On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 20:03:52 +0100 (CET), Non scrivetemi wrote:
>In article <HNednbMcPdNdCPvUnZ2dnUVZ_j8AAAAA@gonamic.de>
>eax@less.than (EAX) wrote:
>
>It's Sveta! To date, I've only seen one other set of this
>beautiful girl, and maybe that's all there is.
>
>From the looks of things, she's taken a razor to her pubes, and
>she needs glasses. Missed the ones on the outside, sweetheart.
>
>Anyone is welcome to call me crazy, but I would have preferred
>to see this young beauty in all of her natural glory, how she'd
>look if razors were kept out of her reach for at least 6 months.
>And this goes for any youthful beauty.
>
>I really like the look of being old enough to grow them, young
>enough not to shave them. And young girls are just beautiful in
>their natural state, when they're being young and beautiful,
>being themselves, and not hacking at their crotch and other
>places with a sharp blade trying to conform to what they feel
>society wants. The whole deal of being innocent has to do with
>being yourself and not knowing that anything about you isn't up
>to the standards of some unknown person who is going to judge
>you.
>
>It pains me to think that Sveta (or whatever her real name is)
>felt that something about her natural body wasn't up to
>standard, and that she had to change it. This girl is beautiful
>to the point that she explodes any "standard", indeed there is
>nothing "standard" about her beauty.
>
>Thank you, EAX, for posting this, and I'd be interested to hear
>if anyone else feels the same way that I do.
>
/* begin rant */
Years ago, when mclt reigned, the most frequent question posed to the
group was, "What does M.C.L.T. stand for?".
I didn't have the capacity to post anonymously back then, but if I had
had, my reply would have been, "They're the first letters of a Russian
phrase which loosely translates as Old, Shaven, Passed off as Young".
Too many of the models suffered at the altar of appearance of
prepubescence. Either she is or she isn't, and a razor will not
camouflage the true age.
Body hair, or lack thereof, neither attracts me to nor repulses me from
adult women. Women didn't shave in the time and place I grew up.
Sexuality is in the mind, and sexual expression is the truest spiritual
connection.
However, the mystique of the girl is lost for me when the secondary
characteristics develop. Mystery and not sexuality is what I look for
in the child model. Innocence, joy, curiousity, the natural exuberance
at just being alive; these are the attraction of the prepubescent.
Such are too soon lost. The razor does not bring any of it back. If
the model grew it, then show it. If she is at the age you prefer, she
should look it.
LS is totally unique in its portrayal of the child. Some other lolita
sites show models with hollow or sunken eyes, ruddy faces, palms, and
feet, sleepy eyes, all signs to me of drugs or of unwillingness to
disrobe for the camera. This smacks of abuse. I find it repulsive.
Young girls, by their design, are not naturally inhibited about their
bodies. This is why I find LS so beautiful. The models portayed are
just being themselves, the photographer captures it, and the photos
reveal it.
/* end rant */
--
mr.bill
|
|
 026 files - "la2-017-026.jpg" yEnc (1/1)')){kind=link}