Female Body Appreciation

Way too many rules and the last two images are of an ugly girl. 2/10 thread

>>17310797
>>17310794
>>17310792
More please and a name of you would.

>>17310800
You're free to look at threads of shitty mirror shots of 5/10's or close-ups of assholes.

>>17310801
Lapa from Amour Angels

>>17310853
sauce

>>17310853
what part of NO Body Mods did you not see, Faggot

>No tattoos, piercings, or other body modifications of any kind.

What a waste of a thread.

File: 007a.jpg (301KB, 807x1564px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 807x1564px

>>17310877
A degenerate fetish sounds like a personal problem to me.

File: 1482789288065.jpg (479KB, 737x1000px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 737x1000px

>>17310873
>large breasts are unnatural
Wew

OP has excellent taste; pls continue

>>17310880
>wew
Pretty sure he was referring to the piercing. And...

>No clothing or accessories
Looks like you fucked up again.

File: 008f.jpg (115KB, 508x761px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 508x761px

>>17310930
The face thing is probably the most important rule bro.

>>17310877
>tattoos, piercings, or other body modifications of any kind.

What a waste of a body

>>17310979
didn't she get pregnant? I feel like I heard she got pregnant.

>>17310976
Dayum

>>17310877
>>17310977
What are the odds

File: 013b.jpg (385KB, 1362x2048px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1362x2048px

>>17310979
>>17310992
I guess the no piercing rule is a little too strict. They are gorgeous.

File: 1387792773326.jpg (582KB, 1329x1925px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1329x1925px

>>17311011
Yes, it's hard to be able to spot one small piercing when I'm choosing the image anyway.

>>17311049
>tfw piss flaps stick to legs

File: 002a.jpg (145KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 800x1200px

>>17311051

>>17311062
>>17311066
Requesting more mulatto butts

>>17310845
Do you guys know her name? Please?

>>17311113
Debora A from Met-Art

>>17310800
>and the last two images are of an ugly girl.
You're fucked up if you think she's ugly my mang

File: 1466807583885.jpg (258KB, 1194x1500px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1194x1500px

Have some vintages.

>>17311133
>>17311135
>>17311139
kek how old are you?

File: 001.jpg (68KB, 801x1200px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 801x1200px

masha e

>>17310805
>>17310809
>>17310810
>>17310879
>>17310884

Name pls

>>17310787
Awesome.

File: 1486912404371.jpg (533KB, 1148x1800px) Image search: [Google]

533KB, 1148x1800px

<3

>>17311546
Her name is Melissa usually with Met-Art I think. She's pretty popular and had lots of stuff out there.

Also, this thread has gone to shit. So many navel piercing and tattoos. Quality over quantity people.

>>17311558
Perfect

>>17311133
amazing vintage blonde

>>17310879
>>>/pol/

>>17311696
/s/ is such a shitty board

>>17310787
>no emphasis on particular body parts
>entire body must be in focus
>first pictures have cut off legs
OP that can't stick to his own rules is shit OP

>>17311993
In focus not in frame dipshit.

>>17311998
if the entire body doesn't need to be in frame, then you can take a closeup pic of a goddamn belly button and it'll follow the same rationale.
or if you go the other way, torso is a body part, therefore you must include legs, otherwise you'll emphasise the torso. You've contradicting rules and all you can do is be a dick about it. People who can't use language in a comprehensible way shouldn't be allowed on the internet.

>>17312009
You're example is moot because it would 1) not include a clear, unobstructed shot of the face and 2) put emphasis on a particular body part. If anything it reinforces some of the other rules. The one rules I've broken so far is the piercing one. There's a chic with big tasteless earrings.

Name one photo were the focal point is the model's torso. I swear this board is full of 15 year olds who don't know about /gif/

>>17312018
the face rule is irrelevant, you're excluding a body part, which puts emphasis on the rest. If you don't like the belly button example, replace it with face. It'll satisfy the face rule and it wouldn't break the emphasis rule any more than any pic that cuts off the legs. Also if you divide the body into upper and lower, those pics clearly emphasise the upper part.

and if you can't find pics where the focal point is the torso, you might not know what focal point is.

if your rules were a program, it would crash in the first minutes of usage. Unfortunately for you, it's not a program and you can't fix it. You could acknowledge your mistake, but that would hurt your street cred or something, right?

