SheSomeGirl Edinburgh

[Marmalade]

External Link/Members Only - Get QR Code
ShesSomeGirl (or not just ‘some’ but ‘a lot’
Some balance is maybe appropriate given the delicacy of reviews which maybe miss out all-important data.

This woman advertises herself as a size 14. We all know that dress sizes vary according to the label and some vary according to NeverNeverLand.

The Daily Mail, that icon of sophisticated intellectual fare for the discerning gentleman who has suddenly run out of toilet roll, offers up four fatties who are a mere size 16 — in a piece appropriately called External Link/Members OnlyHidden Image/Members Only

Yet even by her adroitly poised photograph, ShesSomeGirl is humungously in glorious excess of such underfed offerings.


External Link/Members Only


The photo was taken at a time when ‘curvy’ maybe meant ‘curves in a bit at the waist’ rather than ‘convex in excess of expectation’.

Ok, she’s fat. Let’s say it.
She knows she’s overweight, so the forum should admit it too.

So here’s the other thing: she has quite a nice persona. It comes across as very genuine, and combined with an excess of pleasantly directed enthusiasm that, proportions to one side, makes her very fuckable.

She wouldn’t fit on the back of your bike: but if you can take the tonnage she won’t suffocate you (though I suppose she might if you ask).

Bargain price. OWO, DFK, fingering & cowgirl. Nae rush.

[Jock D]

External Link/Members Only - Get QR Code
ShesSomeGirl (or not just ‘some’ but ‘a lot’
Some balance is maybe appropriate given the delicacy of reviews which maybe miss out all-important data.

This woman advertises herself as a size 14. We all know that dress sizes vary according to the label and some vary according to NeverNeverLand.

The Daily Mail, that icon of sophisticated intellectual fare for the discerning gentleman who has suddenly run out of toilet roll, offers up four fatties who are a mere size 16 — in a piece appropriately called External Link/Members OnlyHidden Image/Members Only

Yet even by her adroitly poised photograph, ShesSomeGirl is humungously in glorious excess of such underfed offerings.

Pet hate of mine as well...unfortunately a lot of the punters on this site don't have a scooby about women's dress sizes either.

[SheSomeGirl]

External Link/Members Only - Get QR Code
ShesSomeGirl (or not just ‘some’ but ‘a lot’
Some balance is maybe appropriate given the delicacy of reviews which maybe miss out all-important data.

This woman advertises herself as a size 14. We all know that dress sizes vary according to the label and some vary according to NeverNeverLand.

The Daily Mail, that icon of sophisticated intellectual fare for the discerning gentleman who has suddenly run out of toilet roll, offers up four fatties who are a mere size 16 — in a piece appropriately called External Link/Members OnlyHidden Image/Members Only

Yet even by her adroitly poised photograph, ShesSomeGirl is humungously in glorious excess of such underfed offerings.


External Link/Members Only


The photo was taken at a time when ‘curvy’ maybe meant ‘curves in a bit at the waist’ rather than ‘convex in excess of expectation’.

Ok, she’s fat. Let’s say it.
She knows she’s overweight, so the forum should admit it too.

So here’s the other thing: she has quite a nice persona. It comes across as very genuine, and combined with an excess of pleasantly directed enthusiasm that, proportions to one side, makes her very fuckable.

She wouldn’t fit on the back of your bike: but if you can take the tonnage she won’t suffocate you (though I suppose she might if you ask).

Bargain price. OWO, DFK, fingering & cowgirl. Nae rush.

I have never advertised myself as a size 14.

[Marmalade]

Profile now says 16.  Still wrong. See Daily Mail link above. Of course some doubtless feel sizes are all in the mind    but my review draws attention to her infinite size: it is not judgmental. If anything it seeks to to draw a dividing line under reviews that did not mention it. I can like extremes: not every punter does.

[twaff]

Profile now says 16.  Still wrong. See Daily Mail link above. Of course some doubtless feel sizes are all in the mind    but my review draws attention to her infinite size: it is not judgmental. If anything it seeks to to draw a dividing line under reviews that did not mention it. I can like extremes: not every punter does.

She can defend herself about sizes etc but as far as I can see the reviews you are 'criticising' for not including or calling out her size nearly all state they think she's bigger than her photos suggest.
Not sure where you can find grounds for drawing a line under them?
Unfair on the reviewers imo

[Marmalade]

She can defend herself about sizes etc but as far as I can see the reviews you are 'criticising' for not including or calling out her size nearly all state they think she's bigger than her photos suggest.
Not sure where you can find grounds for drawing a line under them?
Unfair on the reviewers imo

Is it fuck unfair. Many punters, probably most punters, don't go for women much over size 12. Failure to point out a woman's size in a review is, in my opinion, extremely disadvantageous to that great majority of punters and certainly not disadvantageous to those seeking 'larger women'. "A few extra pounds" on a size 12 might be a size 14. Not 16 or 18. "Bigger than her pictures suggest" is pretty non-specific. I might just as well say "see her webpage for details" rather than putting them in the review. Size makes a difference to punting as it does for health.
So crawl back in your fluffy hole if you don't like my review. 

[twaff]

It's got fuck all to do with being fluffy. You're fucked off picking a girl that didn't suit your preference but are blaming others, I think it's you that needs to crawl off and lick your wounds I'm afraid.

[Marmalade]

It's got fuck all to do with being fluffy. You're fucked off picking a girl that didn't suit your preference but are blaming others.

Now you're just being silly. I picked a girl that did suit my preferences on this particular occasion. My review highlighted points not properly covered elsewhere, and several experienced punters already found them very relevant. Go check the site rules. Post your own reviews in their own thread and stop wanking on about mine in this thread.

I come on here to add value. The value of replying to you however has reached its natural limit. 

[Marmalade]

Looking through fluffytwaff's reviews I see the only time he had a less than 'positive' experience he blamed himself. 

neutral -- down to me not pushing for better value

 

[twaff]

I'm not disputing your review of the WG as that's your opinion but you've called out others on their opinions (which are fairly consistent across them all).
I'll leave it there as no point arguing about any further and, as you say, on your review.

[TommyMoundfrigger]

I didn't quote a size in my review because I don't wear dresses but I did say she was, 'a lot bigger than I was expecting and what her photos suggest.'
Clear enough I would have thought.