Skip to main content

Frocks, Frolics and Fotos

Taylor Swift...Classy AND sexy

31400FBF00000578-3448635-Dazzling_The_singer_who_performed_her_track_Out_Of_The_Woods_wor-a-102_1455588128618.jpg
 
Forget calling it "The Grammy Awards". They should change the name to "The Tacky Awards" because there are some seriously Tackorama outfits this year. :yuck:

Well I hope their singing is better than their dress sense.:singing:
 
GROOVER said:
Jesus, Mary and Joseph, wtf are they wearing? :eek:
Click to expand...
Is it just me or does the lighting on Taylor's bits make it all look a bit full and elongated, or is she just a fuller figured woman there? I guess I am used to seeing the dividing line in so many pictures in underpants and bathers that a smooth finish is a blessed relief. That doesn't sound good but hopefully you know what I mean :)
 
Khun Khun said:
Is it just me or does the lighting on Taylor's bits make it all look a bit full and elongated, or is she just a fuller figured woman there? I guess I am used to seeing the dividing line in so many pictures in underpants and bathers that a smooth finish is a blessed relief. That doesn't sound good but hopefully you know what I mean :)
Click to expand...
Taylor Swift is tall and thin so that outfit just excentuates her figure. She's definitely going commando in it. Not liking her 'Do' at the moment. Her haircut looks like a 6yrs old style.
 
GROOVER said:
Taylor Swift is tall and thin so that outfit just excentuates her figure. She's definitely going commando in it. Not liking her 'Do' at the moment. Her haircut looks like a 6yrs old style.
Click to expand...
I know she's tall and thin but her girl bits look fuller in that photo is what I mean.
 
Ok, from my perspective, her front on aspect of her vaginal/labial area looked fuller and more out there as opposed to those that just go back under on a more acute angle, possibly because of the lighting, possibly as it's her build. Was she not wanting contour to be showing? Oddly, I have a thing for looking for camel toe or the line separating the lips as I have seen many photos of models etc where that happens and it really isn't a good look. Same with the dots on shaved legs. Takes me back to seeing a close up of a leg in an Italian fashion magazine back in the 70s. I look for the more private things. Some women are 'fattier' there, others are 'minimal'. Does that make more sense? Very hard to explain.
 
Khun Khun said:
Ok, from my perspective, her front on aspect of her vaginal/labial area looked fuller and more out there as opposed to those that just go back under on a more acute angle, possibly because of the lighting, possibly as it's her build. Was she not wanting contour to be showing? Oddly, I have a thing for looking for camel toe or the line separating the lips as I have seen many photos of models etc where that happens and it really isn't a good look. Same with the dots on shaved legs. Takes me back to seeing a close up of a leg in an Italian fashion magazine back in the 70s. I look for the more private things. Some women are 'fattier' there, others are 'minimal'. Does that make more sense? Very hard to explain.
Click to expand...
I am screaming here at your post. :laugh: I love it. Hehe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top