Mimi Rogers in full frontal nude scene?
4dtvman
nude scene in the upcoming movie "The Door in the Floor." According
to the rumor, she is posing nude for an artist in the scene and we get
a full frontal view as as well and a side and back view!
Winston Corcoran
@posting.google.com:
what's that movie she was in where she was getting a tit massage throughout
most of the film ?
Poor Tom, he couldn't handle her wild ass.
John Harkness
Rent Full Body Massage.
Mimi Rogers nude scenes aren't exactly rare.
John Harkness
Nick Macpherson
She's done a Playboy layout as well. Hoping for a Mimi Rogers nude scene is so
1980s.
4dtvman
>
>On 1 Jun 2004 06:01:54 -0700, 4dt...@verizon.net (4dtvman) wrote:
>
>>I hope this rumor is true. Mimi Rogers supposedly has a full frontal
>>nude scene in the upcoming movie "The Door in the Floor." According
>>to the rumor, she is posing nude for an artist in the scene and we get
>>a full frontal view as as well and a side and back view!
>
>Rent Full Body Massage.
I've seen Full Body Massage and it is one of my favorite movies. Yes, she does
lots of nude scenes in that movie, but no full frontals. If she had, it would be
my *favorite* movie. By the way, my top six are as follows:
1. Love Crimes
2. Holy Smoke
3. Steaming
4. Sirens
5. Showgirls
6. Full Body Massage
4dtvman
says...
Those "paintings" don't count in my book.
>Hoping for a Mimi Rogers nude scene is so
>1980s.
What's wroing older women? Besides, she's ony 48. Who are we supposed to be
lusting after now? Mandy Moore?
>
>
Doc
"4dtvman" <4dt...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:f37884ca.04060...@posting.google.com...
One of these days I'm going to eBay the copy of Playboy I have with her in
it.
Grand Inquisitor
She used to be attractive, before she had the skin of a cured ham. Why
do so many pretty women smoke themselves wrinkly?
--
"I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
heard all day."
--Arthur Dent
Grand Inquisitor
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
Warchild
"Grand Inquisitor" <zo...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ah4vc.13827$DG4....@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
> 4dtvman wrote:
>
> > I hope this rumor is true. Mimi Rogers supposedly has a full frontal
> > nude scene in the upcoming movie "The Door in the Floor." According
> > to the rumor, she is posing nude for an artist in the scene and we get
> > a full frontal view as as well and a side and back view!
>
> She used to be attractive, before she had the skin of a cured ham. Why
> do so many pretty women smoke themselves wrinkly?
>
Isn't she a Sciento? Those people think that they are immune to the
negative effects of smoking. Just go in for a regular 'Purification
Rundown' and steam all those nasty toxins away.
3finger
wrote:
> I've seen Full Body Massage and it is one of my favorite movies. Yes, she
> does
> lots of nude scenes in that movie, but no full frontals. If she had, it would
> be
> my *favorite* movie. By the way, my top six are as follows:
>
> 1. Love Crimes
> 2. Holy Smoke
> 3. Steaming
I would have loved to have seen "Steaming" on stage when Judith Ivey was
at her physical peak.
> 4. Sirens
> 5. Showgirls
> 6. Full Body Massage
--
3finger
Chicago Cubs, Back-to-Back World Champions ... 1907,1908
sadey...@earthlink.net
> From: Winston Corcoran <wcor...@hotmail.com>
> Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.gossip.celebrities
> Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 13:08:40 GMT
> Subject: Re: Mimi Rogers in full frontal nude scene?
Poor Tom?? You mean poor Mimi! ;)
Hyde
Um...what's so special about nude-Mimi Rogers?
I mean, she's not even hot.
Hyde
-honest question, no trolling here
========================================
"Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo…
so little time, so much to know!".
~ Jeremy Hillary Boop ~
Camille
Man, she did that nudie film, The Masseuse, or whatever it was cllaed.
She was naked throughout, front side back, you name it. Frankly I was
sick to my stomach. Her tits flapping around lik two blimps. Really,
guys might like it, I couldn't take it. It's a real eyeful if you
haven't seen it.
Camille
She DOES do full frontal throughout. You must have seen an edited version.
