Lil bit.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
Left and center are ... um ... pretty ...Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
I'd hit it...Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
After seeing her face in the Who's Hottest: Dragoncon thread, I say absolutely not. Had she been a dog, then yes, but dayum!Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
That's hot.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
It's Jennifer now.As long as it ain't cottage-cheesy - I love it. I would love to eat my breakfast off the booties of J-Lo or Beyonce.
You're kidding. That's a beautiful ###.I love the little diamond created by the confluence of ### and thighs.And a little butt-cleavage peeking out from under the short skirt...Rawr.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
Does not compute.The only way JLo and Beyonce sized rear ends go cottage cheese free is through the miracle of the airbrush.As long as it ain't cottage-cheesy - I love it. I would love to eat my breakfast off the booties of J-Lo or Beyonce.
You're kidding. That's a beautiful ###.I love the little diamond created by the confluence of ### and thighs.And a little butt-cleavage peeking out from under the short skirt...Rawr.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
I wanna know where these broads were when I was hitting the Comic/Gaming/Star Trek conventions circa late 80's! When did geeks get hot?After seeing her face in the Who's Hottest: Dragoncon thread, I say absolutely not. Had she been a dog, then yes, but dayum!Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
I disagree. With all the dancing those chicks do their is no cheese (or at worst very minimal). Look at the size of the rumps of some of the female Olympic sprinters. They stick WAY out and it ain't due to cottage cheese.Does not compute.The only way JLo and Beyonce sized rear ends go cottage cheese free is through the miracle of the airbrush.As long as it ain't cottage-cheesy - I love it. I would love to eat my breakfast off the booties of J-Lo or Beyonce.
Have you seen the Brazil/Latina based pr0n out there? Latin and black women have some fine tushies. Add to the fact JLo and Beyonce are rich and famous and have personal trainers, they are probably in the gym 4-5 days/week.I disagree. With all the dancing those chicks do their is no cheese (or at worst very minimal). Look at the size of the rumps of some of the female Olympic sprinters. They stick WAY out and it ain't due to cottage cheese.Does not compute.The only way JLo and Beyonce sized rear ends go cottage cheese free is through the miracle of the airbrush.As long as it ain't cottage-cheesy - I love it. I would love to eat my breakfast off the booties of J-Lo or Beyonce.
Yeah, except for the fact that the time frame of the 70s through now has been the only time in human history that anorexic skinny has been fashinably attractive.What size was Marilyn Monroe?Ever see Renassaince nude paintings?Ever see greek/roman female statues?None of these things resembled Colysta Flockhart (sp).I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
My research tells me otherwise.The only way JLo and Beyonce sized rear ends go cottage cheese free is through the miracle of the airbrush.
You're kidding. That's a beautiful ###.I love the little diamond created by the confluence of ### and thighs.And a little butt-cleavage peeking out from under the short skirt...Rawr.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
You seem to be in the wrong thread. We are not talking about fat chicks. We are talking about chicks with fat booties. If you don't know the difference then just vote "hate it" and move on.I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
I hate the current body image that women are supposed to live up to nowadays. For most people it is unrealistic and only serves to make young women self concious about how they look.Yeah, except for the fact that the time frame of the 70s through now has been the only time in human history that anorexic skinny has been fashinably attractive.
Yeah, except for the fact that the time frame of the 70s through now has been the only time in human history that anorexic skinny has been fashinably attractive.What size was Marilyn Monroe?Ever see Renassaince nude paintings?Ever see greek/roman female statues?None of these things resembled Colysta Flockhart (sp).I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
Flockhart's a bit of an extreme in the other direction. But that picture posted above is absolutely disgusting. :X Nevermind her butt, her legs are as big as redwood trunks. I hope people are kidding if they think she is attractive. Then again, the more guys going after fat chicks, the less competition for the skinny ones so I suppose I should shut up.Yeah, except for the fact that the time frame of the 70s through now has been the only time in human history that anorexic skinny has been fashinably attractive.What size was Marilyn Monroe?Ever see Renassaince nude paintings?Ever see greek/roman female statues?None of these things resembled Colysta Flockhart (sp).I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
Cause with your stellar attitude about women's bodies, they are all just beating down your door.Flockhart's a bit of an extreme in the other direction. But that picture posted above is absolutely disgusting. :X Nevermind her butt, her legs are as big as redwood trunks. I hope people are kidding if they think she is attractive. Then again, the more guys going after fat chicks, the less competition for the skinny ones so I suppose I should shut up.
I understand the distinction. Celebs like J-Lo are not the norm. Most of the time, junk in the trunk means a girl's at least a little bit overweight. For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.You seem to be in the wrong thread. We are not talking about fat chicks. We are talking about chicks with fat booties. If you don't know the difference then just vote "hate it" and move on.I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
Dude, did you happen to notice that her waste and upper body are teeny tiny? It is obvious she is not obese, she just has a big ###. If you see that and think "fat chick," you have been listening to Hollywood too much.But that picture posted above is absolutely disgusting. :X Nevermind her butt, her legs are as big as redwood trunks. I hope people are kidding if they think she is attractive.
