This is Helga. She is a model. She would never do porn because it is "degenerate". Yet she is willing to do "artsy" nude photos.
The purpose of this thread is to empirically prove that nude pictures like these are not art, but fapping material, and that Helga is not an art model, but a slut. Please help the experiment by reporting on your fapping procedure.
We also thank the modelling agents/photographers who convince the girls that the purpose of the photo is not jizz-collecting but art, effectively brainwashing them.
Thank them for allowing us to jizz to "artsy" 10/10 beauties we couldn't otherwise.
>>890353
its a shame she doesn't do porn
oh well. i fapped to this, i came
She can be as "artsy" as she wants. I'm still going to blow my nut while looking at pictures of her and imagining what kind of dirty, degenerative things I would do to her.
>>890537
What thinks exactly? It is important for research.
What is art?
What is pornography?
Who cares?
>>890568
>Who cares?
Various governments. The UK recently banned a bunch of kinky activities that are commonly seen in porn before.
>>890582
Isn't that just the UK being the UK?
>>890339
>>890537
I think the main difference is that you can see these are kind of tasteful. Sure, she's naked but it's different from being fucked on camera.
You can blow your load to them and I'm pretty sure she knows that's what's happening, but you only get to imagine the dirty kinky shit you'd do to her, not see it. She keeps some dignity.
>>890662
Can't keep your dignity with those fake boobies
>>890662
Fucking in front of a camera is also tasteful. With a taste of lust
Yes, I can blow my load to her pics, and I have indeed, many times. What I argue here is that the main purpose of these pics is indeed to make some anon's dick feel good from time to time, not cultural enrichment. Even though porn and pics like these differ in their means, they have the same goal. And thus, Helga is a semen demon, and not an object of art. That's why she is in this porn board thread. She is not getting the treatment she wants. No one here cares about her artistic expression. But we care about her being a nude slut eye candy. We care about her long, slim legs, her pubic hair, her lush boobs and her slutty facial expression on a very fappable face. We are giving her the treatment Helga, the sex object, deserves. We are watching her pictures while we stroke our cocks, accomplishing her main purpose in life: to bring carnal pleasure to random, jerking men.
You should also help her reach her true potential. Start fapping!
>>890339
I'd argue that art and pornography aren't mutually exclusive unless you define pornography in a more specific manner than "stuff that's likely to get guys hard and/or gals wet".
People trying to combine the two is hardly a recent development, either. It's been a staple of both literary and visual art since fuck knows how long. Pic related.
maan she's not a model, she's a fuckin sluut
- I don't give a fuck as long as I can see her naked she can think whatever she wants
- She probably knows and likes being a slut but just doesn't want to be seen as one
It's all good, we should convince more women to do that. Like those feminists showing their tits to destroy the patriarchy. It's all fine to me.
getting in the spirit of this
Isn't she a jizz magnet?
She is made to be fapped to.
She thinks she's not a whore. Our jizz proves her wrong.
All these girls deserve confirmed fappers.
She's sitting on a cube. So this is art, not fap material.
Is this art?
I've always wondered how mentally challenged people that talk to themselves while dumping in a porn thread must be.
>>890339
take this shit to /s newfag!
>>891491
huge and overexposed also equals art !
>>893567
How exactly is that huge or over exposed?
>>892023
Rule of thumb:
If you have to ask is something is art, or question whenever or not something is art, it's usually art.
>>896649
fuckin lost
>>890339
Something has trouble looking "artsy" when the actress has fake breasts.
>>890339
What the fuck does this have to do with HC??
S/B in (s -softcore)
>>890339
>The purpose of this thread is to empirically prove that nude pictures like these are not art, but fapping material, and that Helga is not an art model, but a slut.
I don't think you're gonna prove anything, let alone that she has sex with a lot of people. But whatever floats your boat I guess.
Also this belongs in /s/.
>>894960
Looks like she's been rode hard and put away wet for decades
>>894952
That is a really stupid rule of thumb that you should immediately discard you pleb.
>>894960
reverse image search did not help me, any chance for sum sauce? she's absolutely gorgeous.
Some anons worry about truly ridiculous things, and need therapy. This thread proves it.
>>896891
The proper reply would have been to advise the anon to an hero.
1. This belongs in /s/
2. We have 2 boards because division exists
3. You are a lunatic talking to himself in taiwanese digimon exchange forums
4. Man can fap to everything. I once fapped to tea mug standing on a table just to prove to myself that I can.
>>890339
But you have to admit that this picture has more aesthetic appeal than some low quality porn production
But yeah to me she is just a regular instagram slut
.
>>896891
either back up your argument
or
get back to fapping
or both
It doesn't matter to me what you do
>>901350
This is the type of pic I wish my gf would take but she insists on keeping her "dignity" fuck that Im taking my digital camera and getting every pixel of that butt
>>901633
look
if she doesn't want you to do it
then don't do it
besides
it would just won't look sexy if she doesn't consent
case in point
THIS
the face of someone who REALLY wants it.
if that face was more apprehensive, it wouldn't nearly be as hot
Beauty and ugliness lies in the eye of the beholder.
>>891130
That's one of the best bums I've ever seen.
>>903728
She has a nice as too.
>>890667
>fake boobies
virgin detected
>>901341
Are there more photos from this? Is it a set?
>>890339
This is the most imbecile argument I've ever read but I don't care and fap, like you should.
Do we care? I mean, are we caring about this now?
