People seem to have varying definitions of “Rubenesque” and I am not so mad as to have an opinion about something, or not to have one. Obviously, a lot of strange stuff has been happening for a long time in terms of women’s images and what women are supposed to look like. I suppose tastes vary but that’s why ‘average’ body type means exactly that - an average, a mean, meeting in the middle between extreme fatness and extreme skinniness. Of course here in the USA we have a major problem with obesity. In all my travels there have been few places I had seen - with the contentious inclusion of the UK - where people are so fat. On the other hand, oddly enough, the so called standard of perfection is actually stick insect, rail thin, Holocaust death camp grossness, ribs sticking out from under skin, etc. So the average should meet in the middle, right? Not sure. The middle seems to cover quite a lot of ground which is why the definition of Rubenesque is apparently up to the individual. Now, I’m not sure just how majorly, Pieter Paul was of a chubby chaser. Granted, some of his women do look not only big but at first glance it might almost seem as if they have stretch marks! Now, are they stretch marks or just natural rolls or flesh - which can be a turn-on actually, because IMO it makes the person look more ‘real’ as well as more soft, and henceforth more fuckable?
Look, there’s a reason why they call it more cushion for the pushin’! Look, I like all kinds of different girls. It’s the diversity and the wonderful assortment of flavours that counts. Although I must say, I definitely would veer more toward the Rubens end of the spectrum than Twiggy.
Going the other way, you’d need to show me something out of the ordinary and unusual to get me hard, like this chick with odd puffy nipples, very small tits, but piercing blue eyes, great hips, and a nice pussy haircut, oh and a look that says “I don’t care if I have weird small tits, come on and eat and fuck this pussy!” Look, variety is the spice of life, right?
