|
|
Post by voice of reason on Mar 29, 2006 17:52:24 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by SIMON OUFC35 on Mar 29, 2006 22:33:29 GMT 10
and yet i still find it strangely arrousing.......
|
|
|
|
Post by pom pom on Mar 29, 2006 22:41:09 GMT 10
that.......looks.....so......wrong...
|
|
|
|
Post by alicia on Mar 30, 2006 9:46:41 GMT 10
It doesn't look anything like Britney Spears.
Also, what are "water-retentive hands"?
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Mar 30, 2006 11:05:34 GMT 10
mmmm.....lactiferous
|
|
|
|
Post by NOMESSSS. on Mar 30, 2006 11:46:35 GMT 10
that is wrong
|
|
|
|
Post by honey soy on Mar 30, 2006 14:22:55 GMT 10
Dunno. Its not that bad, is it? Besides the bear/wolf head, which is weird. She looks too calm. Maybe she should be grimacing and wrenching the ears off the head (?)
|
|
|
|
Post by alicia on Mar 30, 2006 14:24:29 GMT 10
HS, do you know what water-retentive hands are?
|
|
|
|
Post by honey soy on Mar 30, 2006 14:32:13 GMT 10
HS, do you know what water-retentive hands are? I think its the same as with ankles when they are a little swollen cos you are retaining fluid in tissue. Sometimes when you binge drink or at "certain" times of the lunar calendar <being discrete so as not to freak out younger gentlemen on the forum>, rings on your fingers are tighter, but the next day it goes back to normal. Pregnant and 'lunar affected' ladies sometimes hold water in ankles and I suppose hands, too. I'm guessing though. |
|
|
|
Post by alicia on Mar 30, 2006 14:39:24 GMT 10
ahhh. that makes perfect sense.
but they look normal to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by honey soy on Mar 30, 2006 15:01:24 GMT 10
ahhh. that makes perfect sense. but they look normal to me. Yeah, me too. The photography thing at the Entrance Cinema a couple of weeks ago with that naked girl posing in front of the screen for 7 minutes was a bit ruder. |
|
|
|
Post by alicia on Mar 30, 2006 15:27:33 GMT 10
I'm still not sure what that whole thing naked was about. I wonder if affle washed the robe?  |
|
|
|
Post by Jimmydinho on Mar 30, 2006 16:46:58 GMT 10
wot the?
|
|
|
|
Post by honey soy on Mar 31, 2006 11:27:57 GMT 10
A few weeks ago some of us went to the launch of a photography film at the Entrance Cinema. There was a short lived thread advertising the event by a young Terrigal photographer. We were saying it was quite a bit ruder than the Britney sculpture as a young, lithe lady disrobed and posed in front of the curtain for about 7 minutes at the start. There was more nudity in the film but it was in context. It was a good film. Well done. The thing about the robe was my sis had to rush home to get a robe as the naked lady forgot to bring one, herself. |
|
|
|
Post by Jimmydinho on Mar 31, 2006 15:35:30 GMT 10
ha ha, ok. sounds odd
|
|
|
|
Post by voice of reason on Apr 4, 2006 16:16:53 GMT 10
Now I read that she was actually crowning; my previous visualisation was disturbing enough! Of course, while all perfectly natural it does seem challenging to call it art.
|
|