Yes. Please. You are on CRACK if you find that disgusting.I suppose I should shut up.
I'd hit it...Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
Absolutely.You're kidding. That's a beautiful ###.I love the little diamond created by the confluence of ### and thighs.And a little butt-cleavage peeking out from under the short skirt...Rawr.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
I don't know about cutting it, but I'd sure slap it up, flip it, and rub it down.For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.
What is wrong with saying what I find attractive/unattractive on a messageboard? Appearances matter with guys AND girls. So I don't know what tree you are barking up here.Cause with your stellar attitude about women's bodies, they are all just beating down your door.Flockhart's a bit of an extreme in the other direction. But that picture posted above is absolutely disgusting. :X Nevermind her butt, her legs are as big as redwood trunks. I hope people are kidding if they think she is attractive. Then again, the more guys going after fat chicks, the less competition for the skinny ones so I suppose I should shut up.
No. She's not. And yes. She's hot.I understand the distinction. Celebs like J-Lo are not the norm. Most of the time, junk in the trunk means a girl's at least a little bit overweight. For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.You seem to be in the wrong thread. We are not talking about fat chicks. We are talking about chicks with fat booties. If you don't know the difference then just vote "hate it" and move on.I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
This thread had your name all over it.No. She's not. And yes. She's hot.
Her legs are MONSTROUS. :X Compare to the girl standing next to her. Her a** and legs are about twice as big around.Yes. Please. You are on CRACK if you find that disgusting.I suppose I should shut up.
Talk about mudflaps . . .This thread had your name all over it.No. She's not. And yes. She's hot.
The extreme selection was purposeful, but I do know several people who think she is smokin' hot. :XA bit?Flockhart's a bit of an extreme in the other direction.
CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKHer legs are MONSTROUS. :X Compare to the girl standing next to her. Her a** and legs are about twice as big around.Yes. Please. You are on CRACK if you find that disgusting.I suppose I should shut up.
That's perfection.Absolutely.You're kidding. That's a beautiful ###.I love the little diamond created by the confluence of ### and thighs.And a little butt-cleavage peeking out from under the short skirt...Rawr.Far right, yellow skirt. Too much? I say yes.Too much junk.
JLo has a fat ###. That girl has a fat ###. I'm not judging fat asses -- in fact, I think they're just delightful. But the only options for what's back there are fat, bone, and muscle. And big round gobs of flesh hanging off the back sides of women just aren't bone or muscle. They're fat-deposits. It's just how it works. That's women for you.If you like 'em bigger, groove on, people. But don't pretend it isn't what it is.In the rather extreme case of chemically-built Olympic sprinter chicks, yes, you guys may have a point. That's not what's going on with JLo and her ilk, though, no matter how many Hollywood fitness gurus she keeps in tow.No. She's not. And yes. She's hot.I understand the distinction. Celebs like J-Lo are not the norm. Most of the time, junk in the trunk means a girl's at least a little bit overweight. For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.You seem to be in the wrong thread. We are not talking about fat chicks. We are talking about chicks with fat booties. If you don't know the difference then just vote "hate it" and move on.I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
I disagree.Yea, her legs are thick. But I don't know if it's "fat".For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.
C'mon Viv, you can do better.Of course its fat. So are jubblies...but that doesn't prevent guys from liking them bigger.The debate here isn't over the organic composition of the booty, but rather the colloquial definition of "fat" as undesirable...and in that colloquial definition of fat...this is NOT a fat ###.JLo has a fat ###. That girl has a fat ###. I'm not judging fat asses -- in fact, I think they're just delightful. But the only options for what's back there are fat, bone, and muscle. And big round gobs of flesh hanging off the back sides of women just aren't bone or muscle. They're fat-deposits. It's just how it works. That's women for you.If you like 'em bigger, groove on, people. But don't pretend it isn't what it is.In the rather extreme case of chemically-built Olympic sprinter chicks, yes, you guys may have a point. That's not what's going on with JLo and her ilk, though, no matter how many Hollywood fitness gurus she keeps in tow.No. She's not. And yes. She's hot.I understand the distinction. Celebs like J-Lo are not the norm. Most of the time, junk in the trunk means a girl's at least a little bit overweight. For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.You seem to be in the wrong thread. We are not talking about fat chicks. We are talking about chicks with fat booties. If you don't know the difference then just vote "hate it" and move on.I get a little bit amused at how a lot of people's standards for what is attractive, as far as what's considered too fat, seem to be slipping. I think it has a lot to do with how Americans are becoming more and more obese in general and so being moderately or slightly overweight is becoming more "normal". I can only guess but I suspect that overseas this isn't the case as much.
Her arms are as well. Although I will agree that she looks better in that pic than the one from behind. I have to think she's "big boned" because usually a girl with big arms, legs, ### like that would be bigger around the waste as well but she isn't. Either way, I don't find her at all attractive but to each his own.I disagree.Yea, her legs are thick. But I don't know if it's "fat".For the record, the girl in that pic is fat any way you cut it.