| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
SeedK (0)
|
Imagination kicks in. :)
|
12-01-10 12:26am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
tangub (0)
|
Yes it's nude...just not sexually explicit
|
12-01-10 12:34am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Lionheart (0)
|
Well if she is naked that you can not argue that she is 100% nude
|
12-01-10 04:13am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
lk2fireone (0)
|
What are these "good parts" that are not being shown?
You want to stick a speculum up her vagina or anus to see them?
|
12-01-10 09:48am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
turboshaft (0)
|
REPLY TO #4 - lk2fireone :
I'm sure for some that's the criterion. Most Playboy centerfolds could be considered fully nude even the photos are not explicit (and as long as jewelry doesn't count).
I believe R-rated films can show 100% naked fully nude but not "good parts" fully nude--no boners, no pink, no stink--and I'm sure the vast majority of directors don't even think of challenging that.
And it's also the difference between the artsy nude sites that so many like here at PU and the harder girls-only "good parts" ones.
|
12-01-10 11:54am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Capn (0)
|
Yes it is.
It is what I would refer to as coy nudity, as opposed to explicit.
Cap'n. :0)
|
12-01-10 12:34pm
Reply To Message
|
7
|
rearadmiral (0)
|
While I usually watch b/g hardcore, I have to admit enjoying "coy nudity" (thanks for the phrase Capn).
|
12-01-10 01:36pm
Reply To Message
|
8
|
Capn (0)
|
REPLY TO #7 - rearadmiral :
Coy nudity is really part of the tease. ;0)
Cap'n. :0)
|
12-01-10 03:01pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
Well, she could be a contortionist and have herself all packed up like a suitcase, but if she'd "bare nekkid nude," then it's fully so.
I like it when they're fully, ass-tastic nude, m'self. Now I supposed I'll have to define that.
Well, did you see today's Twistys set of Brigitte Hunter? That would serve as a good example, especially pics 70 to 77.
|
12-01-10 05:03pm
Reply To Message
|
10
|
pat362 (0)
|
I had to pick no because there wasn't an option for "it depends". I think that if you don't see every good parts then can't you truly say that the model is all nude. Yes, it's quite possible that she is but then again she might not. Our mind start to imagine and that's not necessarily a bad thing but I prefer that if the term topless or all nude is used then you should see what the term implies. I've noticed the use of the term topless used quite often in the last few years and when you see the image then the breast are hidden by an arm, hands or anything so basically you don't see anything except an outline.
Playboy has used jewelery in some imaginative ways to limit what you see.
|
12-01-10 06:40pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
RustyJ (Suspended)
|
Yes, by definition
|
12-02-10 02:53am
Reply To Message
|
12
|
rearadmiral (0)
|
REPLY TO #8 - Capn :
Agreed. And sometimes (maybe a lot of the time) the tease is the best part.
|
12-02-10 02:28pm
Reply To Message
|
