Polls: Fashion & Beauty

KoreanJapaneseThaiChinese

I'm just wondering since I have a temporary work VISA in Poland so I will be living here for a couple of years for work-related reasons and would love to meet a couple of girls here. I have a preference for thick/curvy women and here are a few pictures of a Polish Instagram fitness model girl, who possesses the body shape I'd love in a woman. Unfortunately, Polish women with a body shape like hers (pictures below) most likely make up around 0.01 percent of Poland's female population since all the Polish women I've seen around me so far, lack a shapely body and the fact that Europe, especially Slavic countries, prefer thin women as their beauty standards.








I honestly think it is a bummer how girls like in the video and pictures above, are an extreme rarity, especially here in Poland.

So I pretty much just found these 2 pictures on Google, on some website talking about embarrasing skirt stories... apparently these 2 women both did a photoshoot of themselves wearing cute dresses... and then after the photoshoot they went to hang out with their friends on a night out, but had to go home to put on jeans and wear the dress as a sort of long shirt because apparently the dresses were too "short" and "embarrassing" to wear out in public. While they never flashed, they said they "almost did." They also said that while standing up the dresses were only a bit more than a hand above the knee, but rose up to almost their thighs as they sat.

But as for me, personally... they don't seem that short to me. Maybe it's because I live somewhere hot and women wear dresses that length all the time, but they just don't seem that short.

For the girl in black, if she's gonna sit like THAT than sure, it's too short... but if she sat normally, than no. As for the one in pink... she's doing it perfectly, even in the photo. Just sit with legs together, or crossed. It's miles away from actually flashing her underwear.

Also, when they wore jeans with the dresses, it did NOT look good. It looked so much better when they wore JUST the dresses as shown. Those dresses were made to be worn bare legged! Plus, if flashing was really that big a deal to them, some spandex booty shorts would've done the trick much better.

I bought a suit to go to interviews and career fairs on my college campus. Here are some pics



I got it tapered and everything, however I think they need to take more off the sides because I have more of a V shaped body. What do you think? Too big, just right, or too small?

Title.

We as guys often refer to attractive girls by a number of different adjectives: Pretty; cute; hot; sexy; lovely; gorgeous, etc. My question to you is this-- what is the real difference between any of them? I often see girls on here asking odd questions such as "Hey guys which do you prefer, cute girls or sexy girls?" And my answer generally is, "Yes."

The reason-- for the decision to not entertain a choice between the two I mean-- is that *they're the same damn thing.* Either a girl is attractive enough that you would date her or want to kiss her or have sex with her, or she's not. Period. The rest is just splitting hairs in my opinion. If she's not attractive enough that you'd want to bang her, then how on earth is she "cute, but not hot?" Cute implies physical attraction at least on some level. So if she's not attractive enough to want to get with, why are you using any of those adjectives at all? Or, conversely, if she IS attractive enough, why not use any of them interchangeably?

I'm not suggesting that all attractive girls are EQUALLY attractive, I mean there's the 10 scale for a reason ("she's a 7/10" as opposed to "she's a 9/10" or whatever), but how does saying like "She'd be hotter if only blah blah blah" have any different meaning than "She'd be sexier if only blah blah blah."

No difference from what I can see. ^ The girl above is cute AND hot AND pretty AND sexy, not one or the other. Anyway, tell me. What do you guys think?