>>17310797
Shes like a ghoul, shes perfect!

I love strange pale women like these.

>>17312030
If there's a picture of a face it would put emphasis on the face, right? It would also defeat the purpose of this thread with the subject Female Body Appreciation. What you're arguing about is trivial at best anyway.

>if your rules were a program
This just proves your autistic because humans are critical thinkers, not machines. I'm not an artist and I created those rules in less than 10 minutes. I created them to help posters know what I'm looking for. I didn't create them to be analyzed by some autistic sperg.

>>17312036
if you read instead of just skimming, you wouldn't have had to resort to silly buzzwords, but since you apparently have an attention span of a dog, I'll leave you be.

If 10 minutes is the rough time value you felt closest to the time you spent making up those rules (a critical human being would), that says something..
so does fact that you're analysing the rules at the same time as saying they're not to be analysed.

>>17312042
I sincerely hope you are trolling dude.

>>17312047
while originally I didn't want to, reactions like that usually trigger this.

although I still think pictures with cut off legs have nothing to do in a thread which appreciates the female body - you can't appreciate something if you don't see a third of it.

>>17312056
If that were the case there would only be a handful of pictures. It's hard enough to find ones without piercings or tattoos. When places like Met-Art get a 10/10 model they spend half the time taking high-res closeups of her butthole.

>>17312058
fair enough, I guess.. it definitely is better than most of the threads, that's for sure
>came to fap
>reached consensus instead
feels good

File: 1461257580993.jpg (1MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2000px

>>17311696
>telling someone posting sexy, beautiful women to get off /s/ while contributing nothing

KYS, you're the cancer killing /s/.

>>17311019
any one have anymore of her or name ?

>>17310933
> The face thing is probably the most important rule bro.

> Posts picture that doesn't show face

Holy Christ this thread is an aspy-shit-fit.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder not someone with a kinky fetish as some on this post appear to believe and think

>>17311982
It's all of the dick shriveling blandness of Playboy without the articles.

this is a good thread. I'm against the tattoo/piercing embargo but can get behind the rest of it.

>>17310787
sauce on OP?

>>17314801
Muriel Hegre

>>17312032
lel

>>17310800
Thats what a real girl looks like, virgin. Go back to /hm/

>>17310880

Wow, I'm in love. More of her? Name?

>this much pure autism in one thread

File: 33825584_x-art_caprice_sexy_yoga_cutie-91-lrg.jpg (1MB, 4000x2667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x2667px

>>17311558
Is there a reason why people fuck with the color so much the model looks like a corpse? Necrophilia or something?

>>17310912
Mmm Guerlain

>>17310973
Name? More? Need more to Jack off to

>>17310873
it's going to be ok, we're all going to be ok

>>17310787
BASICALLY A http://www.kindgirls.com THREAD.

>>17310805
Ears have been pierced. Abandon thread

>>17310850
navel piercing

>>17310995
navel piercing

>>17316471
>>17316513
>>17316517
Butthurt numale detecting.

File: femjoy_110646_017.jpg (451KB, 2000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 2000x3000px

No one ever posts Kinga.

>>17317111
wow

>>17316748
No it's a different thing called satire.

File: 1293000823047.jpg (183KB, 2000x1303px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 2000x1303px

Good night!

>>17310976
Source?

>>17311014
Name? Please!

>>17313802
There were articles in playboy?! But somewhat agree.. I always find it funny people can't just go to a different fucking thread..like I don't care for chubbies, but I may go in a board with some just to see. Not shit post about how it's disgusting.If all us intelligent ones just ignored the autistic; they'd go away

>>17310945
What a cutie! Who is she?

>>17311626
Name, please!

>>17312009
the other guy is right, you are wrong

File: Erica_Campbell.jpg (196KB, 1150x1150px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1150x1150px

>>17320980

>>17320698
Kloe Kane

>>17311546
>>17311633
Melisa Mendiny or Mendini. One s. Also goes more rarely by the name Kristina Uhrinova.

