HOME | DD

FunkyBytes — Smile Alone [NSFW]

#arousing #babe #beauty #body #cute #doll #erotic #exciting #girl #glamour #gorgeous #lascivious #libertine #love #naughty #nude #pinup #pleasure #senses #sensual #sensuous #sexy #spicy #steamy #stunner #stunning #torrid #unclothed #vaporous #voluptuous #wallpaper
Published: 2018-06-20 07:29:33 +0000 UTC; Views: 30008; Favourites: 438; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Related content
Comments: 17

MESTREMACOM3 [2022-06-10 22:13:46 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

NeverMindMe4Ever [2018-08-14 15:01:52 +0000 UTC]

NeverMind a smile like that 4Ever, and would worship it 4Ever

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

BOONTYKILLER82 [2018-06-20 19:51:01 +0000 UTC]

Du très bel ouvrage ce bracelet en or sertis de pierres précieuses MA GNI FI QUE

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Red-Wine80 [2018-06-20 16:49:15 +0000 UTC]

Yummy!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

FeralShojoo [2018-06-20 14:40:41 +0000 UTC]

disgusting semi-porn shot that doesn't belong on an art site.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

wysinwyg In reply to FeralShojoo [2018-06-20 22:32:11 +0000 UTC]

There is a setting to shut off adult content. Also, Is the Statue of David "semi-porn" .. it is full frontal male nudity . I love the female body. I love it when "artists"  do openings with toilets and feces thrown all over and that is ART.?!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

FeralShojoo In reply to wysinwyg [2018-06-21 07:12:07 +0000 UTC]

The mature content filter hides everything, not just nudity, and I have no problem with other sensitive content. If dA should ever decide to finally differentiate between all the mature forms, I'll certainly check the no more nudity stuff.
And please don't compare the time and effort that went into an actual piece of art with the spread cunt shots of this website. It's degrading.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

wysinwyg In reply to FeralShojoo [2018-06-21 19:58:38 +0000 UTC]

Okay. I think the Statue of David is porn by your logic. I don't want to walk into a museum and see some guy posing with his penis hanging out. That is my choice. How is a shot of a naked woman's vulva degrading? I think it is amazing that women feel so comfortable with their bodies that they want to show them off. It wasn't that long ago when women were ashamed of their sexuality but men could do anything.  Now I don't think it appropriate for younger people but that is a parent thing. And far as DA policing the site, they have kicked off endless people that cross the line (wherever that is)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FeralShojoo In reply to wysinwyg [2018-06-21 20:05:54 +0000 UTC]

No it's not, because the statue of David is not about his penis. His genitals aren't the main focus, like the cunt is in this picture. The statue of David is supposed to show the beauty and physique of the male body, the whole body, not just the genitals. Though I'm pretty sure if Michelangelo would have liked women the same way than men, it would have been a female statue
The statue has been drawn and then sculpted, which takes a lot of time and effort regardless of the subject. This is nothing but a cheap semi-porn shot.

And I think we all know that these women don't show their body because they are comfortable. They GET PAID.

Besides, one who is truly comfortable with their body doesn't need reassurance from others by posting nude selfies online. The people who do that are usually the most insecure, acting confident, but ultimately looking for compliments and reassurance.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Yo-Snap In reply to wysinwyg [2018-06-21 03:15:20 +0000 UTC]

There's a difference between nudity in a natural state and nudity in a sexual state. Natural states are ART, and sexual states are PORN. This is sexual, this is porn, this doesn't belong here.

And just because an adult filter does exist, doesn't mean that it prevents people from seeing stuff like this. Filters only go so far when whoever is posting it actually do it properly.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

wysinwyg In reply to Yo-Snap [2018-06-21 19:46:46 +0000 UTC]

Well said. However, when is nudity not sexual in an artistic format? I'm not talking about taking a shower or bath either. But for the most part, when a guy or girl see an attractive nude person, it does stimulate sexual thoughts. Plus who made you the person to decide what is and isn't porn. Just a nude picture 30+ years ago was considered porn even if it was as a painting. Also you have the free will to not look at it and move on to something you like better. Freedom of expression seems to be in short supply.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Yo-Snap In reply to wysinwyg [2018-06-21 22:17:53 +0000 UTC]

Well i'll put it this way: if you need to move a part of your body in order to see a hole, or if specific muscles are flexed in a manner where parts are erected when they normally wouldn't be, then it's porn. If you can't see holes or such unusually prominent organs, then it's probably in artistic format. Whether or not YOU, as a viewer, sees it as sexual is your own problem to deal with.

Don't argue with me about this when the broad's just showing her vagina and anus. Ya ain't making much of a point.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TAUXVII In reply to Yo-Snap [2018-06-21 04:00:35 +0000 UTC]

^

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

stavrospet [2018-06-20 13:50:01 +0000 UTC]

Yes!!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

richo7502000 [2018-06-20 11:55:23 +0000 UTC]

stunning lady

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ogrinsol [2018-06-20 10:09:42 +0000 UTC]

mmmmmm

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

themexicanduck [2018-06-20 08:29:23 +0000 UTC]

nice smile

👍: 0 ⏩: 0