Re: Photo Tampering Throughout History
Mike Findlay <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
No, you are inferring that. There is a difference. >**because the modification was so minor I contend it added nothing sexual.< Then why modify it at all? >**why? Because it was her boob? What about the hair and facial edits? Her abdomen? The glow? All of these was there. We only seem to care about the boob.< What planet are you living on? Are you denying that the breasts of the human female are sexual organs/objects of sexual desire? >***hmmm, I check and so far you win for the being the first to mention nipples. I see where your mind is.< WTF? >***Seriously, no one has made any of those arguments. ***let me repeat. I don’t find the breast edit inherently sexier.< Why enhance the bust size of a child, (the character is a child), at all? Pleasend don't respond "they didn't" because that is just being absurd, not to mention repetitive and isn't relevant to the argument. Mike F. > And again, you act like they took her from an a cup to a d. I don't think anyone is arguing that. >**they are certainly implying it.< -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot