LET'S GET REAL - MILLIONS OF PRETTY GIRLS WOULD LOOK AT THIS PIC WITH INCREDULITY upon being told LIly Cole is a leading I'nal model.
And as for you alleged feet afficionadoes who think her feet are better than bad, have a very close look at this pic. Now let me klnow if you hold the same opinion?
I have always argued even bad feet can be made to look good in certain footwear, which is why feet should only be judged bare or in havaianas - and here is Exhibit #1 for the Prosecution (gamoto!)
tweety (guild knight)2014-06-14 19:27:02
"If I had a hammer I'd hammer in the morning I'd hammer in the evening all over this land" :)
Mojotoejoe (user)2014-07-20 19:18:38
Her feet are absolutely fine and no hammer. If she had hammer toes that would be evident in any of the many flip flop shots we have of her. Instead they all show perfectly normal toes. The shot you object to is simply showing her momentarily off balance. Everyone's toes do that. You need to judge after looking at more than one photo.
@BinB..as you seem to approve of my earlier recommended galleries, got another that will likely cause you to drool all over yourself...she goes under the nom de plume "Abbie" and as you'll see like so many other galleries, there's only a couple of decent shots with nail polish, which leaves you with numerous others to which you can put your polishing talents to good use...see attached pic...
@BinB...LOL back at ya. In my brief time with the site I've seen more than a few nitwits, one in particular who shall remain nameless to protect the guilty, who was totally clueless about shoe size but had to argue with my assessments. (Just goes to prove you were spot on about your advice to keep my comments to myself and quietly change any size discrepancies)
@Warpy> @BinB...syntax/grammar unimportant when you're honest with yourself, and your candid admissions here spoke volumes
Thanks, my friend, appreciate the kind vibes. It was actually a comedic callback to a flame at me from someone on @Pamela_Anderson's wall, if you didn't see that. Doubt much of what ensued survived! LOL. Basically someone had an issue with my syntax & suggested I needed Grammar School. I could've listed my qualifications & awards in that arena, but considering the source, why bother? Don't need to defend myself to a nitwit.
@pixxxie...didn't mean to offend...if that's your thing..cool...it's just not mine. As for the misogyny reference, I can see your point which is probably apropos for some dudes..but...my taste in tats (or lack thereof) applies equally to both genders.
@Pixxxie - Beloved Wife #2 had short hair when I met her. And was blonde all her life (I prefer brunettes); her feet weren't great, she was a smoker; she had a baby (I don't like kids, but adopted and loved that one as my own for 18 years). I loved her anyway. I've dated women with short hair, tats, nail polish, no nail polish. I'm not as narrow as you might think (nor as I used to be, and I mean that *literally*!!!) Personality, intelligence and morals are #1 with me. Too bad I missed the morals part on wife #2. Now, at my age & appearance, I can hardly have 'parameters' at all, let alone narrow ones. Any port in a storm, any girl with any hair at all, as long as she's fairly drama free (IOW, not like this site) and a decent person.
Then, maybe you're not speaking just to me, but to @All. And my grammar/syntax sucks sorry if.