"Kshama Sawant, socialist Seattle city council member" - didn't even want to see the picture after that.

(01-08-2014 01:43 AM)LeBeau Wrote:  

If she put the fishnets on, then absolutely.

(01-08-2014 09:26 AM)LeBeau Wrote:  Upon further research.... yes it seems to be.

I just saw that pic on a random site with busty chicks, was curious where people draw the line on thick girls.

I guess she's like a cosplay or comic convention girl?

Yea she is, I would hit it most definitely

(01-08-2014 01:43 AM)LeBeau Wrote:  

Yeah I would hit that. Saying that I would have sex with quite a few girls of here so maybe my standards are just low in general.

(01-08-2014 02:23 PM)tylerdurden1993 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:43 AM)LeBeau Wrote:  

Yeah I would hit that. Saying that I would have sex with quite a few girls of here so maybe my standards are just low in general.

That face is ugly. No way.

^ Liar

No, I'm totally not into that look at all. I like to see ribs too.

So there is a knock on the door, you open it, and there is this gal with a box of condoms and a gallon of lube.

"Nah thanks, Im good"

"Yeah come in, bedroom is over there"

(01-08-2014 06:30 PM)germanico Wrote:  So there is a knock on the door, you open it, and there is this gal with a box of condoms and a gallon of lube.

"Nah thanks, Im good"

"Yeah come in, bedroom is over there"

I might change my mind if I could see her with all the make-up painted on, but until then she's a completely unappetizing mess.

I've turned down better offers with that, lube included.

What is wrong with you people, fuck no. NO FATTIES.

Standards, they are your friends.

Not too much wrong with that Indian politician. WB, definitely.

(01-08-2014 08:15 PM)kerouac Wrote:  

You're supposed to make it a borderline decision!!! LOL

NO.

Alright so that last pic of the chick in black costume and top hat sparked some discussion, interesting seeing the diff. opinions...

I would agree the red head hot dog blob is disgusting and can easily be dismissed, without a second thought.


Next balcony on deck:

She has a rare medical condition that prevents her body from storing fat.

Bright side: She has zero percent body fat, and if you married her, you'd never have to worry about her turning into an obese landwhale

Downside: she has also been labeled as the "world's ugliest woman".

http://www.ibtimes.com/lizzie-velasquez-...eo-1530714

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Vel%C3%A1squez

^ I thought this thread was about either the lowest you'd go, or what would be borderline for most guys.

Clearly the world's ugliest woman just fucks up the bell curve if you'd be willing to hit that.

Personally having to scroll down past that just made me:

^^I'm afraid I would physically hurt her. No.

(01-08-2014 11:54 PM)LeBeau Wrote:  

Alright so that last pic of the chick in black costume and top hat sparked some discussion, interesting seeing the diff. opinions...

I would agree the red head hot dog blob is disgusting and can easily be dismissed, without a second thought.


Next balcony on deck:

As a breast man, without a doubt

(01-08-2014 07:28 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

What is wrong with you people, fuck no. NO FATTIES.

Standards, they are your friends.

I don't classify her as a fatty. Personally, I prefer a girl with some padding rather than someone I can pop a chest tube into from across the room because I can see the spaces between her ribs so plainly. If her chest looks like a damn xylophone, generally it's a turn off. I actually told a decent looking girl when I was in the Air Force to "gain about 10-20 lbs and we'll talk".

(01-07-2014 12:31 PM)kerouac Wrote:  

Yes, repeatedly and without hesitation. That's about a 7.5 or 8 in my book but obviously I am using a different scale than most on here.

[/quote]

As a breast man, without a doubt
[/quote]

With those tits, I would not even blink...

(01-09-2014 02:36 AM)internationalscientist45 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 07:28 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

What is wrong with you people, fuck no. NO FATTIES.

Standards, they are your friends.

I don't classify her as a fatty. Personally, I prefer a girl with some padding rather than someone I can pop a chest tube into from across the room because I can see the spaces between her ribs so plainly. If her chest looks like a damn xylophone, generally it's a turn off. I actually told a decent looking girl when I was in the Air Force to "gain about 10-20 lbs and we'll talk".

Your choice of terminology doesn't change the fact that padding = fat. Therefore, you like moderate fatties.

(01-09-2014 02:40 AM)internationalscientist45 Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 12:31 PM)kerouac Wrote:  

Yes, repeatedly and without hesitation. That's about a 7.5 or 8 in my book but obviously I am using a different scale than most on here.

You're standards border on troll.

(01-08-2014 11:54 PM)LeBeau Wrote:  Next balcony on deck:

I would just to see those unleashed. They look impossible.

(01-09-2014 04:19 PM)redpillrage33 Wrote:  I would just to see those unleashed. They look impossible.

Dominican Poison...

(01-09-2014 11:27 AM)Laner Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:40 AM)internationalscientist45 Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 12:31 PM)kerouac Wrote:  

Yes, repeatedly and without hesitation. That's about a 7.5 or 8 in my book but obviously I am using a different scale than most on here.

You're standards border on troll.

Why is that? How is simply not liking the same thing you do "bordering on troll"? Did I miss something here?

Quote:Your choice of terminology doesn't change the fact that padding = fat. Therefore, you like moderate fatties.

Fair enough and that is not something I would disagree with. I just don't choose to use the term "fatty" to describe a woman who still has a decent figure. It should, at least in my opinion, be reserved for women who look like a Coke can instead of a Coke bottle. Like I said, to each and to their own and I'm more than willing to wing a "moderate fatty" for anyone on this forum so they can get the skinnier friend. Fair enough?