Dimrill wrote:
Am I the only person who prefers the "no minge show" option over "horribly held open and part-prolapsing" photogrumble? The suggestion is better that the predator's face in most cases.
I disagree here, because the concept behind most pictures where the girl is clearly naked but under instruction to conceal certain aspects of her nakedness but not others comes across as contrived in the extreme. It would take a special breed of pricktease as yet unconceived of by neither man nor womankind to sprawl naked and alluring and then say "well, you've seen my buttocks, off I go, bye!".
It's for related reasons that I found Lucy Pinder's continued employment in the "Cover of Nuts" industry staggering as she somehow managed to make a career of NOT showing her tits. I like pretty girls as much as the next man but this raft of magazines that survives on poorly written articles and the "phwoar, mate" aspect of "eight sizzling pages" of bored women naked but not revealing so much as a nipple, especially in the age of Lobstertube, hard to comprehend. Even with the crazed "oh, but I have to see HER bits" feeling, I can't understand how it's lasted so long in the face of proper porn online.