Post: #76

She should have stopped right in the middle. Not skinny nor weird looking.

Post: #77

Had I been born a black dude I'd be like:

Post: #78

(11-07-2018 07:24 PM)renotime Wrote:  Had I been born a low status and/or ghetto black dude I'd be like:

Fixed.

Post: #79

This is disgusting, that horse ass is definition of repulsiveness.
Why would she go from small/proper human ass to that morbidity?

Post: #80

Her instagram photos are photoshopped.

If you google it, she admits it.


God knows what this fat bitch really looks like.

Terrifying.

Post: #81

(11-08-2018 03:58 AM)mikado Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 07:24 PM)renotime Wrote:  Had I been born a low status and/or ghetto black dude I'd be like:

Fixed.

Kanye West is the top black dude in the world and Kim's ass is the size of an 18 wheeler.

Post: #82

(11-06-2018 10:17 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-06-2018 10:11 PM)Enoch Wrote:  I may get some hate but I love the right thickness in a woman.

https://www.instagram.com/iskra/?utm_source=ig_embed

If you would not absolutely destroy this you should get your T levels checked.

For men with more exotic tastes:

https://www.instagram.com/alexisenunes/?hl=en

^Seriously?

(11-06-2018 01:30 PM)PolymathGuru Wrote:  I'll ride both styles. She isn't a land whales by any means. It is a question of taste. I don't think the chubby chasers are part of her thirst base. The extra 10kg just means I gotta add 10kg of strength to my forearms, biceps, triceps and the back.

I wouldn't be ashamed by any means to walk around in public with her.

How the fuck is she not fat as shit to all you guys? Honestly dont get it

I swear this "thicc" wave worries me more than any "blue" wave.

Im going back to the 10 thread

Ever make a little piggy squeal? Don't knock it until you tried it.

Post: #83

(11-08-2018 08:33 PM)PolymathGuru Wrote:  

(11-06-2018 10:17 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-06-2018 10:11 PM)Enoch Wrote:  I may get some hate but I love the right thickness in a woman.

https://www.instagram.com/iskra/?utm_source=ig_embed

If you would not absolutely destroy this you should get your T levels checked.

For men with more exotic tastes:

https://www.instagram.com/alexisenunes/?hl=en

^Seriously?

(11-06-2018 01:30 PM)PolymathGuru Wrote:  I'll ride both styles. She isn't a land whales by any means. It is a question of taste. I don't think the chubby chasers are part of her thirst base. The extra 10kg just means I gotta add 10kg of strength to my forearms, biceps, triceps and the back.

I wouldn't be ashamed by any means to walk around in public with her.

How the fuck is she not fat as shit to all you guys? Honestly dont get it

I swear this "thicc" wave worries me more than any "blue" wave.

Im going back to the 10 thread

Ever make a little piggy squeal? Don't knock it until you tried it.

That's the same logic the dude in the pegging thread used.

No thanks son

Post: #84

She's ruined.

Post: #85

I can congratulate the gents who preferred the 54kg on-the-left version of a girl (or any slender babe for that matter), for you have an evolved, built-in, excellent mechanism for selecting the females of the highest reproductive potential. Waist to hip ratio isn't a capricious personal preference - it is a very well documented phenotypical marker of prime fecundity and overall health.

The further a female's WHR deviates from 0.7 ratio, the worse. Let me quote just one review article but for a curious man, there is plenty research articles published in estimable, scientific journals corroborating truthfulness of my perspective:

Women with high WHR (0.80 or higher) have significantly lower pregnancy rates than women with lower WHRs (0.70–0.79), independent of their BMIs [48]. Therefore, it appears that the lower pregnancy rate in women with high WHR, compared to women with low WHR, is due to a problem with embryo development and its viability.

In a remarkably ambitious study, worldwide WHRs in female depictions dating from the Upper Paleolithic to modern times were analyzed [75]. Measurements of female WHR were obtained from 330 photographs of artworks dating from 32,000 years (B.P.) to 1999 A.D. from Europe, Asia, America and Africa. Results show that, most frequently, WHR was depicted in the range of 0.6 to 0.7. The most important finding of this investigation is that female WHR depictions have remained relatively unchanged from the Upper Paleolithic to the present day. Taken together, this historical cross-cultural information affirms the claim that preference for low WHR is an adaptive design feature rather than an artefact of cultural influence.

