaue the internet is not going back in the box and neither is retouching and cosmetic surgery.

BTW I remember one of the women from the band Girlschool in the 70s or early 80s saying she had a job at a publishers touching up photos in girlie mags to cover up acne and pimples etc.

scheming_gypsy

adouglasmhor wrote: »

it's showing now, but she's not fat. She might be 'bigger' but she looks as though she'll be quite tall unlike small dumpy birds who wear Uggs and look like Easter eggs in wellies.

adouglasmhor

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

it's showing now, but she's not fat. She might be 'bigger' but she looks as though she'll be quite tall unlike small dumpy birds who wear Uggs and look like Easter eggs in wellies.

How about liis windischmann http://www.liisweb.com/gallery.html