Beauty is in it. You, obviously are this guy here:
Do you prefer:
1.
Or 2:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...Author refaPosted on Eye of the…
September 2, 2011 10:47 pm GMT -5
Beauty is in it. You, obviously are this guy here:
Do you prefer:
1.
Or 2:
(No Ratings Yet)Loading...
#2 obviously… i’m not into fucking 8 year old thai boys
who in their right mind would ever choose #1?
I know the men with that preference exist… I honestly expected less of a landslide. #1 isn’t radically underweight, she appears to be a fairly healthy girl who’s just WAY thin. I mean — her ribs are visible, but she’s not showing bones in her legs or arms, and even has a little ass going on. :shrug:
i’s tap 2 in an instant. unf.
#2. No question.
It’s not just that somewhat overweight is better than anorexic, it’s that #2 seems to have something remotely resembling a sense of style.
#1. Both have fine bodies by my standards but as far as I can tell #1 doesn’t have a boring face or ugly tattoos… she might could use a bit of tit but whatever.
#1 is not 8, Thai, or a boy. Did a flat chested skinny girl hurt your feelings?
2. hands fucking down.
twas a joke! my ex of 3 years weighed 95 pounds. the important part is who the person is. but on a strictly physical level #2 is just sexier to me. plus as someone else said, #1 doesn’t look happy in the photo.
nice gunt on 2.
i’d rather fuck myself than either of those two.
Not really a fair contest since no 1 is photographed in such a way as to make her look as unappealing as possible.
Yes.
presentation of #2 is more alluring, but #1 is appealing and barring severe psychological or physiological problems you can always bulk that up.
in short, need more data.
This. Anybody who would choose 1, and not “1, but I wish she had hips or something!” but literally wants a woman who’s that non-developed-looking, is either a pedo who’s smart enough to get their rocks off with the closest legal thing or into effeminate men. There is nothing “womanly” about the first one. It’s not about how big she is, it’s at least showing you’ve passed puberty.
Personally, I don’t ever want to see bones through skin. I like soft, inviting women because they feel better to cuddle, sleep with and fuck. I’ve never understood anyone wanting to fuck a girl who’s pelvis grinds up into you or ribs push into your chest when you could have soft tits to lay against and round thighs to push into.
#1 is also good if you want to live out a rape fantasy where you’re in the SS and she’s been in Auschwitz a few months.
#2 is Doris Feline
HA! I love trick questions.
Depends on the season of the year!
Or put another way,
>70°F = #1
<70°F = #2
If it’s exactly 70°F, beat off.
Both at once……
^
Though I’d still choose 2 for her meats!
wheres the middle band? i cant vote for either one
“#1 is also good if you want to live out a rape fantasy where you’re in the SS and she’s been in Auschwitz a few months.”
Point taken! New item on my menu; thanx.
both are kinda ugly, i’ll pass.
gotta have titties
1
Amen, meaty women FTW.
#1 all day. I dont care if she’s like fucking a pair of elbows. I can’t fuck with a girl that’s got a waist bigger than mine. Did it once and never again. #2 would probably crush my pelvis if she got on top.
2 and we will steal that little blue table thingy over at 1’s house
Cant agree more. Dated a size 0 90lbs girl for years, but it turns out I fell for and married a #1.5 girl. It all comes down to the person inside the package, like you said. Then again #2 is just too flabby for me.