It is not an intelligent, hot, elegant turn on. and I will always go for the weirder, hot chick w/ a brain who doesn't feel the need to be permantly tan, look like jlo (that shit is dumpy up close, I dated a few cheerleaders like that in 11th grade) nothing against their bodies, but really what gives? I have had these type of girls try to hang out in the hallway of my dorm room wanting to party etc. Most women are great, but w/ the onslaught of media hungry people ie: (I mean nothing if I'm not in print, on some cheap ass video, photo etc.) a lot of young women have been looking awfully desperate to be "seen" by someone, ANYONE! If they don't feel they can get a dick hard w/ obvious "put on sexuality" then they feel they don't rate.īooks seem to be a forgotten commodity these days, so does self respect. I mean, look, women who aren't totally airbrushed and/or anorexic and/or post-plastic-surgery and/or among the 0.01% most naturally gorgeous females on the planet! GROSS!!
It's a strange thing about the Internet, that it encourages people to hold each other (well, women, really) to ever more impossible standards of beauty. But the "eye" that judges these at-least-moderately-attractive women as "gross" - a description which, I think it's fair to say, is several levels below mere unattractiveness - is an "eye" that would regard at least 99% of the human race as ugly. I'm not saying these ladies are the most gorgeous female specimens on the face of the earth, but good grief, they aren't "dumpy" or "gross," either.
Marty, no offense, but you are so "that guy" who always says stuff like this about pictures of (at least reasonably) pretty women on the Internets. Posted by Brendan Loy on at 08:12 PM in Babes, Boobs & Sex Here is the offending photo, republished for your, uh, edification: Female students pretty much routinely walk around campus in their underwear! :)īut, you can judge for yourself. If something similar had happened at BYU or even Notre Dame, I'd understand, but c'mon: this is Arizona State we're talking about. It seems even more like an overreaction when you consider that ASU's reputation wasn't exactly squeaky-clean before this. (That said, Fox News reports that "the cheerleaders the photographs were a result of college kids goofing off, and they believe the decision to disband the team has been in the works for a while." Also, Fox says the photo is two years old.)Īccording to the aforelinked post about Courtney Cox/Simpson, ASU cheerleaders are required to sign a pledge that says, "I know that I am part of a team representing ASU and will therefore always try to present myself in the best interest of the university." Still, disbanding a 16-person squad for the actions of 6 members - particularly when those "actions" involved nothing worse than posing for a PG-13 photo - seems like a bit of an overreaction to me.
The stated reason for this change, according to The Dirty's paraphrasing of the alleged ASU e-mail? "ecent events of inappropriate behavior by the Cheer Squad (link to this post was enclosed in email)." Which will not be called the cheerleaders, but instead "Sparky's Crew." The only form of "cheer squad" that will remain is the megaphones and signs. It quotes, supposedly, an e-mail from ASU's Vice President of University Athletics, stating in part: NO cheer squad next year at ANY football, basketball or other sporting event games. Meanwhile, over at The Dirty, the post that started it all confirms that the underwear photo was indeed the ASU cheerleading squad's downfall. , if you didn't know, is a gossip blog that has recently become kind of a big deal, particularly in the sports world, due to its penchant for publishing compromising photos of athletes, including Alex Smith, Matt Leinart, Terrell Owens, Dan Majerle, and Matt Leinart again.Īnyway, The Big Lead has more on the cheerleader story, as does Fox News.
0 kommentar(er)
