Post: #26

It's because of kids - no amount of genetic gift or fitness dedication can make up for it. It does some fucked up shit to the body when you crap out a little yard ape or have your belly slashed open to rip out a 10 lb tumor.
A couple years ago I was fuck buddies with a Russian doctor who was 42. Never married, no kids, sort of a female red pill gal. Extremely cynical, so we got along great. She was a committed to fitness and very into yoga. She had a great body, face, flat ripped stomach, and was an excellent and enthusiastic bang - a solid 7. She makes my top ten list and looked better than most women years younger.
Granted, it's a small sample size. But my theory is that a childless woman with good genetics, and a dedication to fitness can survive the wall up until 50 or so, and remain thoroughly bangable. It may even go beyond 50, but I have no direct experience at that age point, and think it's too far from my oldest (42) for me to extrapolate.

Post: #27

WB inside the universe of photoshop

Post: #28

For a beautiful woman hitting the wall is the equivalent to a rich man losing most of his wealth and ending up begging for change by the corner.

Post: #29

(02-15-2015 06:46 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  It's because of kids - no amount of genetic gift or fitness dedication can make up for it. It does some fucked up shit to the body when you crap out a little yard ape or have your belly slashed open to rip out a 10 lb tumor.
A couple years ago I was fuck buddies with a Russian doctor who was 42. Never married, no kids, sort of a female red pill gal. Extremely cynical, so we got along great. She was a committed to fitness and very into yoga. She had a great body, face, flat ripped stomach, and was an excellent and enthusiastic bang - a solid 7. She makes my top ten list and looked better than most women years younger.
Granted, it's a small sample size. But my theory is that a childless woman with good genetics, and a dedication to fitness can survive the wall up until 50 or so, and remain thoroughly bangable. It may even go beyond 50, but I have no direct experience at that age point, and think it's too far from my oldest (42) for me to extrapolate.

When women have kids young like they are supposed to nature will tighten them back up. There are tons of single mothers who blasted out anonymous spawns at 18, when you fast forward to them at 23, you had no idea they had a kid.

Did you know that a female can loose ALL of her baby weight by just breastfeeding her child. Nature isn't stupid. Nature knows it has to get that woman back in fit shape so she can be persued again for mating.

Its when women start having kids past thier fertile crescent/peak. The body will give women less and less resources to spring back the older she is. For Cindy Crawford having her kids at 33 and 35 is hardly in her most fertile window and thus her body likely never sprung back.

Her body looks like it has been ravashed by to much cardio, running, and to much sun exposure. To be honest, I always though she was overrated. Hyped up when Canadian and Euro girls were taking the shine in that industry. She always looked like a dog to me, never thought she was hot.

Post: #30

(02-15-2015 09:27 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(02-15-2015 06:46 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  It's because of kids - no amount of genetic gift or fitness dedication can make up for it. It does some fucked up shit to the body when you crap out a little yard ape or have your belly slashed open to rip out a 10 lb tumor.
A couple years ago I was fuck buddies with a Russian doctor who was 42. Never married, no kids, sort of a female red pill gal. Extremely cynical, so we got along great. She was a committed to fitness and very into yoga. She had a great body, face, flat ripped stomach, and was an excellent and enthusiastic bang - a solid 7. She makes my top ten list and looked better than most women years younger.
Granted, it's a small sample size. But my theory is that a childless woman with good genetics, and a dedication to fitness can survive the wall up until 50 or so, and remain thoroughly bangable. It may even go beyond 50, but I have no direct experience at that age point, and think it's too far from my oldest (42) for me to extrapolate.

When women have kids young like they are supposed to nature will tighten them back up. There are tons of single mothers who blasted out anonymous spawns at 18, when you fast forward to them at 23, you had no idea they had a kid.

Did you know that a female can loose ALL of her baby weight by just breastfeeding her child. Nature isn't stupid. Nature knows it has to get that woman back in fit shape so she can be persued again for mating.

Its when women start having kids past thier fertile crescent/peak. The body will give women less and less resources to spring back the older she is. For Cindy Crawford having her kids at 33 and 35 is hardly in her most fertile window and thus her body likely never sprung back.