>>17321003
December of what year?

>>17321288
Cynthia Myers, Miss December 1968.

>>17320987
this is 10/10 for me

>>17314934
unreal

>>17310787
Lots of photoshop, spraytan, silicone, liposuction. This is what you wanted?

>>17325273
>this enraged whale

lmao

real good thread. thanks y'all

>>17325273
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

>>17310994
Hory sheet

>>17311025
kyla cole, my first love. penthouse pet in like... 1999, stolen from the service station

File: 086.jpg (224KB, 1303x2000px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1303x2000px

one of my old favourites.

File: 008.jpg (162KB, 1303x2000px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1303x2000px

>>17329533

>>17320414
Anna Tatu

File: 004.jpg (160KB, 1303x2000px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1303x2000px

ah.. sweating my favourite

File: 0t3mqkh749zi.jpg (146KB, 1362x2048px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1362x2048px

>>17329533
one of my fave blondes

File: clelia-2-3560.jpg (174KB, 1338x1999px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1338x1999px

>>17329533
and my fave redhead

File: 71260CB9-7E37-4B81-A7C0-AA6665D9F9F4-14463-00000CA713C191D1_tmp.jpg (99KB, 1154x977px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1154x977px

>>17314934

Oh shit I knew I recognized that image. Found this one over on /aco/...yeah I was confused too.

>>17310800
Go be a degenerate elsewhere

>>17310994
1 in 77

>>17310800

You're from /b/ aren't you?

>>17311194

Okay this one looks like a different girls face was superimposed here.

File: 1484955817354.jpg (448KB, 1806x1465px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 1806x1465px

not sure if this one counts

File: 1484955946333.jpg (220KB, 1416x1300px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1416x1300px

not sure about this one either

File: 1482799171738.jpg (493KB, 686x1024px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 686x1024px

still not sure...

File: 14993370_10210675126424937_2726606920629372831_n.jpg (40KB, 500x673px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x673px

might count :D

File: 1475700735813.jpg (722KB, 1249x2592px) Image search: [Google]

722KB, 1249x2592px

must count...

>>17332057
>>17332058
>>17332065

How can you not be sure? You can read can't you?

>No clothing or accessories

Shirts, socks, shoes, and bikinis are clothing or accessories.

>>17333599
-50/10 would use to rekindle the fire

File: 51.jpg (561KB, 1067x2587px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 1067x2587px

>>17332066

File: 56.jpg (956KB, 2345x1944px) Image search: [Google]

956KB, 2345x1944px

>>17332066
>>17336633
I've been looking for more of her. What's her name?
>inb4 reverse image search
>sauce pulled up by reverse image search is down

File: ryonerr.jpg (456KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 1600x1200px

>>17329533
>>17329540
>>17329547
>>17329564
>>17329580
>>17333672
>>17333676

File: 106.jpg (1MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1944px

>>17336791
Wot?

File: VaHywhqg.jpg (199KB, 728x915px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 728x915px

>>17336791
Holy Jesus. Thank you anon.

>>17336791
stop browsing /s/ on your e-reader, dude

File: 1445124831528.jpg (330KB, 1064x1600px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 1064x1600px

>>17336612

File: 1482015471204.jpg (1MB, 2377x1549px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2377x1549px

>>17337605

>>17337608
I NEED a name. Please anons

File: 1471476617842.jpg (137KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1000x665px

>>17337608

File: 1482015376618.jpg (719KB, 1785x1753px) Image search: [Google]

719KB, 1785x1753px

>>17337631

>>17311079
She is 1/4 Black. We would be looking for a mixed Black like a Brazilian.

>>17336791
Why was this deleted?
It had imgur slash a slash dyDZm and 4PMbR
Is this compromising material or what?

>>17338046
pictures that aren't of women are against the rules

>>17337605
>>17337608
>>17337631
>>17337633
>No clothing or accessories.
>No excessive makeup.
>No tattoos, piercings, or other body modifications of any kind.
>No emphasis on particular body parts such as breasts, buttocks, or feet.

>>17310990
whats her name?

>>17340342
Anjelica boyd

Quite a shit thread, OP