3finger
lin...@comcast.net (Camille) wrote:
> > I've seen Full Body Massage and it is one of my favorite movies. Yes, she
> > does
> > lots of nude scenes in that movie, but no full frontals. If she had, it
> > would be
> > my *favorite* movie. By the way, my top six are as follows:
> >
> > 1. Love Crimes
> > 2. Holy Smoke
> > 3. Steaming
> > 4. Sirens
> > 5. Showgirls
> > 6. Full Body Massage
>
> She DOES do full frontal throughout. You must have seen an edited version.
Er, no she doesn't. I have seen the film myself, plus if she had done
full frontal in some "unrated" version, video captures would have been
all over the Internet. There are plenty of captures of Mimi from that
film, but no full frontal. She is totally nude during most of the film,
but no pubic flash is to be found.
Mitchell Holman
news:c38c1057.04060...@posting.google.com:
> 4dt...@verizon.net (4dtvman) wrote in message
> news:<f37884ca.04060...@posting.google.com>...
>> I hope this rumor is true. Mimi Rogers supposedly has a full frontal
>> nude scene in the upcoming movie "The Door in the Floor." According
>> to the rumor, she is posing nude for an artist in the scene and we get
>> a full frontal view as as well and a side and back view!
>
> Man, she did that nudie film, The Masseuse, or whatever it was cllaed.
> She was naked throughout, front side back, you name it. Frankly I was
> sick to my stomach. Her tits flapping around lik two blimps.
You make that sound like a negative. Sure beats
seeing Brad Pitt's ass over and over and over again.
4dtvman
I saw the totally unedited version of Full Body Message and she does
not do any full frontal nudity in that movie. We see her breasts and
butt ALOT in that movie and yes, we do get an eye full, but no lower
frontal views of her. I'm constantly having to define the phrase "full
frontal nudity" for those like yourself who don't seem to understand.
A frontal view of a woman's breasts does not constitute full frontal
nudity if her lower frontal area (pubic region) is not also shown.
Also, side views and backside nudity do not count as full frontal
nudity either.
Apparently, there are lots of people who are confused about this
issue. Some silly woman (whose name is Rachelle Kadow) once wrote a
letter to the editor of my local newspaper claiming to have seen full
frontal nudity on an episode of NYPD Blue!
sadey...@earthlink.net
for what they can see on the web.
> From: pandor...@charter.net (Pandora)
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.gossip.celebrities
> Date: 3 Jun 2004 06:08:22 -0700
> Subject: Re: Mimi Rogers in full frontal nude scene?
>
> I actually have the *original* Madonna Playboy and Penthouse
> nude spreads. In Playboy she's got hairy pits. Real hot!
> Real well-grown-out hair. One to two inches in her pits.
> $500 for the Playboy. $400 for Penthouse. $700 for both.
> Original issues. Didn't ever subscribe but I bought to
> see her when I was young. Must say, she's got a great bod with nice
> full C t---! Medium-hairy (normal, no shave) muff. About a dozen
> pages in each mag.
> (Give or take -- it's been about 20 years since I've even seen
> these mags -- but they're probably collectors items.)
> Mags in original condition, except for age.
> This is Madonna like you've never seen. She tried to
> stop the distrubution of this but couldn't as she had sold the
> rights to some nudey photographer before she got famous.
> Hurry. Won't last.
Camille
Oh, right. Sorry, I was only thinking of breasts.
Camille
Well, for me it was a negative. I've actually always preferred small
breasts to large. It seems messy (am I anal or what?) And it also
seems like Tom Cruise would not have liked that at all, based on the
general consensus about him and women. Nicole, I can see him relating
to, a very compact boyish package.
Tweek
> breasts to large. It seems messy (am I anal or what?) And it also
> seems like Tom Cruise would not have liked that at all, based on the
> general consensus about him and women. Nicole, I can see him relating
> to, a very compact boyish package.
Yeah, Nicole Kidman's real boyish. pfft.
Mitchell Holman
You can keep the boyish packages. A decent
balcony, however, is a delight any day of the week.
4dtvman
I totally agree. Real women have curves!
Antnee
Its been a while but I vaguely remember quite a bit of Mimi in the
flesh, albeit not totally full frontal, in The Rapture.
And she filled out that Diana Riggs-The Avengers suit in the first
Austn Powers movie.
John Smith
I'm sorry. No offense, but that is easily the most pathetic favorite movie
list that I have ever seen. I am not kidding when I say that tears are
welling in my eye sockets from laughing so hard. I've never seen any list
like this. It is a saver. Thanks for making me laugh.