Her body looks like it has been ravashed by to much cardio, running, and to much sun exposure. To be honest, I always though she was overrated. Hyped up when Canadian and Euro girls were taking the shine in that industry. She always looked like a dog to me, never thought she was hot.

Women who use children as their excuse to why they are fat are just being lazy. Breastfeeding burns something over 500 calories a day. If a woman just has a normal diet at her BMR and breastfeeds her child like nature intended, she will lose all the weight she gained from the pregnancy. This doesnt even take into account that she should be exercising like all human beings should be doing.

Post: #31

Quote from the first Cindy Crawford article that came up in Google:
"An unretouched photo of Cindy Crawford has been circulating on Twitter this morning, revealing a body that defies expectations—it is real, it is honest, and it is gorgeous."

Post: #32

Only somebody with a mild mental illness would dress up in that outfit and still think they look hot. All for her to "feel" sexy dressed like that, but looking sexy? Far from it.

Many atheletes retire when they can't perform at thier topevels. Becauae thier drive and ego won't let them not be the best. They then walk away.

Emmit Smith told the story about how he still wanted to play after the Cowboys wouldn't give him a new deal with a promise to start. He went to Arizona and still put up almost 1000 yards at age 35 in his final year. But he said be cried when the team went to Dallas and the first time in his life, in that stadium he had to get ready in the opposing locker room. He said he cried for almost all of pregame and he realized then he made a mistake and should of walked away from the game. He said that he would keep playing until somebody else could take the starting job from him. None of the kids did, but his heart was not in it. He walked after fulfilling his two year contract and then retired a Cowboy.

There is nothing wrong with pride. But even Emmit admitted in his story he would of likely been beat a new hungry running back behind him. He barely beat him out in camp and new the young kid could only get better, while he was fighting with diminishing skills.

So there is pride that keeps you in the game, but the reality of it all has to come through. For Cindy Crawford we see the pride of her still doing photoshoots at her age. But the reality is she is not sexy anymore. A old woman isn't looked on for her looks. Her pride should come from talking about her experincss as a super model, a mother. A business woman, that should give her fulfillment and pride. But since she rejects reality she still thinks she can dress in clothes like she is 19 again.

For athletes the reality is too real. The pain and soreness is more intense. And the work to get to game shape gets more grueling. It gets to be not worth it as your feel it daily. Only a delusional athlete would keep going only by force (the need for money), no athlete in a nlrmal setting would put him self through all that if it wasn't needed, or something he felt he could do honestly.

Post: #33

(02-15-2015 06:46 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  But my theory is that a childless woman with good genetics, and a dedication to fitness can survive the wall up until 50 or so, and remain thoroughly bangable.

If women with good genetics have no children to remain bangable in their twilight years, my future great-grandchildren will only have fuglies to bang. Think of the children!

Post: #34

(02-15-2015 11:56 AM)kosko Wrote:  So there is pride that keeps you in the game, but the reality of it all has to come through. For Cindy Crawford we see the pride of her still doing photoshoots at her age. But the reality is she is not sexy anymore. A old woman isn't looked on for her looks. Her pride should come from talking about her experincss as a super model, a mother. A business woman, that should give her fulfillment and pride. But since she rejects reality she still thinks she can dress in clothes like she is 19 again.

For athletes the reality is too real. The pain and soreness is more intense. And the work to get to game shape gets more grueling. It gets to be not worth it as your feel it daily. Only a delusional athlete would keep going only by force (the need for money), no athlete in a nlrmal setting would put him self through all that if it wasn't needed, or something he felt he could do honestly.

The difference is, an athlete that's past his prime isn't going to get a pass. If he can no longer perform, he's out of there. Sports is as meritocratic as it gets. If you can't perform, you can't play.

With Cindy Crawford, she can put up a nasty photo like this and have millions of women(and their white knight cohorts) lavishing her with praise for being "a real woman". Nobody is going to give a 40 year old, fumbling athlete a "you go boy" pass. No matter how bad a woman looks, there's no shortage of female peers and white knights ready to lift her ego.

Post: #35

^^So true. For some women there really is no Wall, only speed bumps.

