bart_calendar ([info]bart_calendar) wrote,
@ 2008-05-10 11:40:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:lots and lots of comments, lots of comments

Holy Hermione!
Apparently even British celebrity girls don't wear panties anymore.


Photobucket


Advertisement

(Post a new comment)


[info]agentsteel53
2008-05-10 10:28 am UTC (link)
explain the vertical black stripes??

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 10:30 am UTC (link)
I'm hoping a girl can explain them.

They certainly don't seem to be panties.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]agentsteel53
2008-05-10 10:32 am UTC (link)
maybe they are panties - with a striped design that is alternating extra-super-sheer and black.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 10:37 am UTC (link)
I think it's part of the dress or garters of some sort.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]agentsteel53
2008-05-10 10:38 am UTC (link)
well... Upper Brain's been having too much fun. I for one am going to let Lower Brain do some analysis too.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 10:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]twain, 2008-05-10 11:09 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 11:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 11:14 am UTC
Good link - [info]thoughtsex, 2008-05-10 02:06 pm UTC

[info]taste_my_scream
2008-05-10 11:50 am UTC (link)
she's wearing knickers, they are just sheer.

when have we reverted to school yard bahviour of trying to see everyone's drawers or lack there of..

'oooooh... you show me your's I'll show you mine!'

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 11:51 am UTC (link)
I just found the picture interesting.

Mostly because I really like emma watson.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]taste_my_scream
2008-05-10 11:53 am UTC (link)
is this the point in the conversation that I call you a dirty old man.. ;p

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 11:54 am UTC (link)
To the crime charged I plead 100 percent guilty, your honor.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]taste_my_scream
2008-05-10 11:55 am UTC (link)
it's a good thing this is not new information HAHA.. perv

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 12:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 12:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]taste_my_scream, 2008-05-10 12:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 12:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]taste_my_scream, 2008-05-10 12:07 pm UTC

[info]sexy_sassy
2008-05-10 12:10 pm UTC (link)
i saw this two weeks ago. she's really pretty. but aww the paparazzi! poor thing. :(

and, no, those are panties.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 12:29 pm UTC (link)
This demonstrates what an idiot male I am.

I assume that if I can see pubes that there are no panties.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]mattg
2008-05-10 12:59 pm UTC (link)
They're sheer panties made transparent by the flash of the camera.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 01:01 pm UTC (link)
Yes.

Apparently I'm an idiot when it comes to women's underthings.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]donnalee_kiss
2008-05-11 04:04 am UTC (link)
Its the nature of flash photography, they're probably very thin panties with that lacy design, but with the flash you can see thru them. Its like those runway shots where the dress becomes sheer from the flash.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]charlotte_webb
2008-05-10 01:54 pm UTC (link)
Paparazzi suck. She has her knees together; her dress just rode up. What a pack of moneygrubbing pigs.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 01:55 pm UTC (link)
Yep,

The only people worse than lawyers.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

zencalm_again
2008-05-10 02:16 pm UTC (link)
I wish you could have posted another picture, if you agree that paparazzi are moneygrubbing pigs. For aren't you then just increasing the fame and exposure of the unfair shot?

Sure, pussy is nice to look at, but this picture is basically upskirting, and isn't that a crime?

She clearly was trying not to be seen. And I'd rather not try to figure out her panties when she's trying to keep them hidden.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 02:17 pm UTC (link)
I don't claim to be any paragon of virtue and I find her pubes too pretty not to most, moral reservations aside.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]bart_calendar
2008-05-10 02:19 pm UTC (link)
Upskirting is only a crime if the cameras are hidden.

When you are getting out a limo to your birthday bash and surrounded by dozens of photogs, it's hard to argue that the cameras are concealed.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]sushis
2008-05-10 03:47 pm UTC (link)
You're speaking as if ethics began and ended with the letter of the law.

I agree with zencalm_again

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 03:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sushis, 2008-05-10 03:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 03:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]charlotte_webb, 2008-05-10 08:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 03:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sushis, 2008-05-10 03:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 03:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sushis, 2008-05-10 04:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 04:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sushis, 2008-05-10 04:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 04:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]charlotte_webb, 2008-05-10 08:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 09:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sushis, 2008-05-12 03:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-12 03:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]babyblooz, 2008-05-10 11:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]charlotte_webb, 2008-05-10 08:09 pm UTC
you rock - [info]thoughtsex, 2008-05-10 08:02 pm UTC
Re: you rock - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 09:25 pm UTC
Re: you rock - [info]thoughtsex, 2008-05-10 11:44 pm UTC
Re: you rock - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-11 04:30 am UTC
Re: you rock - [info]thoughtsex, 2008-05-11 02:46 am UTC

[info]charlotte_webb
2008-05-10 08:08 pm UTC (link)
Like I said, she clearly has her knees together. Unless female stars wear burkhas, a well-placed photographer with a telephoto lens is going to be able to catch something once in a while. And selling porn of someone's body without their consent should be a crime.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 09:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]charlotte_webb, 2008-05-11 03:16 pm UTC

[info]sushis
2008-05-10 03:49 pm UTC (link)
I completely agree with you.

Edited: I'm agreeing with zencalm_again ; it's hard to figure that out, the way this looks on the page once posted.

Edited at 2008-05-10 03:51 pm UTC

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]bart_calendar, 2008-05-10 03:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sushis, 2008-05-10 04:03 pm UTC

[info]freespeculation
2008-05-11 12:36 am UTC (link)
Solution: she needs to gain a lot of weight so her thighs swell and obscure the view to all but those lenses which are actually underneath her. Then they'll catch those nasty upskirting paps!

(Reply to this)

[info]scopo
2008-05-12 01:21 am UTC (link)
assuming she's on her way to a red-carpet, evening event, she's wearing entirely the wrong sort of watch :)

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…