The research summarized in this article validates the assertion that selection designed psychological mechanisms in humans to attend to bodily features that convey reliable information about phenotypic and genetic quality and to judge such bodily features as attractive. WHR is a reliable indicator of a woman’s various aspects of reproductive capacity (postpubertal premenopausal status, hormonal status and probability of conception and parity), early sign of pregnancy, potential parasite infestation and risk for various diseases. Given that WHR is a heritable trait, an ancestral man selecting a mate with low WHR would have assured his offspring of high quality maternal care (lower risk for diseases) and the genetic gift of good health.

If you have a strong preference for women whose WHR deviates substantially from 0.7 ratio, there's something to think about.

Bibliography: Singh, D. Female Mate Value at a Glance: Relationship of Waist-to-Hip Ratio to Health, Fecundity and Attractiveness. Neuroendocrinology Letters Special Issue, Suppl.4, Vol.23, December 2002.

Post: #86

(11-09-2018 10:46 AM)ksbms Wrote:  I can congratulate the gents who preferred the 54kg on-the-left version of a girl (or any slender babe for that matter), for you have an evolved, built-in, excellent mechanism for selecting the females of the highest reproductive potential. Waist to hip ratio isn't a capricious personal preference - it is a very well documented phenotypical marker of prime fecundity and overall health.

The further a female's WHR deviates from 0.7 ratio, the worse. Let me quote just one review article but for a curious man, there is plenty research articles published in estimable, scientific journals corroborating truthfulness of my perspective:

Women with high WHR (0.80 or higher) have significantly lower pregnancy rates than women with lower WHRs (0.70–0.79), independent of their BMIs [48]. Therefore, it appears that the lower pregnancy rate in women with high WHR, compared to women with low WHR, is due to a problem with embryo development and its viability.

In a remarkably ambitious study, worldwide WHRs in female depictions dating from the Upper Paleolithic to modern times were analyzed [75]. Measurements of female WHR were obtained from 330 photographs of artworks dating from 32,000 years (B.P.) to 1999 A.D. from Europe, Asia, America and Africa. Results show that, most frequently, WHR was depicted in the range of 0.6 to 0.7. The most important finding of this investigation is that female WHR depictions have remained relatively unchanged from the Upper Paleolithic to the present day. Taken together, this historical cross-cultural information affirms the claim that preference for low WHR is an adaptive design feature rather than an artefact of cultural influence.

The research summarized in this article validates the assertion that selection designed psychological mechanisms in humans to attend to bodily features that convey reliable information about phenotypic and genetic quality and to judge such bodily features as attractive. WHR is a reliable indicator of a woman’s various aspects of reproductive capacity (postpubertal premenopausal status, hormonal status and probability of conception and parity), early sign of pregnancy, potential parasite infestation and risk for various diseases. Given that WHR is a heritable trait, an ancestral man selecting a mate with low WHR would have assured his offspring of high quality maternal care (lower risk for diseases) and the genetic gift of good health.

If you have a strong preference for women whose WHR deviates substantially from 0.7 ratio, there's something to think about.

Bibliography: Singh, D. Female Mate Value at a Glance: Relationship of Waist-to-Hip Ratio to Health, Fecundity and Attractiveness. Neuroendocrinology Letters Special Issue, Suppl.4, Vol.23, December 2002.

Yeah but we aren't animals. That's not how it should be.

In this modern era, men shouldn't be attracted based on primal things like just looks and "waste to hip ratio" bull-shit.

It's the 21st century, you disgusting patriarchical (not a word, but I can picture a fem-tard using it) animal.

Post: #87

I wouldn't even speak to a girl with an ass that big, and I would not associate myself with a guy who had a girlfriend like that.

Post: #88

Brazil was full of these big asses when we visited for the olympics, I don't find it very attractive myself. Lots of them had tattoos on their flanks like they were horses or cattle. I'm not sure if we got the trend from them or if they got it from us. I only saw a handful of women out there that I'd consider attractive.

I've been with a few bigger girls, my game-ignorant past-self felt like that were the best I'd ever get. It looks fun to grab but it smells bad, moves slow and doesn't age well. The fat ones don't like to dance or go swimming or do much fun stuff at all apart from screen viewing. They carry all these mental complexes about their bodies, they oppose your efforts to self improve, they dont have anything interesting to say. I'll never date another fat girl again, I'd rather be alone. By all means squeeze a pair of fat tits if you like, it can be fun. Don't relationship those girls though, not worth it.

