表紙に使われた写真

ハイヒール

さすがの無駄肉ゼロ！

美人で良かったね

このタイミングで雑誌が発売されたということは、撮影自体は五輪前に終了していたはず。メダルがなければただの「出たがり娘」扱いに留まってしまう恐れがありましたが、決してそれだけの女ではないところを自力で証明したステファニーは立派です。北京では今、あのフェルペス選手と恋の噂も流れているとか(ガセ臭いですが)。

リンク: Girls Of FHM(他の画像はここで)
リンク: Stephanie Rice linked to Michael Phelps | Herald Sun
リンク: Stephanie Rice | Herald Sun(彼女の本業での様子はここで)

La jolie Holly Valance succède à Ana Ivanovic en couverture du FHM anglais. Je ne suis pas un grand fan mais j'avais bien aimé sa petite apparition dans Prison Break...

Megan Fox, de 22 años, fue nombrada la mujer más sexy del mundo en abril de este año a través de una encuesta realizada por la revista FHM, mientras que Angelina Jolie se encuentra en el puesto número 9. Megan es comparada frecuéntemente con Jolie, por su belleza, "wild style" y más que todo por sus tatuajes. Pero antes de hablar de éstos, les dejo los primeros 10 puestos de la encuesta.

10. Keira Knightley
9. Angelina Jolie
8. Hilary Duff (?)
7. Cheryl Cole
6. Scarlett Johansson
5. Hayden Panettiere
4. Elisha Cuthbert
3. Keeley Hazell
2. Jessica Alba
1. Megan Fox

Ahora, sobre sus tatuajes. Muchos me parecen pro, como por ejemplo la imagen de Marilyn Monroe en su antebrazo derecho.

Luego en un tobillo tiene una luna creciente con una estrella..

En un costado tiene escrita la frase "había una vez una niña que nunca supo lo que era amor hasta que un niño le rimpió el corazón" en inglés.

A un lado en la espalda lleva otra frase, "todos nos reiremos de las mariposas doradas."

Esta vaina en la muñeca que no sé qué es...

El nombre de su novio/prometido, Brian Austin Green, que por cierto es 13 años mayor que ella.

También tiene que si unos tribales por ahí y un símbolo de fuerza en el cuello, pero... no conseguí fotos aksjdnkajlsdnsjkadsa.

Megan admite haber probado algunas drogas, pero dice que la única que le gustó fue la marihuana, incluso está a favor de su legalización. ¿Qué tal? sadnkslandkjsadk qué focker. Le gustan los video juegos y su favorito es Gears of War para Xbox. De música le gustan que si The Strokes y Beastie Boys. No es nada amiga de Lindsay Lohan, incluso durante la filmación donde ambas actuaron juntas, Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen, dice que no se llevaban nada bien. Y por último, dice tener más amigos que amigas, “From what I've experienced, women aren't good friends to one another. When guys want to hang out with you because your personality is badass, women immediately hate you.”

Y ya pues. ;)

tonight had a photo shoot for the FHM magazine..

photographer's cat...meow ~

my first time being shot in a studio ....

and..we went to Mcdonald...

FHM want me to wear my W's cap with Ronald Mcdonald....hahaha...

had a very long interview for the Oct issue, stay tuned!

this is their August issue....

But since that fateful day of on the 28^th May when the Sex and the City: The Movie was released to a grasping UK fan base, dark clouds have been brewing. Distant mumblings have swollen and gathered into a deafening chorus of outrage and distain. The male detractors have spoken.

With the bristling panache of Charlie Brooker, razor sharp critiques have been launched. Shrewd strategies of attack have been outlined. My two male housemates plotted to stick it to us stupid women by descending on the cinema mid-showing and running amok, cat amongst the pigeons style. They were bravely unperturbed by my assurance that they'd be beaten to death in a hale storm of heels and handbags.

Peter Travers of Rolling Stone words the disaffection elegantly when he muses...

"Some dudes would rather light their dicks on fire than endure this movie version of the ultimate TV chickcoms".

What have the New York glam clan done to incite such wanton acts of penile incineration? Feeling under siege, have the Gods of Testosterone called upon their minions to set aflame their prized jewels in a sacrificial offering? If only the more ambitious cult leaders could somehow harness this mystery ingredient, they'd be laughing. And why has Peter Travers chosen such a bold opening statement? As if to fend off the shameful emasculation threatened by the film's diamante glare. You can bet it was a tense day in the Rolling Stone office the day this assignment was dished out. ("Oy, Travers! When you're done scraping the gum off the underside of my swivel chair you can get cracking on the Sex and The City review!").

