MSN – The wise minds at Zoo Weekly magazine must have been hurting for ideas when someone came upon the idea of posting a picture of a woman cut in half, serial killer-style, to its Facebook page, and then asking readers which of the two halves they preferred. The wildly misogynistic comments did not go unnoticed by the Australian Advertising Standards Board, which argued with the magazine’s editors about whether a magazine’s Facebook page is essentially considered advertising (leaving them open to censure) or editorial content (giving them the chance to be as nasty as they want to be).
Feminists, is there anything they can’t ruin? Just a simple advertisement that asks a simple question which deserves a simple answer. Of course they blow it all out of proportion and say it’s cruel to ‘serial killer-style’ chop a woman in half to decide between the upper portion of face and tatties between the lower half of puss, ass and legs. All it does is help the viewer visualize the difference better. How am I supposed to make an accurate decision when the body is attached? That’s umpossible. But that’s neither here nor there, the real question is what do you choose: Face/Tits/Arms vs. Puss/Ass/Legs.
No brainer: the bottom half, and I’m usually a Biggin’s guy. But the top half there’s still an opinion to be heard and a boss to be ordered by. Not worth it when those tittes ain’t gonna stay perfect forever. Sag city by 40. Bottom half you don’t have to answer to anyone unless it you both become fluent in the lost language of the queef. The no armed chick made it feasible to be able to live and make sandwiches with just your feet. Plus I think for some reason I was aroused by a Herbie Hancock video in my youth. Game, set, match: Puss/Ass/Legs.
Vote 1 for She’s still got a hole up top so it’s good and 10 for Finally, I don’t have to hear screams when anal is attempted: