I know that in the warp speed world of online bullshitting that the Britney performance on the MTV VMAs is old news. But I'm way out of the target demographic for that rubbish anyways, so it's only natural that I'm commenting on it a little late.
I actually intend to comment on the commentary itself, rather than on Britney's performance (which WAS bad, even by Britney's already bottom-of-the-sea standards -- but who is really surprised by that?). Specifically, I want to address all of the small-souled wannabe Perez Hiltons (and the only thing worse than actually BEING Perez Hilton is wanting to be Perez Hilton) out there who went on and on about how FAT Britney looked.
Pause for a second and take a look at the photograph attached to the bottom of this post. What do you see? I'll tell you what I see: A criminally untalented, mouth-breathing, baby-neglecting terrible-taste-having bombshell.
Yeah, I said it: Britney Spears, physically speaking (not counting, of course, that indelibly stupid expression that is permanently plastered on her face), is incredibly sexually attractive, particularly now that she's a little curvier than the pre-got-knocked-up-by-a-wickedly-stupid-dude Britney. While she's still reasonably fit, I see more curvature to her ass and larger, rounder breasts. Yes, her belly isn't rock hard. Show me a guy who prefers a girl with a six-pack to a girl with a slightly soft belly, and I'll show you someone with unacknowledged confusion concerning their sexual orientation.
Female bodies are supposed to have some give to them -- it's what makes them feminine. While it is true that one part of Britney's anatomy has a little TOO much give (her brain), there is absolutely nothing fat about her. And if there is, well, then color me a chubby chaser.
I actually intend to comment on the commentary itself, rather than on Britney's performance (which WAS bad, even by Britney's already bottom-of-the-sea standards -- but who is really surprised by that?). Specifically, I want to address all of the small-souled wannabe Perez Hiltons (and the only thing worse than actually BEING Perez Hilton is wanting to be Perez Hilton) out there who went on and on about how FAT Britney looked.
Pause for a second and take a look at the photograph attached to the bottom of this post. What do you see? I'll tell you what I see: A criminally untalented, mouth-breathing, baby-neglecting terrible-taste-having bombshell.
Yeah, I said it: Britney Spears, physically speaking (not counting, of course, that indelibly stupid expression that is permanently plastered on her face), is incredibly sexually attractive, particularly now that she's a little curvier than the pre-got-knocked-up-by-a-wickedly-stupid-dude Britney. While she's still reasonably fit, I see more curvature to her ass and larger, rounder breasts. Yes, her belly isn't rock hard. Show me a guy who prefers a girl with a six-pack to a girl with a slightly soft belly, and I'll show you someone with unacknowledged confusion concerning their sexual orientation.
Female bodies are supposed to have some give to them -- it's what makes them feminine. While it is true that one part of Britney's anatomy has a little TOO much give (her brain), there is absolutely nothing fat about her. And if there is, well, then color me a chubby chaser.
tequilaraymax:
I thought she looked great...
glitchwitch:
And you would be exactly right. This simply isn't a subjective matter.