shanmonster | Oct. 29th, 2004

Nikki Warner is in fantastic shape. But this picture of her creeps me out for several reasons.

First of all, her boobs look about as congruous as a hand grenade on a cake. Maybe the implants look nicer when she's fully clothed, but right now, they look like a couple of cantelopes stuffed beneath her skin.

The next oddity is the disparity in her skin tone. I'm sure she's wearing a spray-on tan. Her face and hands practically glow in the dark.

Thirdly, that's the teensiest g-string I've ever seen. It appears to cover just her pudenda. All the better to see her fabulous physique, I guess!

These descriptors could fit plenty of female fitness models I've seen. I understand that a tan makes muscular definition really pop, and I can understand the scanty clothing (why bother wearing anything, though?). However, I don't understand the implants. Don't these incongruous globes hide the pectorals? Wouldn't natural breasts, even if they lose all their fat and pretty much disappear, accentuate the muscles beneath? It seems to me the implants are done just to fit some sort of strange belief that if boobs aren't really there, then neither is femaleness.

Now I realize that some women just really want to have the boobies on their chest. But if I rightly remember, in competition, participants lose points if they don't have knockers. This would mean that in order to be a professional body builder/fitness model, surgical modification is de rigueur. I wonder how many of them are on Rate My Boob Job?

And now, lest you feel left out, ( here's one for the laydeez: )