John
Neil Cerutti
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> In article <Tc%xc.43320$sS2.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>, John Smith
> surprised "In the Cut" with Meg Ryan didn't make it.
What about _Bad Liuetenant? That list is sexist!
--
Neil Cerutti
"I know you're up here, Tina. I can smell your BRAIN."
--Return of the Living Dead
4dtvman
>
>X-No-archive: yes
>
>In article <Tc%xc.43320$sS2.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>, John Smith
><johnsm...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
Ding, ding, ding!!! You just won the Sherlock award!
> I'm
>surprised "In the Cut" with Meg Ryan didn't make it.
There's not any full frontal nudity of Meg Ryan in that movie, unless you've
seen an unrated version that I'm not aware of.
4dtvman
plated metal
4dtvman wrote:
<ya da ya, -hack->
>>
>>They all have full frontal nudity with major female stars.
>
>
> Ding, ding, ding!!! You just won the Sherlock award!
>
>
>
>>I'm
>>surprised "In the Cut" with Meg Ryan didn't make it.
>
>
> There's not any full frontal nudity of Meg Ryan in that movie,
That'd be the USA release of the film you're talking about. The rest of
the world got the works. Bad luck.
-p
4dtvman
Oh yes, the good ole USA - land of the free, except when it comes to
television and movies.
Sounds like it's high time I bought a multi-region DVD player.
4dtvman
Oh yes, the good ole USA - land of the free, except when it comes to
Donna
look. After reading it, I should have just avoided it!! LOL!!!!
> These pics are all over the internet. No one is going to pay high dollars
> for what they can see on the web.
I know, what a joke. Like anyone would pay for those when they can
just look them up!!! I've even seen them and I haven't ever seen a
Playboy in real life. "Won't last" LOL!!! "Won't sell" is more
accurate.
(P.S. To the seller....In the interest of even more accuracy, if I
remember right about the Madonna pics, I don't think "medium" hairy is
accurate. She's more Robin Williams-esqe.)
Some people have um...."interesting" taste in films. Here's a question
for the boys...since so many of you are so interested in seeing "full
frontal nudity" - why don't you rent a porn film instead of searching
for real actresses like Meg Ryan who have done nudity?
Donna
look. After reading it, I should have just avoided it!! LOL!!!!
> These pics are all over the internet. No one is going to pay high dollars
> for what they can see on the web.
Love Rhino
> > She was naked throughout, front side back, you name it. Frankly I was
> > sick to my stomach. Her tits flapping around lik two blimps.
>
>
> You make that sound like a negative. Sure beats
> seeing Brad Pitt's ass over and over and over again.
Just because my mind is rather crass, what ass can you
bare (haha, get it?) more:
Brad Pitt's
Or George Clooney's (Solaris)?
4dtvman
Obviously, you're one of those who thinks nudity is nudity is nudity
and doesn't understand our fascination with celebrity nudes. I've
found that either a person understands it or they don't. It's
difficult to explain that fascination to someone who doesn't
understand it. It's kind of like describing the color blue to someone
who has been blind from birth. With that being said, I will attempt to
explain it anyway.
I don't know about anyone else, but my basic fascination with it has
to do with a sense of conquest or bragging rights. In another sense,
it's a kind of satisfaction with finally being able to see something
I've been wanting to see for a long time but have previously been
teased with it and have not been able to see it. Contrary to popular
belief, full frontal nudity of top mainstream actresses (or "real
actresses" as you call them) is still very rare. True, there are alot
of bare breast and bare butt shots these actresses, and plenty of full
frontals of "extras", magazine centerfolds, and soft-porn stars, but
not much full frontal of the actresses I really want to see. So, when
it happens, it's a real treat.
So, why won't porn stars do? Well, nudes of porn stars are a dime a
dozen. You wouldn't get excited about seeing, let's say, a cell phone,
would you? Besides, I consider them to be sub-human and about on the
same level with backyard animals. To me, getting excited about seeing
a nude porn star would make about as much sense as getting excited
about seeing a cat running around in my yard!
Richard
> 4dtvman wrote:
>
> > I hope this rumor is true. Mimi Rogers supposedly has a full frontal
> > nude scene in the upcoming movie "The Door in the Floor." According
> > to the rumor, she is posing nude for an artist in the scene and we get
> > a full frontal view as as well and a side and back view!