I would hazard a guess that the number of hecklers who, unlike poor old Peter Travers, have actually done any hard SATC time could be rounded up a New York minute. Don't get me wrong; if they were to sit through a couple of episodes I'm pretty sure they'd still hate it. But it does take the sheen off their critical credentials somewhat when they've failed to do even the most rudimentary research.

Take a casual glance at the online discussions surrounding SATC and you'll stumble across the kind of vitriolic pillaring usually reserved for Muslim extremists, paedophiles and Heather Mills:

Movie Review: Sex and The City movie satisfies fans: 31^st May 2008

The relief I feel is this garbage is something only American women can relate to or have to tolerate around them. There's a growing epidemic of femifascism in the U.S. and movies like this only worsen it.

Splash Says: May 15^th 2008

I'd rather be captured by the Taliban and forced to make my escape in a battle suit built of my own faeces than sit through 150 minutes of this

Contact Music, Sex and the City: 17th JuneKim Cattrall's Samantha... she's a 50-year-old whore who would be derided by feminists if she were a guy. Imagine, a subplot centred on a sexually-unhinged himbo who can't settle down and commit to one partner because he's too focused on himself and his below-the-belt needs.

(A middle aged egotistical lothario? Christ, yeah, audiences would never go for that.)

So, I couldn't help but wonder: What are the chaps getting their knickers in such a knot about? Unbeknownst to most of us, the arrival of SATC on the silver screen seems to have been interpreted as a declaration of war; a large gleaming pair of pink scissors poised threateningly beneath the collective ball sack. Who knew?

And SATC fans have looked on with a casual bemusement at the flaming gauntlet that has been unexpectedly tossed in their path. Only the most die-hard (and deluded) devotees amongst us would try, in earnest to make the case for SATC as a feminist manifesto. Yes, the depictions of female relationships are often accurate and poignantly rendered. (This is partly what sets teeth a-clatter. Most women have been privy to the paranoid shiftiness that female solidarity can muster in their men folk). There are also some genuinely funny moments and an occasional biting cynicism which cuts through a lot of the drippy sentiment. But for the most part, its pretty silly, and we know it.

For one, it sloppily equates feminist empowerment with capitalist hedonism, spawning the dubious myth that happiness is a pair of Milano Blahnik strappy sandals. But the political pitfalls of SATC have been documented to death. And yes, Carrie is intensely irritating, Samantha as an erotic trailblazer trots a smug and implausible path and Charlotte...well, Charlotte should never have been allowed to wander outside her Sylvanian Families Dream House. (That's right, no mention of Miranda, who is of course, beyond reproach and as a female role model, on a par with Michaela Strachan).

Yes, it's a guilty pleasure. But glance a moment at the male televisual hit list and it makes SATC look like a BBC2 season of Russian performance art. Gladiators? Police, Camera Action? Nuts TV? But are men harangued from every quarter, cajoled up onto their soapboxes to defend these visual vices? (Well, in fact Gladiators is a legitimate showcase of physical excellence and Nuts TV...). Can you imagine? And where cinema is concerned, the catalogue of crimes becomes deeply deplorable. But still this dedication to the time honoured melange of tits, fists and explosions escapes scrutiny.

So where is women's equal right to luxuriate in morally bankrupt, sugar coated chicken feed? To indulge in hedonistic viewing that glitters on the retina and tugs cheaply on the heart strings? It seems we have none. Female trash culture is acceptable so long as it can be safely relegated to the lowly echelons of super market fiction or daytime TV. But the hype for SATC: The Movie has been like chlamydia in the under 25s; pretty much inescapable.

And it's the status of the film as a blockbuster that seems to have ruffled feathers. (It speaks volumes that before I looked the word up, I had the vague notion it referred to a lucrative action flick staring someone of the Mel Gibson ilk). Hype is annoying. That's a given. Like Fearne Cotton, it has been sent by God to try us.

But do women moan about the endless parade of dick-flicks shoved in our apathetic faces? Indiana Jones, Hancock and Transformers are some recent examples. No. For starters they're too abundant, we'd do little else. Like the drunken solicitations from clammy faced louts, we've learnt to zone them out.

Men seem to sense that SATC is a sign, however an imperfect one, of women's greater social capital. That a film which excludes straight men could stake itself so palpably in the media limelight has aroused a niggling unease. Whilst not offering us the most glistening examples, it does flag up ground won on the gender playing field. It wears the campaign T-shirt without really funding the cause.

At its best, SATC plays to a sexually and financially autonomous womanhood. For many lads this translates to 20ft man gobblers, waxed King Kongs in stilettos terrorizing the city. And maybe this fear is more than just the fictional Samantha lurking under the bed. Let's be honest; SATC laughs in the face of the fake orgasm and asks men to veto their own semen before receiving head! But a generation of men sold the myth of female sexual expression as the writhing compliance of a FHM High Street Honey (women's new found erotic agenda is cool so long as it takes shape in a penchant for pole dancing or lesbian exhibitionism) were never going to take this lying down.

