soledad wrote:as long as it is proportion to her body I'm fine with it
HARVIN wrote:soledad wrote:as long as it is proportion to her body I'm fine with it
like the chubby girl in your avatar?
puke.mo.vaho wrote:BEAUTY IS INDEFINITE. WE DEFINE IT.
lunica wrote:puke.mo.vaho wrote:BEAUTY IS INDEFINITE. WE DEFINE IT.
Shamcey???
The.Apprentice wrote:So what?
Y'all guys keep complaining that only strong sashes make it, but once a weaker sash is in the top 16 you're complaining.
WTF is the problem with a heavier contestant? They have to work so much harder to make it into the top 16 anyway.
Also, keep in mind that your definition of "chubby" is still considered skinny in the real world.
I think it's good that IMG and MUO are evolving with their times.
Miss Tiffany wrote:This year's Canada, on the other hand, was a little skinny and she still made it. They are promoting diversity and different body shapes as well to make women feel more confident
TopTgirl wrote: I BELIEVE THE WORD SHOULD BE "VOLUPTUOUS", "FULL FIGURE" or "PLUS SIZE" AND EVERY WOMAN HAS A DIFFERENT SHAPES AND SIZE IF THEY ARE MAKING THE CUT IT IS BECAUSE THE MISS UNIVERSE IS VERY DIVERSE WHEN IT COMES TO BEAUTY AND FIGURE!
Ian Sebastin wrote:No matter how much people try and promote fat or overweight people, it ain't attractive. Being fat and overweight is nasty. Miss Canada was not fat by normal standards but she was overweight. She did not look good on stage in a two-piece..next to the other girls. No one wants to see a fat ass parading around on stage.
HARVIN wrote:
last January it was Miss Canada
keyss wrote:Chubby contestants should place in spite of being chubby not because of it!!!
I didn't have a problem with Canada to be honest because she also had a good performance. Big Foot from Croatia was gigantic and super awkward on stage.
IMG is trying entirely too hard and its really obvious.
Kakak wrote:Trump's toxic era is gone for good.
Users browsing this forum: Antoniofak, Antoniomzk