>
> do so many pretty women smoke themselves wrinkly?
Stupidity? Smoking in North America is rapidly devolving
into the past time of the poor and uneducated.
Which is why American tobacco companies are rabidly going
after fertile grounds in the Orient.
-Rich
Donna
it's not like you're seeing anything in person or that the actress is
showing her body to you personally. I guess I must not be too into the
whole living vicariously thing. But I do understand the dime-a-dozen
thing verses something unique and special. I'm surprised more men
aren't bored with porn after the initial shock value is gone. In fact
I always wonder why men don't get sick of porn or Playboy type things
because it's the same thing over and over. Even things like Sports
Illustrated or Victoria's Secret seem so similar and boring. I don't
know but I think a lot of men must have a sort of low level in terms
of sexuality in order to watch the same things over and over and over.
It's like a 3 year old who can watch the same Disney movie a million
times.
4dt...@verizon.net (4dtvman) wrote in message news:<f37884ca.04061...@posting.google.com>...
RogerM
>
> Thanks for the explanation. I don't "get" the bragging rights because
> it's not like you're seeing anything in person or that the actress is
> showing her body to you personally.
In the fantasy mind, she is.
> I guess I must not be too into the
> whole living vicariously thing. But I do understand the dime-a-dozen
> thing verses something unique and special. I'm surprised more men
> aren't bored with porn after the initial shock value is gone.
Shock value? Novelty would be a better term.
> In fact
> I always wonder why men don't get sick of porn or Playboy type things
> because it's the same thing over and over. Even things like Sports
> Illustrated or Victoria's Secret seem so similar and boring. I don't
> know but I think a lot of men must have a sort of low level in terms
> of sexuality in order to watch the same things over and over and over.
> It's like a 3 year old who can watch the same Disney movie a million
> times.
>
I'll interrupt the male-bashing to add my two cents.
Why do you eat food day after day? It's basically the same act, right?
We men don't usually look at the same woman over and over. We look at a
variety of women as part of a fantasy about having sex with them. It is
in a male's best reproductive interest to have as many offspring as
possible. Due to natural limitations, this would require mating with
many different women, and as often as possible. Sperm is very cheap
compared to eggs, and it is sound strategy to plant whenever and
wherever one gets the chance. This instinct is seen in fantasy behavior,
as well. We have rules against behaving in such a way in real life, but
this does not limit ones fantasies.
--
" Newborns are not persons. And frankly, the only human (as a person)
life you end when killing a newborn is a *potential* person's life. If
we
consider murder to be the slaying of a person (as opposed to an animal,
which we do not consider murderous), then killing an infant is not a
case of
murder." - Michael Scott Brown, June 16, 2004
I do NOT endorse the above statement.
RogerM
>
> I was avoiding this thread but it kept being bumped up. So I had to
> look. After reading it, I should have just avoided it!! LOL!!!!
>
> > These pics are all over the internet. No one is going to pay high dollars
> > for what they can see on the web.
>
> I know, what a joke. Like anyone would pay for those when they can
> just look them up!!! I've even seen them and I haven't ever seen a
> Playboy in real life. "Won't last" LOL!!! "Won't sell" is more
> accurate.
>
> (P.S. To the seller....In the interest of even more accuracy, if I
> remember right about the Madonna pics, I don't think "medium" hairy is
> accurate. She's more Robin Williams-esqe.)
>
> Some people have um...."interesting" taste in films. Here's a question
> for the boys...
"Boys?"
> since so many of you are so interested in seeing "full
> frontal nudity" - why don't you rent a porn film instead of searching
> for real actresses like Meg Ryan who have done nudity?
Aversion to silicone? Some of us like a natural look.
For many, the answer would be the social stigma against viewing
hard-core erotica.
For others, it might be that women in adult films tend to have very a
similar appearance. I don't think a lot of those actresses look at all
like Meg Ryan.
Donna
> I'll interrupt the male-bashing to add my two cents.
>
Male-bashing? LOL!! It's not male bashing if I'm stating an honest
observation or opinion. I'm not saying that women are on a higher
level than men. You can't live in this society and not notice that
SOME men (alot maybe) seem to get stuck in a teenage boy mentality
when it comes to sexuality.
> Why do you eat food day after day? It's basically the same act, right?