And so perhaps to the greatest crime of all: That the characters, failing to make the Babe grade, refuse to approach their sexuality like the buried body under the patio. Note the indignation expressed at the gang's supposed crimes against sexiness:

Robert Ebert: 29^th May 2008

Louise [Carrie's young, demure assistant] is warm and vulnerable and womanly, which does not describe any of the others.

Buck Turgidson Says: 16^th May 2008

Lesbianism is one thing, but a movie with unattractive geriatric lesbians would have you in the theatre all by yourself.

Dave of Scarborough: 10^th June 2008

ha ha ha billy ray valentine.. so true. if i wanted to see 4 unattractive sad middle aged slappers i wouldn't need to pay for the 'privilege'.

Th_Ph Says: 15^th May 2008

Sarah Jessica Parker - the fashion icon whose message is "ugly girls can be pretty, too."

Interests must be kept within the remit of Good Housekeeping magazine it seems. Some serious rules have been broken. You are allowed to be a cock hungry nympho so long as you're under 30 and hot off the Hollyoaks production line. Why have these actresses not been ushered off into the homely pastures of family sitcom or gravy advert? In this refusal to shuffle into the milieu of the pastel twin set there exists a grain of courage that keeps many of us coming back for more.

What seems to elude the detractors above is that, for once, this is a visual buffet to which they were not invited. The colourful parade of flamboyant fashion and "sexy" men (the array of arrogant, tiny eyed creeps left many of us wanting) are designed to excite the female ocular palate. Carrie et al don't care if you don't want to fuck them. Their success isn't predicated on this (and they probably don't want to fuck you either). Is this such a difficult notion to grasp?

Could it be that for many men today, the eye candy imperative has spiralled out of all control? Their libidos have been pandered to to the degree that they won't tolerate anything sexual that doesn't have them reaching for the Kleenex. Put the champers on ice. The new horizons SATC is supposed to represent can't be toasted just yet.

So unless the fellas are concerned that we're selling our dreams of equality down the river, why can't they butt out? SATC might not showcase the promised land of sexual empowerment. But in the shameful response it's solicited, it certainly shows us the enduring obstacles standing in its way.

Heather Kennedy

So before you all get sidetracked into "clearly Fuckpoliteness you have a problem with the human body" and such claptrap - the point of this post, AND of that over at Hoydens is NOT that bodies are a problem, is NOT that nudity, or near nudity is a problem, it is the fact that this is *required* of female athletes in contrast to what is required of male athletes. That world class female athletes due only to the fact that they are female are *required* by the dress codes to subject themselves to the male gaze, to submit to being seen as a sex object first and an athlete second (bikinis are *required* to be no more than the maximum allowable fabric thankyou) purely in order to play the sport at which they are the best in the world. Ok? So if we're going to argue, let's argue about *that* and not some imaginary scenario where it's about prudishness. I like bums, boobs and bodies in general just as much as the next person.

So. Some of the comments went into the 'personal choice' and 'personal freedom' arguments. Like "you should be GLAD you are ALLOWED to wear skimpy stuff". First, we are not talking about being allowed to, we are talking about being required to. There is a big difference. As tig tog noted in her comment on the thread at Hoyden, Indian beach volleyball players refused to wear the bikinis - but the only reason these women could refuse the lycra and play in loose clothing like the men is because the rules allow "a change in the dress code out of respect for the religious, cultural and ethical sentiments of participating countries". Not the women themselves mind you, only their country. So you can't just say "No thanks, I'd like a pair of baggy shorts as I can't be arsed with the waxing and I'm sick of sand wedgies". As one commenter at Hoydens said cheekily

So if I’m a professional athlete, I can’t get out of wearing sexy clothes unless I’m religious?
“sky daddy says I can’t wear revealing outfits” is the only excuse to get out of it??

So there is no individual choice at stake here when the rules require it and the only way you can get out of it without being disqualified is if your *country* has certain beliefs about the appropriateness of the teeny tiny bikinis and therefore the *whole* team objects. If you have a problem - tough shit. Suck it up my friend, if you didn't want to be ogled and wanked over, you shouldn't have tried to play sport...what do you think you are, a man? And if you're gonna keep whinging, well guess what, you're off the team, just like that. You could be the shit hottest of the shit hot, but if you won't do the bikini then you don't get to play.