Post: #36

(02-15-2015 09:37 AM)The Reactionary Tree Wrote:  

(02-15-2015 09:27 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(02-15-2015 06:46 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  It's because of kids - no amount of genetic gift or fitness dedication can make up for it. It does some fucked up shit to the body when you crap out a little yard ape or have your belly slashed open to rip out a 10 lb tumor.
A couple years ago I was fuck buddies with a Russian doctor who was 42. Never married, no kids, sort of a female red pill gal. Extremely cynical, so we got along great. She was a committed to fitness and very into yoga. She had a great body, face, flat ripped stomach, and was an excellent and enthusiastic bang - a solid 7. She makes my top ten list and looked better than most women years younger.
Granted, it's a small sample size. But my theory is that a childless woman with good genetics, and a dedication to fitness can survive the wall up until 50 or so, and remain thoroughly bangable. It may even go beyond 50, but I have no direct experience at that age point, and think it's too far from my oldest (42) for me to extrapolate.

When women have kids young like they are supposed to nature will tighten them back up. There are tons of single mothers who blasted out anonymous spawns at 18, when you fast forward to them at 23, you had no idea they had a kid.

Did you know that a female can loose ALL of her baby weight by just breastfeeding her child. Nature isn't stupid. Nature knows it has to get that woman back in fit shape so she can be persued again for mating.

Its when women start having kids past thier fertile crescent/peak. The body will give women less and less resources to spring back the older she is. For Cindy Crawford having her kids at 33 and 35 is hardly in her most fertile window and thus her body likely never sprung back.

Her body looks like it has been ravashed by to much cardio, running, and to much sun exposure. To be honest, I always though she was overrated. Hyped up when Canadian and Euro girls were taking the shine in that industry. She always looked like a dog to me, never thought she was hot.

Women who use children as their excuse to why they are fat are just being lazy. Breastfeeding burns something over 500 calories a day. If a woman just has a normal diet at her BMR and breastfeeds her child like nature intended, she will lose all the weight she gained from the pregnancy. This doesnt even take into account that she should be exercising like all human beings should be doing.

This. You and Kosko earned post of the day for me.

I had to fight off so many female family members and other women trying to tell my wife to stop breast feeding it wasn't funny. It was extremely unpleasant to deal with to be completely honest.

Fast forward to today, everyone is shocked how my wife is not only back to her original shape, but she is even 4 pounds less than when she told me she was pregnant.

God and nature has a plan, if the women are not too lazy to do the work and breast feed the baby. Having kids at a young age puts them in a better position to maintain a nicer figure longer into their lifespans and prevents cysts from forming on their ovaries. I recall reading something years ago about younger mothers less likely to develop ovarian cancer as well.

Post: #37

^ If you've ever worked in an office environment with women who are pregnant, that shit is infuriating. "I'm eating for two"...yeah, but the other person is about the size of a fucking CD.

Post: #38

(02-15-2015 03:35 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  This. You and Kosko earned post of the day for me.

I had to fight off so many female family members and other women trying to tell my wife to stop breast feeding it wasn't funny. It was extremely unpleasant to deal with to be completely honest.

Fast forward to today, everyone is shocked how my wife is not only back to her original shape, but she is even 4 pounds less than when she told me she was pregnant.

God and nature has a plan, if the women are not too lazy to do the work and breast feed the baby. Having kids at a young age puts them in a better position to maintain a nicer figure longer into their lifespans and prevents cysts from forming on their ovaries. I recall reading something years ago about younger mothers less likely to develop ovarian cancer as well.

Heh - it reminds me of the fact that there are still some MDs around who claim that breast feeding can be 100% replaced by formula. Thankfully many doctors know that it's bullshit. They even recently found that breast milk has substantial cancer fighting properties and contains more nutrients than we can possibly create artificially at our current technological level.

Women should breastfeed at least for 12 to 24 month.

It is not without merit that some feminists have advocated for baby boys to receive formula as to balance their privilege - evil slags.

Post: #39

Quote:An UNRETOUCHED photo of Cindy Crawford surfaced on Twitter

ONOES!!!11!!!

My world is crumbling!!!11!!!

