| REGISTERIT'S FREE! |
 |
 |
 |
RECEIVE custom news |
 |
 |
TRACK your favorites |
 |
 |
BUILD your fan profile |
 |
 |
POST messages |
 |
| LOGIN | SIGN UP TODAY |
|
| Transformers |
 |
| Better eye candy- Megan Fox or The Robots
[1] 2 3 4 5 6 |
 |
| POSTED Wednesday, July 04, 2007 11:08:34 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Wednesday, July 04, 2007 11:16:08 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Wednesday, July 04, 2007 11:17:53 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 01:09:00 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 01:33:25 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 08:13:04 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 08:50:23 PM |
|
 |
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 09:27:04 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 10:25:22 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 11:07:51 PM |
|
lindoyle said: I'm a female and not at all attracted to other girls, so there's no way in hell she's better eye candy than a freaking Transformer. Still, my not being attracted to girls doesn't mean I don't see the pretty ones as pretty either. And Megan Fox well...I didn't find her all that appealing. Would she have been as hot if she wasn't showing any skin? Or are the guys only drooling at a little booty shake and a thin waistline? Of course I'm not a guy so I'll NEVER see an appeal from ANY woman (which is so fine by me lol) But I dunno, she's nothing compared to Scarlett Johannson or Jessica Alba, who I find extremely beautiful girls. I even thought the blonde girl in Transformers was much more pretty, probably because her character had more intellect. But still...her face was cuter, her hair, her accent. Why the buzz over Megan Fox? I mean seriously?
Well its obvious you won't understand. But she is absolutely smoking hot. Now I wont say she is gorgeus because I reserve that for the likes of Jennifer Love Hewitt and Jessica Biel. Jessica Alba is overrated, shes alright at best. Scarlett Johansen is beautiful though.
But Meghan Fox just has an excellent body. Decent sized top, very slender waist, and hips and booty to die for. Oh, and great legs! And as for me, she has a few tats and thats just hot. Not to mention the brunett hair with the blue eyes!
PSN - allan77 |
 |
Edit Reply w/Quote
|
 |
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 11:38:01 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Thursday, July 05, 2007 11:52:50 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 12:03:48 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 01:02:22 AM |
|
 |
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 01:21:05 AM |
|
lindoyle said: Hmm...let's see. You said:
allan_shizaar said:
Well its obvious you won't understand. But she is absolutely smoking hot....Meghan Fox just has an excellent body. Decent sized top, very slender waist, and hips and booty to die for. Oh, and great legs! And as for me, she has a few tats and thats just hot. Not to mention the brunett hair with the blue eyes!
And I said:
lindoyle said: Would she have been as hot if she wasn't showing any skin? Or are the guys only drooling at a little booty shake and a thin waistline?
I'd say I had a pretty good understanding on what was so "hot" to you guys. And I guess you already kinda answered my question too, what with all the praises of just her physical appearance. Am I to assume she wouldn't be as hot if she were more covered up? I'm guessing not, which means yeah, I can kinda understand guys. The more sweaty and exposed a shapely girl is, the hotter she is. But she'd be less hot if you couldn't see anything. I'd say I've got a handle on you guys haha.
Well the fact of the matter is, that any girl who is physically attractive and wears clothes that cover it up, will not be considered hot. Unless you already knew what she looked like. I would still feel the same about her if she was wearing tight pants and a tight shirt. But if she was wearing baggy clothes then obviously no.
What else can you expect?!
PSN - allan77 |
 |
Edit Reply w/Quote
|
 |
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 02:05:09 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 05:47:47 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 06:55:17 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 10:32:17 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 11:20:34 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Friday , July 06, 2007 11:38:43 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Saturday, July 07, 2007 03:43:04 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Saturday, July 07, 2007 07:04:01 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Saturday, July 07, 2007 02:25:37 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Saturday, July 07, 2007 10:21:57 PM |
|
 |
 |
| REPLIED Sunday , July 08, 2007 12:37:02 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Sunday , July 08, 2007 07:27:48 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Sunday , July 08, 2007 06:35:34 PM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Monday , July 09, 2007 01:09:34 AM |
|
 |
 |
| REPLIED Monday , July 09, 2007 01:19:54 AM |
|
 |
| REPLIED Monday , July 09, 2007 03:16:41 AM |
|
|
|
|