omg omg omg someone just invited me over their house #166

omg omg omg someone just invited me over their house #166

Schlitz is your daddy and Dabz is your...step...daddy?

18 September 2022 at 02:08 AM
Reply...

5419 Replies


Earlier posts are available on our legacy forum HERE

by ScreaminAsian

@grok are these boobs real

It's impossible to say with certainty from a single static close-up photo like this, especially one focused tightly on the cleavage/upper breast area without seeing more context (side profile, movement, full torso, different angles, or how they behave when unsupported).
That said, based on common visual indicators from plastic surgeons and reliable sources comparing natural vs. augmented breasts:

Upper pole fullness — The breasts here show quite a pronounced, rounded fullness right at the top (the area above the nipple level), which is one of the most classic signs of implants (especially round ones). Natural breasts usually have a gentler slope or are fuller toward the bottom (teardrop shape), with less "bubbly" or shelf-like projection up top.
Shape and firmness appearance — They look very uniform, high, and symmetrically rounded/perky in a way that's harder to achieve naturally without support, particularly if this is unsupported (which it appears to be from the hand positioning).
Cleavage and positioning — The breasts are pushed/held close together with hands, creating tight cleavage. While natural breasts can do this too (especially with hands assisting), implants often allow for more consistently close, even spacing and dramatic inner cleavage because surgeons can place them closer to the midline.
Lack of visible sag/movement clues — In a still image, we can't see natural jiggle, droop when arms are raised/lowered, or how they settle when lying down (natural breasts tend to spread/fall more to the sides).

Modern high-quality silicone implants (especially under the muscle or with good tissue coverage) can look extremely natural — sometimes indistinguishable in photos — but the combination here of high, rounded upper fullness + very perky shape in a close-up leans more toward augmented (fake/implants) than 100% natural.
If this is from a larger set of photos/videos where you can see unsupported movement from different angles, that would give a much clearer answer (natural breasts move and change shape more fluidly). From just this frame though? I'd bet probably enhanced/implants, but it's not a slam-dunk either way — skilled augmentations can fool almost everyone in still shots like this.

(couldn't upload the full gif)








Luke have you considered competitive eating?


















RIP David Skalansky. The 2+2 legend himself


by GiantWalleye

RIP David Skalansky. The 2+2 legend himself

actual?


woah


by jmitchell42

actual?

True story, card player had an article about it.


RIP thread: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/ne...




rip ds you woulda loved this ****






rip david sklansky you missed my 100-day streak by one day







Reply...