Re: Stephanie Dahl anyone?
Always wondered if
Stephanie Dahl's lover fired off a bit early in this attached pic (let alone if there is a vid of it)?
hogo said:
Are those natural. Because I've seen a lot of tits in my day
In pics, they look like they could either be partially fake or natural.
She "mounds" quite nicely, so it's clear that she was naturally bust, even if only a portion.
But when you see her in videos, the suggestion is that they are very much real, just firm/tight.
They not only sway, but they hang and her lovers get an intense experience when they cup them.
Now she is from the early '90s when silicone was still allowed in the US.
Saline never, ever looks anywhere near as good.
So my best guess has always been that she is naturally a good D and had a silicone (not saline) wafer put in under each one.
Especially since she doesn't "mound" completely flat on her back.
But even then, there's no evidence to suggest she had wafers inserted.
So either she had a really good doc, or she is just that naturally busty
and firm/tight.
In the case of the latter, I agree, they are -- to quote you ...
hogo said:
if those are natural, they got to be some of the best looking tits ever
And I'd have to say, it's not just "best looking" either.
Those puppies are wide, not just torpedo hangers, with a good split between.
So not only would they be a deep tit-fuck, but they would be perfect for cupping while she's riding atop.
Which explains what happened in my attachment.
She's normally too thin for my tastes, but the hourglass figure and wide breasts (rather wide for her chest even) that have extremely ample size (and hang) just put her over-the-top!
[Please Note: the attachment in this post has been deleted by moderator
BNF]
[Read more about the board rules:
here]