I total get that the attemp. I'm saying how it that remotely valid or logical. Frankly it's an asinine stament. It the kind of thing someone says when they've lost an argument.
I total get that the attemp. I'm saying how it that remotely valid or logical. Frankly it's an asinine stament. It the kind of thing someone says when they've lost an argument.
Llllllllll wrote:
I total get that the attemp. I'm saying how it that remotely valid or logical. Frankly it's an asinine stament. It the kind of thing someone says when they've lost an argument.
That's something Hitler would say.
Pre or post the Syphilis really setting in?
As a man who's been with small and large breasted women, I would definitely say that big breasts give you a much more erotic sensation; they really turn on a man. A woman with small breasts usually has something else to compensate for their lack of breasts.
hominy wrote:
As a man who's been with small and large breasted women, I would definitely say that big breasts give you a much more erotic sensation; they really turn on a man. A woman with small breasts usually has something else to compensate for their lack of breasts.
Actually, I'm curious about this. Would you prefer big breasts to small Lolo ones, even if the the big ones were saggy with large areolas? It's quite rare to have large, "perfectly" formed breasts. I guess this is a highly personal preference...
IMHO, anybody who says that they don't find Lolo physically appealing is either lying, or prefers men.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
IMHO, anybody who says that they don't find Lolo physically appealing is either lying, or prefers men.
I've had them all and like them all. Variety is the spice of life. But, I'll take perfectly formed small over too large and not "perky".
Good things can come in all sizes. It's a cliche, but it happens to be true.
really? .. wrote:
hominy wrote:As a man who's been with small and large breasted women, I would definitely say that big breasts give you a much more erotic sensation; they really turn on a man. A woman with small breasts usually has something else to compensate for their lack of breasts.
Actually, I'm curious about this. Would you prefer big breasts to small Lolo ones, even if the the big ones were saggy with large areolas? It's quite rare to have large, "perfectly" formed breasts. I guess this is a highly personal preference...
If I had to pick between lolo jones with large saggy breasts or small mosquito bites, honestly I would prefer the large saggy breasts. S hit, I have a bigger chest than she does. Now, that's not to say that I love saggy large breasts; usually the women I date have very nice large breasts. It's not quite rare btw, you just haven't been with any girls who possess them.
Looks like my frequent times thinking about Kim Kardashian will now include Lolo and Kim .....
Lolo, oh Lolo. Please marry me.
MrPerfecto wrote:
Lol. She is more flattering because you can only see her from behind/side, thus hiding the tiny boobs and broad shoulders.
I can understand not liking the tiny boobs, but what's wrong with broad shoulders? She looks fantastic, but I prefer pics where she's smiling. She has a beautiful smile!
To whoever mentioned the weirdness of the fashion choice, the outfit is a nod to Leeloo from The Fifth Element. Lolo is like Leeloo?
http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/1ds3-3/leeloo-fifth-element.jpg
Sprintgeezer wrote:
IMHO, anybody who says that they don't find Lolo physically appealing is either lying, or prefers men.
Firstly, you NEVER offer a "humble" opinion. Secondly, I don't think anyone is saying she is ugly. But she is being put on a pedestal as an "Oh my GOD....SHE IS FREAKING HOT!!!" chick. And many, me included, don't agree with rating her as high as that.
I think she is overrated. I like boobs. I like curves. I don't like highly muscled, no-boobs-but-man-pecs-instead, broad-shouldered, man-abs, type chicks that much. You are used to staring at these types in the gyms (men and women) so maybe that is what works for you. I'd 100x rather have a south american super curvy, big booobed, round booty chick, with a LITTE fat on her. Now hold the phone, I am NOT saying fat, I am saying normal amount of fat for a woman. Pick out just about any chick marching in the Carnival celebration in Brazil, or hell, 95% of the younger chicks on a souther american or spanish beach, and I'd prefer them over lolo. Because they have FEMALE bodies.
Sometimes I do appreciate the extremely fit chicks, if they still have some curves on them. Lolo's body is too extreme version of this. And yes, while she has pretty eyes and a nice smile, there is even something slightly manly about face shape. She is either on the juice, or just has naturally high testosterone from training/genetics.
Bottom line: too manly.
(now would I turn her down if I was single and she wanted me. Of course not. Of course I've done less attractive chicks than her. I and others are simply saying: she isn't our preference, and not nearly as hot, in our opinions, as many of you seem to think. )
really? .. wrote:
Actually, I'm curious about this. Would you prefer big breasts to small Lolo ones, even if the the big ones were saggy with large areolas? It's quite rare to have large, "perfectly" formed breasts. I guess this is a highly personal preference...
This is pretty much the definition of a false dichotomy.
As Benny Hill once said, I would like to have carnival knowledge of her.
She looks like a Tranny.
Sir Lance-alot wrote:
Sprintgeezer wrote:IMHO, anybody who says that they don't find Lolo physically appealing is either lying, or prefers men.
Firstly, you NEVER offer a "humble" opinion. Secondly, I don't think anyone is saying she is ugly. But she is being put on a pedestal as an "Oh my GOD....SHE IS FREAKING HOT!!!" chick. And many, me included, don't agree with rating her as high as that.
I think she is overrated. I like boobs. I like curves. I don't like highly muscled, no-boobs-but-man-pecs-instead, broad-shouldered, man-abs, type chicks that much. You are used to staring at these types in the gyms (men and women) so maybe that is what works for you. I'd 100x rather have a south american super curvy, big booobed, round booty chick, with a LITTE fat on her. Now hold the phone, I am NOT saying fat, I am saying normal amount of fat for a woman. Pick out just about any chick marching in the Carnival celebration in Brazil, or hell, 95% of the younger chicks on a souther american or spanish beach, and I'd prefer them over lolo. Because they have FEMALE bodies.
Sometimes I do appreciate the extremely fit chicks, if they still have some curves on them. Lolo's body is too extreme version of this. And yes, while she has pretty eyes and a nice smile, there is even something slightly manly about face shape. She is either on the juice, or just has naturally high testosterone from training/genetics.
Bottom line: too manly.
(now would I turn her down if I was single and she wanted me. Of course not. Of course I've done less attractive chicks than her. I and others are simply saying: she isn't our preference, and not nearly as hot, in our opinions, as many of you seem to think. )
For a runner, she is quite hot. That means having a runner's body with low body fat, not curvy, and an angular face. But if you prefer the "non-runner" body, then she is not your type. But for those who like that type, she is definitely hot.
Party On wrote:
If Lolo was president, she'd be Baberaham Lincoln, but that outfit is just weird.
WE'RE NOT WORTHY!!
She needs breasts. Face is very nice, great body but she's totally flat chested. 7.5/10
