Which is more of a turnon?

[mcfbridge]

Okay,

This one is for the guys.

If you had your choice of nude pictures of an anonymous supermodel or actress,

or

nude pictures of an attractive woman you knew.

Which would you want?

 

[minsue]

Only for the guys?

Aw, can I play too? Pretty please?

 

[Randi Grail]

Only for the guys you say, but may I ask, don't you mean famous actor/model instead of anonymous?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Okay,

This one is for the guys.

If you had your choice of nude pictures of an anonymous supermodel or actress,

or

nude pictures of an attractive woman you knew.

Which would you want?

I didn't vote because it would depend on the relationship with the attractive woman. A family member or a close friend and I wouldn't be interested. I would choose a sexy woman I know slightly, and who is something of a bitch, especially if the pics were like something from a porn site.

I don't believe there is any such thing as an anonymous supermodel or actress.

 

[SeaCat]

It's always much more of a turn on seeing the people I know. Actresses/Models usually turn me off.

Cat

 

[minsue]

Only for the guys you say, but may I ask, don't you mean famous actor/model instead of anonymous?

 

[gauchecritic]

Why the modifier "attractive"? There are very, very few women who are unattractive without clothes. As a matter of fact there are very, very few women who are unattractive.

And making it a question "for the guys" just isn't cricket.

But I do get the gist of the question.

Known, or 'approachable' is far more attractive.
But then, if you actually 'know' a supermodel then you know what she looks like without 4 hours of preparation too. So it becomes a moot point.

In an interview, Robert Palmer was speaking about his 'backing band' for the "Addicted To Love" video. He said that when they turned up at the set they were a "right bus load". But you've seen the result of 4 hours in 'makeup'.

Gauche

 

[Guest]

Bravo! Gauche

Perdita

 

[mcfbridge]

Why the modifier "attractive"? There are very, very few women who are unattractive without clothes. As a matter of fact there are very, very few women who are unattractive.

And making it a question "for the guys" just isn't cricket.

But I do get the gist of the question.

Known, or 'approachable' is far more attractive.
But then, if you actually 'know' a supermodel then you know what she looks like without 4 hours of preparation too. So it becomes a moot point.

In an interview, Robert Palmer was speaking about his 'backing band' for the "Addicted To Love" video. He said that when they turned up at the set they were a "right bus load". But you've seen the result of 4 hours in 'makeup'.

Gauche

Actually, approachable is not what I was going for.

The comparison I was looking for was between an incredibly physically beautiful woman that you do not know at all, famous or otherwise,
VS.
A normally attractive woman (Which is 99%) whom you are familiar with and know their personality.

This could be anyone from a neighbor to someone on this board whom you correspond with.

 

[Randi Grail]

Gauche is my hero. Well said.


Besides, there are enough pictures of naked/semi naked models and actresses out there to make anyone bored stiff with the concept. So in a way, naked pictures of people closer to you is much more inaccessible, and therefore a more exotic and tittilating idea.

On the other hand, if they are in the neighborhood already, why would I want pictures? I want then naked, cuffed, in my bed.

 

[herecomestherain]

I really enjoy beautiful images but up until recently I couldn't say they have aroused me. Outside of actual sex with my sweetie, nothing arouses me more than a piece of erotic writing.

I think that a sexy picture of someone I know and care about is undoubtably a bigger turn on for me than a sexy picture of an attractive someone I don't know. Much of the turn on factor in that is in knowing the person and in appreciating the intent behind the image.

 

[minsue]

I really enjoy beautiful images but up until recently I couldn't say they have aroused me. Outside of actual sex with my sweetie, nothing arouses me more than a piece of erotic writing.

I think that a sexy picture of someone I know and care about is undoubtably a bigger turn on for me than a sexy picture of an attractive someone I don't know. Much of the turn on factor in that is in knowing the person and in appreciating the intent behind the image.

Well said.

 

[smartnsassy]

depends on what the choices look like.

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

lack of penis

i know you said guys.. but my lack o' phallis doesn't mean that my view point isnt valid...so, for this question i have donned my strap on.. consider me one of the guys...for a moment...

im turned on by pics of real women. like gauche said..
there are very few women who arent beautiful.
i look at some of the av's here and its sweeter than seeing anjelina jolie(sp) in some photo shoot.

 

[SnoopDog]

I can only agree. Nude's of a girl I know is much more of a turnon.
And of course people that are too beautiful and perfect in every sense are just boring. 'Normal' people have natural beauty and it's always a turnon to see somebody with body parts that might not fit into what's being defined as beautiful.

Snoopy

 

[SummerMorning]

Bravo! Gauche


Perdita

Curse you and your cigarettes, Perdita! Don't you know some of us who've quit are still physically addicted?!? Do I smoke in my AV? Noooo. You know why? Because I quit. Dammit. Grr...

 

[oggbashan]

Neither...

...I prefer my imagination.

To me clothed is more erotic than nude.

I can imagine what a woman looks like nude and my imagination is better than a makeover.

I can imagine a woman dressed as a bride, a princess, for a grand ball, for the cancan or whatever. My imagination can remove defects, shed years, lift and reform breasts, take off or add inches as required and still produce an ideal (my ideal) image of this particular woman that is recognisable as herself.

Her imagination may produce a different result.

Both will be nothing like the view she would see standing naked before a large mirror.

'Mirror, Mirror on the wall, Who's the fairest of them all?'

With my imagination, any woman is.

Og

 

[gauchecritic]

The comparison I was looking for was between an incredibly physically beautiful woman that you do not know at all, famous or otherwise,
VS.
A normally attractive woman (Which is 99%) whom you are familiar with and know their personality.

This could be anyone from a neighbor to someone on this board whom you correspond with.

But the problem here is that you're assuming that what magazines consider beautiful is what any individual will agree with.

From the posts so far, this is not the case.

Magazine/movie/TV promoted beauty: Calista Flockhart, Sarah Michelle Geller, Courtney Cox.

People I consider more beautiful (famous so that you know to whom I refer) and would prefer to see naked: Glenda Jackson, J K Rowling, Dawn French.

I honestly cannot think of a single female on Lit who I would not like to see naked.


Gauche

 

[Guest]

Curse you and your cigarettes, Perdita! Don't you know some of us who've quit are still physically addicted?!? Do I smoke in my AV? Noooo. You know why? Because I quit. Dammit. Grr...

Summ, if you are seriously angry, tough. You never find yourself near someone smoking? I find it difficult to even smoke outdoors now. I'll not be censored in cyberspace. Deal with it.

Perdita

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Do people still even look at nudie pics anymore?

What about those ones where they hold a beachball in front? Or hide behind an umbrella?

I'm with Og. I like clothes and attitude and my imagination.

---dr.M.

 

[herecomestherain]

I like nudie pictures. They aren't stroke material though.

 

[Guest]

HCT Rain, you are terrifically gorgeous. Just making sure you know.

Perdita

 

[herecomestherain]

Perdita, you are very kind. Thank you.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Perdita, you are very kind. Thank you.

Hi, Rain.
Perdita doesn't always agree with everything I say but this time, I guess she does. You really have a beautiful face.