I like the thin one better, I'd still hit the big one though.

Post: #89

(11-09-2018 10:46 AM)ksbms Wrote:  If you have a strong preference for women whose WHR deviates substantially from 0.7 ratio, there's something to think about.

Yeh, WHR of 0.7 is probably the ideal for reproduction. I'm speculating here but what could be happening is something akin to the 'Cheesecake' analogy that I remember Stephen Pinker talking about.

The male brain is looking for markers that say: slimmer waist and wider hips. The opposite of this (slim hips, wide waist) is definitively unapealling. So when a man sees wide hips and slim waists this pushes a pleasure button in their brain. The mechanism is a discrete function, like binary code in a computer. Either on or off.

It's possible that some men just don't regulate this mechanism as much. For them, the wider the hips and slimmer the waist the better!

Cheesecake didn't exist in nature or the ancestral environment but it contains all the stuff that hits the pleasure buttons: fats and sugars. These things (fats and sugars) individually in the ancestral environment were healthy and useful but combined together in the extreme combination found in cheesecake become deadly in 21st century. Because some people can't regulate and refrain from the dopamine hit they get from them.

As I said I'm just conjecturing here for lols... But perhaps, in some men, the Kardashian arse works on the brain the same way that cheesecake does. It's not healthy because it's not the ideal for reproduction -- but it sure feels good to them.

Post: #90

(11-08-2018 08:51 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-08-2018 08:33 PM)PolymathGuru Wrote:  

(11-06-2018 10:17 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-06-2018 10:11 PM)Enoch Wrote:  I may get some hate but I love the right thickness in a woman.

https://www.instagram.com/iskra/?utm_source=ig_embed

If you would not absolutely destroy this you should get your T levels checked.

For men with more exotic tastes:

https://www.instagram.com/alexisenunes/?hl=en

^Seriously?

(11-06-2018 01:30 PM)PolymathGuru Wrote:  I'll ride both styles. She isn't a land whales by any means. It is a question of taste. I don't think the chubby chasers are part of her thirst base. The extra 10kg just means I gotta add 10kg of strength to my forearms, biceps, triceps and the back.

I wouldn't be ashamed by any means to walk around in public with her.

How the fuck is she not fat as shit to all you guys? Honestly dont get it

I swear this "thicc" wave worries me more than any "blue" wave.

Im going back to the 10 thread

Ever make a little piggy squeal? Don't knock it until you tried it.

That's the same logic the dude in the pegging thread used.

No thanks son

I was being glib.

But seriously, what kind of fuck nut would be into pegging.

Post: #91

Honestly I much prefer the girl when she was skinny. However I think NZ has dumpstered my standards, I still WB the fatty.

Post: #92

Most of you don't have the equipment for the big ass version, so you are forced to hate it.

Post: #93

(11-10-2018 02:11 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  Most of you don't have the equipment for the big ass version, so you are forced to hate it.

Shots fired!

Post: #94

Fake. Her ass looks 10kg heavier, tits exactly the same as 54kg version. Doesn’t compute

I blame Sir Mix A Lot, Big Sean, Nicki Minaj, The Kardashians, Tyga and Drake most of all

Post: #95

(11-09-2018 03:07 PM)PolymathGuru Wrote:  But seriously, what kind of fuck nut would NOT* be into pegging.

Fixed that for you

Post: #96

(11-10-2018 02:11 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  Most of you don't have the equipment for the big ass version, so you are forced to hate it.

Post: #97

(11-10-2018 02:11 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  Most of you don't have the equipment for the big ass version, so you are forced to hate it.

I can lift 64kg easy

Post: #98

Neither looks amazing but the first version looks boring as fuck. Who wants to bang a chick with a hip:waist ratio of 1?

I'd take the one with the ass injections if you could put the 18 year old skin on it(the 28 year old skin looks a little bit lived in), assuming she still has the flat stomach without photoshop.

Post: #99

64kg but she is on her way to 84kg by this time next yr

Post: #100

WNB. And yeah, I agree with Atlanta Man that ass is probably somehow enhanced - proportions just aren't natural.

Gravity and father time will reveal all in a few short years. By then, pity the beta who wifes her up.