Quote:
Originally Posted by Coelacanth
Not my fault some of you guys are sexually boring and have no imagination, going by the "OMG SHE HAS NO CLOTHES ON = TOO TRASHY" mentality. Is this middle school?
|
IMAGINATION? LOL those covers have zero of imagination, it's pure stereotypical cheap sexyness. I wouldn't call it trashy because of how much she's wearing it's about how it's portrayed: they did a crappy job with set it totally looks like some cheap AV modeling studio, i don't even know where to actually settle my eyes on. Not even mentioning the compossition and design itself IMO and with that leopard print it's like the tackyest part of it all! Let alone those hooker heels & that pose.... it's like... i don't even wanna start explaining that....