>
> We men don't usually look at the same woman over and over. We look at a
> variety of women as part of a fantasy about having sex with them. It is
> in a male's best reproductive interest to have as many offspring as
> possible. Due to natural limitations, this would require mating with
> many different women, and as often as possible. Sperm is very cheap
> compared to eggs, and it is sound strategy to plant whenever and
> wherever one gets the chance. This instinct is seen in fantasy behavior,
> as well. We have rules against behaving in such a way in real life, but
> this does not limit ones fantasies.
>
Wow! It looks like you've taken a lot of time to formulate a "theory"
to dismiss your own behavior. Men aren't animals who have to spread
their sperm anywhere they can. Men have a mind and a brain and free
will...your argument falls flat. I think a better explanation might be
that men use fantasy as a replacement or supplement to the
intimacy/excitement (or lack of intimicay/excitement) in his real
life. I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world (it's a lot
safer than other things) but don't say that watching porn/nudity is
some innate thing that men can't control. I know a lot of men who
don't seek it out because they are happy with their wives or whatever
sexual relationship they have.
Donna
>
> Aversion to silicone? Some of us like a natural look.
>
That's understandable. I think silicone looks awful too. That whole
exaggerated Baywatch type of look is so unattractive! I would imagine
in porn it's even worse.
> For many, the answer would be the social stigma against viewing
> hard-core erotica.
>
> For others, it might be that women in adult films tend to have very a
> similar appearance. I don't think a lot of those actresses look at all
> like Meg Ryan.
>
Sure there are. Charlie Sheen dated a porn star years ago and when I
saw a pic of them together, I actually thought it was Meg at first.
But I can understand the idea of a "cheap" looking person and a
supposedly "wholesome" woman. Isn't that what Playboy is all about?
They like women who look the girl-next-door or like women who you
wouldn't think would pose nude. The funny part is that a woman (say
like Meg) can look as innocent as possible, but that doesn't mean she
ACTS innocent in her real life. But I guess like you're saying, it's
all about fantasy.
mariav
> In article <c38c1057.04060...@posting.google.com>,
> lin...@comcast.net (Camille) wrote:
>
> > > does
> > > lots of nude scenes in that movie, but no full frontals. If she had, it
> > > would be
> > > my *favorite* movie. By the way, my top six are as follows:
> > >
> > > 1. Love Crimes
> > > 2. Holy Smoke
> > > 3. Steaming
> > > 4. Sirens
> > > 5. Showgirls
> > > 6. Full Body Massage
> >
>
>
>
> Er, no she doesn't. I have seen the film myself, plus if she had done
> full frontal in some "unrated" version, video captures would have been
> all over the Internet. There are plenty of captures of Mimi from that
> film, but no full frontal. She is totally nude during most of the film,
> but no pubic flash is to be found.
the culture is in trouble,all right
jere7my tho?rpe
foa...@yahoo.com (Donna) wrote:
> I think a better explanation might be
> that men use fantasy as a replacement or supplement to the
> intimacy/excitement (or lack of intimicay/excitement) in his real
> life. I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world (it's a lot
> safer than other things) but don't say that watching porn/nudity is
> some innate thing that men can't control. I know a lot of men who
> don't seek it out because they are happy with their wives or whatever
> sexual relationship they have.
This is similar to "I know a lot of people who don't read books because
they're happy with the conversations they have with their spouses," or
"...because they're happy with their real lives and don't need to escape
into fantasy worlds."
Porn offers variety of experience; it's possible to be perfectly happy
with your real-world sex life and still enjoy fantasizing about /
watching alternate sexual experiences. It has nothing to do with
whether or not your spouse is "enough" for you. Fantasy and
masturbation are healthy, whether you're alone or happily married.
----j7y
--
jere7my tho?rpe "Clever stratagems are quite beyond my
734-769-0913 powers, but if it is rank foolishness
jer...@yahoo.com you require, I have no end of it."
http://www.livejournal.com/~jere7my Jack Shaftoe, _The Confusion_
RogerM
>
> RogerM <rodger...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<40D95D36...@ns.sympatico.ca>...
> >
> > Aversion to silicone? Some of us like a natural look.
> >
>
> That's understandable. I think silicone looks awful too. That whole
> exaggerated Baywatch type of look is so unattractive! I would imagine
> in porn it's even worse.
>
Terrible, in my opinion. Four hours a night is all I can stand. :)
> > For many, the answer would be the social stigma against viewing
> > hard-core erotica.
> >
> > For others, it might be that women in adult films tend to have very a
> > similar appearance. I don't think a lot of those actresses look at all
> > like Meg Ryan.
> >
>
> Sure there are. Charlie Sheen dated a porn star years ago and when I
> saw a pic of them together, I actually thought it was Meg at first.
Was she natural or silicone? An adult film actress who looks like Meg?
I'd like to know who she is. Purely out of curiosity, mind you. :)
RogerM
>
> RogerM <rodger...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<40D95BC9...@ns.sympatico.ca>...
>
> > I'll interrupt the male-bashing to add my two cents.
> >
>
> Male-bashing? LOL!! It's not male bashing if I'm stating an honest
> observation or opinion. I'm not saying that women are on a higher
> level than men.
"I don't
know but I think a lot of men must have a sort of low level in terms
of sexuality in order to watch the same things over and over and over.
It's like a 3 year old who can watch the same Disney movie a million
times."
> You can't live in this society and not notice that
> SOME men (alot maybe) seem to get stuck in a teenage boy mentality
> when it comes to sexuality.
>
> > Why do you eat food day after day? It's basically the same act, right?
> >
> > We men don't usually look at the same woman over and over. We look at a
> > variety of women as part of a fantasy about having sex with them. It is
> > in a male's best reproductive interest to have as many offspring as
> > possible. Due to natural limitations, this would require mating with
> > many different women, and as often as possible. Sperm is very cheap
> > compared to eggs, and it is sound strategy to plant whenever and
> > wherever one gets the chance. This instinct is seen in fantasy behavior,
> > as well. We have rules against behaving in such a way in real life, but
> > this does not limit ones fantasies.
> >
>
> Wow! It looks like you've taken a lot of time to formulate a "theory"
> to dismiss your own behavior. Men aren't animals who have to spread
> their sperm anywhere they can.
We are animals. So are women. Not "merely" animals, but we do have
instinctive drives which have great influence on our behavior.
Why do women like shopping more than men? Why do men like sports more
than women? Instinct, driven by evolutionary reinforcement.
>Men have a mind and a brain and free
> will...your argument falls flat.
If you think men have free will when it comes to sex, then you don't
understand men.
> I think a better explanation might be
> that men use fantasy as a replacement or supplement to the
> intimacy/excitement (or lack of intimicay/excitement) in his real
> life.
Do you have any idea how often men think about sex?
> I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world (it's a lot
> safer than other things) but don't say that watching porn/nudity is
> some innate thing that men can't control. I know a lot of men who
> don't seek it out because they are happy with their wives or whatever
> sexual relationship they have.
Contentment can reduce the drive, yes, but few men are sexually
satisfied enough to not fantasize about promiscuity.
4dtvman
> Thanks for the explanation. I don't "get" the bragging rights because
> it's not like you're seeing anything in person or that the actress is
> showing her body to you personally. I guess I must not be too into the
> whole living vicariously thing.
For me, it's definitely the "living vicariously" thing. :-)
> But I do understand the dime-a-dozen
> thing verses something unique and special. I'm surprised more men
> aren't bored with porn after the initial shock value is gone. In fact
> I always wonder why men don't get sick of porn or Playboy type things
> because it's the same thing over and over. Even things like Sports
> Illustrated or Victoria's Secret seem so similar and boring. I don't
> know but I think a lot of men must have a sort of low level in terms
> of sexuality in order to watch the same things over and over and over.
> It's like a 3 year old who can watch the same Disney movie a million
> times.
I'm 100% with ya there. After just a few Playboys and porn flicks, I
got tired of them. Apparently, as you say, there are enough guys out
there who want to view the same stuff over and over again. I guess
that's why there's never any innovation, variety, or suspense in porn.
There's no incentive to do it.
For me, the ideal "men's magazine" would feature everyday women, ages
18-49, in all shapes and sizes, except for those who are morbidly
obese or otherwise butt ugly. Other than that, the only requirement
would be that the models look classy and not have the appearance of
sluts, strippers, hookers, druggies, trailer park trash, or sex
kittens. Depending on their comfort level, the models could pose fully
clothed, totally nude, or anywhere in between. All photography would
have to look highly professional but completely natural with no "air
brushing" or major re-touching used.