Really guys, who gives a fuck? You expected one model from 20-30 years back to look good forever?

The question is, why should we care? There are millions of incredibly hot, young women out there. Lets talk about them and how to get them into bed, not about washed up former models.

Post: #40

The sun damage is obvious. Not sure what those hollows are by her pussy and inside her thighs. Given all that, I would still do her for old times sake.

Post: #41

Man, this shit is depressing even for my cynical "there are no consequences" for women worldview.

Quote:Really guys, who gives a fuck? You expected one model from 20-30 years back to look good forever?

The question is, why should we care? There are millions of incredibly hot, young women out there. Lets talk about them and how to get them into bed, not about washed up former models.

It's not that we care she is old. It's that she gets the pussy pass from so many people which is simply appalling.

Post: #42

You know it used to be an honorable thing for girls to grow into older women. It just seems like women are all buying into the "Forever 21" bullshit. Women are most beautiful to look at when they're young and in their sexual prime not after they've been devoured by time. Please make this craziness stop.

Post: #43

(02-15-2015 03:55 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  I'm not nearly as put off by the photo as I am with all the You-Go-Girlism surrounding the photo. This story has gone viral on Facebook and there are even quite a few white knights chiming in about how they are tired of women being oppressed by beauty standards. Who are these clowns trying to fool. As if they wouldn't prefer to fuck a 23 year old Crawford over the current one. These white knights disgust me.

She was once at the apex of beauty, she made millions off her looks. She had a nice run and can live comfortably for the rest of her life. Her time has gone however and she needs to gracefully accept that fact and go quietly. Nobody wants to see a middle-aged wrinkly body. I don't give a damn if she represents "a real woman". Her wrinkled, leathery skin is better kept out of sight. What's next at this point? Here's a "real" woman too, and probably what Crawford will look like in 10 years:

Madonna in 3 years

Post: #44

More ridiculous comments...

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/nation-n.../23469947/

Post: #45

(02-15-2015 10:36 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  You know it used to be an honorable thing for girls to grow into older women. It just seems like women are all buying into the "Forever 21" bullshit. Women are most beautiful to look at when they're young and in their sexual prime not after they've been devoured by time. Please make this craziness stop.

I agree, an under 40s woman doesn't seem to be able to connect the dots with old age.

1. That judgemental and bitchy shrew of an old lady usually only exists or is tolerated because she has a husband with her/supporting her.

2. That revered, sweet and kind old woman that everyone wishes was their grandmother and has entire churches rushing to her aid and praying for her if she falls and breaks her hip gets that kind of social pull because she is a kind and selfless old lady, not because she is powerful or even once was hot.

Once the looks are gone, kindness, a motherly attitude and selflessness are what matters to being a relevant woman. Today's pre-menopausal woman doesn't get that.

Post: #46

(02-15-2015 10:19 PM)Samseau Wrote:  It's not that we care she is old. It's that she gets the pussy pass from so many people which is simply appalling.

Do you care about those "so many people"?

Do you mind them giving her a "pussy pass"? Was it YOUR pussy pass they gave away?

Does that people have any influence over the life you chose for yourself?

Discussions about the sun damage of former celebrities belong in celebrity magazines, to be read by bored housewives or gossipy hairdressers.

Post: #47

(02-15-2015 03:51 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  After photoshop it looks presentable:





Now she is getting the full brunt and ridicule of the internet, although the feminine imperative will cover for her claiming she is against ageism and so brave.

What's so brave about a 48 year old hamster who still wants to be seen as sexy as at age 19?

Most of her fellow models of that time have retired in grace and are now enjoying their families. Will she try to sex it up at age 60?

Women should never smoke cigars. Might as well be wearing a strap-on at that point in terms of complete and utter turn off. (The paint-on-weddding-dress bitch and her friends were smoking cigars too.)

Post: #48

What a shame. Was one of my first fap memories as a teen.

Post: #49

Here the full pic used in the magazine:

   

Post: #50

(02-17-2015 07:52 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  What a shame. Was one of my first fap memories as a teen.

Yep, me too. Which is why I'd assumed she had retired by now, because my first fap wasn't exactly recent.