Home » Is this what passes for hot these days?

Is this what passes for hot these days?

Posted on October 16, 2009 by big jonny

It’s not often we do this, but damn if something doesn’t need to be said. These girls are way to thin. This is downright spooky. Sure, we used to, ahem, celebrate the female form on these pages a bit differently… But that does not mean that we ever supported eating disorders or drug addiction.

Am I saying either of these women has an eating disorder and/or a drug addiction? No. I’m saying they are way too thin. Damn baby, eat a cheeseburger. Is this what passes for hot these days?

gallery_main-1014_battlestar_babes_05

gallery_main-1014_battlestar_babes_06

Images sourced from thesuperficial.com

About big jonny

The man, the legend. The guy who started it all back in the Year of Our Lord Beer, 2000, with a couple of pages worth of idiotic ranting hardcoded on some random porn site that would host anything you uploaded, a book called HTML for Dummies (which was completely appropriate), a bad attitude (which hasn’t much changed), and a Dell desktop running Win95 with 64 mgs of ram and a six gig hard drive. Those were the days. Then he went to law school. Go figure. Flagstaff, Arizona, USA

View all posts by big jonny →

24 Replies to “Is this what passes for hot these days?”

HUMPTY on October 16, 2009 at 11:47 am said:

Amen. The biyatches have “Nalgas de Aspirina” . Aspirin Ass. Flat, white with just a slit down the middle. Need to have some junk in the trunk to be hot….
el jefe on October 16, 2009 at 12:08 pm said:

A woman who is reasonably thin because she is fit is hot. A woman who looks like skeletor because she doesn’t eat is not.
Aaron on October 16, 2009 at 1:16 pm said:

Relax, these women are the male form of M. Rassmuesen or Stephen Rooks. Granted these rail thin mamas shouldn’t be making every other woman feel insecure as hell for not being freaky thin; that is what really sucks with this trend.
Baddcog on October 16, 2009 at 2:01 pm said:

Why so serious?
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/3074/slide_3074_44235_large.jpg
Baddcog on October 16, 2009 at 2:02 pm said:

Guess the link missed the name of the custom, that’s the ‘Anna Rexia’
Anon on October 16, 2009 at 2:22 pm said:

The more-modern name is “Photoshop”.
Fletch on October 16, 2009 at 3:16 pm said:

I’d be afraid I would snap them if I climbed on-board.
Give me some wibble with my wobble.
singletrack maestro on October 16, 2009 at 3:33 pm said:

Bend over and beg for protien bitch !
dave on October 16, 2009 at 3:38 pm said:

Beautiful women come in all shapes and sizes.
senna on October 16, 2009 at 5:07 pm said:

This is true, but being underweight or overweight is not ideal, not beautiful, and if you ask me, a little overweight, a few curves here and there, is far more sexy than skeleton girls. The real ugliness is the fashion industry pushing these women to be so thin, and then the result it has on young girls.
A normal woman is not that thin. This is the way they look during a famine.
Ryan on October 16, 2009 at 7:33 pm said:

In Asia, a lot of girls look like Grace Park.
This has more to do with genetics and a lack of exercise then eating.
Peter on October 16, 2009 at 8:15 pm said:

Id hit em
bikepunk on October 17, 2009 at 2:22 am said:

Sorry… no thanks. I sw this earlier on another site, and thought to myself…”really? Hot girls of Battlestar Galactica? Whatever happened to Erin Grey? To Heather Locklear? What the fuck happened to girls like Shannon Tweed???

I mean Gene Simmons’ old lady still makes me put down the remote on occasion…

these girls… I’d pass on.

Period.
Tim Weber on October 17, 2009 at 3:49 am said:

She ain’t heavy; she’s my sister
dave on October 17, 2009 at 5:32 am said:

senna, that’s pretty much what I was driving at. That emaciated look-I just don’t get it.
Dean on October 17, 2009 at 7:38 am said:

Lean is hot , and skinny is fast. And you jonny are niether.
elbowspeak on October 17, 2009 at 10:02 am said:

Get these women some ham sandwiches, stat!
schultzenheimer on October 17, 2009 at 11:05 am said:

photoshop, no doubt every chick in that zine is. ralph lauren just got slammed for photoshopping and the french are coming up with a law that demands every photoshopped imaged to be labeled if the woman has been “enhanced”

http://rubyroom.aol.co.uk/2009/10/16/ralph-lauren-photoshop-controversy-continues/
dave on October 17, 2009 at 11:43 am said:

Wonder if they’ll have a law about fake titties.
bikesgonewild on October 17, 2009 at 12:52 pm said:

…when i go down there i wanna celebrate the beauty & lust of life, not be made to think about impoverished nations…

…sorry babes…those bodies = fail…
judi on October 17, 2009 at 4:25 pm said:

i love your comments on this! i cannot stand to see a woman with no muscle like that. thin like that is just gross. i have been 5’7 and 150lbs (size 6, body fat 14.6%) for years now. when i was 13, in ballet class, my teacher smacked my leg with a stick and told me to lose 10lbs. my legs have always been huge, and recently in a race, i was told i could feed a family of 4 with mu calves. so there. fuck those skinny ass bitches.
chewy kolchuk on October 17, 2009 at 5:08 pm said:

What’s the big deal? They’re Cylons!!! A) they should be shot on site, and B) if you do wanna climb onboard, just have their HDs downloaded into bodies with a few more curves built into them. Then shoot ’em…

So sayeth we all!
Husky Midget on October 18, 2009 at 6:48 am said:

Ahem, Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder…duh.
I prefer 700 bpm bootyshakers. Its the only thing that can keep me awake when I got whiskeydick.
dave on October 18, 2009 at 7:14 am said:

Husky, “chacon a son gout” or something. Point is, too skinny is just as unhealthy as too fat when you reach a certain point. All respect to the bee holder, just the same.