Further there is some discussion of the fact that women's sports are being told that to ensure an audience sufficient to keep them on the tele, they need to sex it on up cos (so the logic goes) (hetero) men watch the sport, (gay men and women apparently lack the Sport Appreciation Gene) and (hetero) men like the tits and arse and require that ALL (with the exception of any they deem to be ew yuck) tits and arse be on display at ALL times, ergo, since (hetero) men are apparently all unrefined apes, we simply must combine the mandated twin (hetero) male passions of SPORT SPORT SPORT and FHM models into one, and (hetero) men might continue to watch you enough that we can lower ourselves to keep your silly "pretending at sports" on tele. Of course no one bothers question whether or not men are in fact not all great neanderthals who must must must have their beer, steak, misogyny and rough-house sportwatching all together at once. No one bothers to say to those neanderthals who DO think all this is A-OK with THEM (and who are only concerned with their own happiness) "Hey dudes, women playing sport? It's not about your cocks". No no, women will give way and accomodate...that's what they're supposed to do right? So where were we?? Oh yeah, that's right, it's all down to the individual choices of the individual women.

You know even if you could get me soundbites of every friggin beach volleyball player ever to say "I LOVE the bikini", given it's mandated, given women know the marketing pressure they're under, given that women were little girls who learned VERY quickly that no matter what they do in their life nothing will win them quite as much glory as being deemed Teh Hot Chik and they are allowed to be acknowledged as excelling when and only when they're hot enough to excuse their audacity - I don't buy that it's all explained away and made ok by recourse to the mantra of "individual choice".

Because even where individual players are ok with the bikini wearing it doesn't *stop there* does it? Have you heard the commentators? Continual comments on the looks and vulnerability of the female athletes, on their social lives, calling them 'girls', talking about how when their mums aren't there you just wanna give them a hug. Not only are female athletes *required* to dress to display every part of their body, but they are apprehended as 'sweet pretty girls' first and athletes second. (Bring on the counter examples of the weightlifters, I defy you...you know that counterexamples where you mock a woman's *lack* of acceptable femininity don't disprove that the commentary of women as decoration, objects of vulnerability, bearers of warm smiles that light up the nations hearts, the continual commenting on appearance, and *judging* femininity favourably or unfavorably and calling grown women, athletes top of their field 'girls' is an issue right?)

THEN we have the issue of EVEN if individual athletes are ok, even happy with being rated and assessed and often demeaned in such ways (please see Gold Diggers picture on my previous post - women who kick the arse of prior world record holders don't win/achieve/earn gold...they do what women do and they DIG IT) what of the rest of society and the effects it has on us to keep reinforcing that women are for our visual appreciation/children/SEXAYYYY first, and anything else much much later...I mean really....what of the fact that every other woman (in fact every other man woman and child) in Australia is currently being subjected to the salivating lewd boring comments designed to signal one manly man to another how WELL you perform your manly masculinity over "Heheh...beach volleyball...hehe...hi five hot chicks for us...shall we wank to a porn video later" style comments.

I mean fucking REALLY??? Wow, you are just so UNIQUE for noticing and appreciating the oh so rare sight of young thin hairfree chicks in bikinis. It's not just that you dig this image, I don't give a good goddamn flying fuck what gets you off. Really. It's that you think it's ok to subject these and all other women to it, it's that you don't acknowledge that women are every day subjected to your bonehead assessing and ranking over where they fall ACCORDING TO YOU on the I'd Bone Her Scale.

You appear here not to be *getting* the difference - that you don't have to perform and be judged in these same ways, not getting the links between this pervocracy and sexual violence against women, so where a woman performs the HOTNESS she is required to perform to a sufficient standard  - if she actually does what is required of her - then if she gets raped it's kind of *her fault* for provoking the dude, you don't seem to get for a moment that you can wear as much or as little clothing as you like without thinking for a second that should YOU bare skin YOU would be considered to have been 'asking' to be raped).

I mean we have to deal with this every friggin day ANYWAY (see discussions HERE at Hoyden regarding the social pressures on women to look 'good' if they don't want to be ignored in every aspect of their life) and we have to put up with bullshit double standards/harrasments/whatever reaction men *feel like* having to every woman who walks past/dares to exist. And NOW we have to sit around as if we're not there while you bond with one another in our presence over how hot *those chicks* are, (all the rest being invisible and not worth worrying about offending) how awesome it is for you that their sport means more perving for you, how *mmm mm mmmmm nekkid chicks are ALL for me*...anyway. I'm tired now.

If you can't have any goddamned respect for the athletes, or for the women in your life/at your workplace just COS they're women, nay because they are living breathing humans, let's indulge in the age old "imagine it's your daughter" routine...imagine a/ your daughters being commented on like that, imagine b/ what it does to your daughter to hear others, or indeed you audibly objectifying/rating/comparing and swapping women and your Great Shared Ladder of Bonability in front of them...imagine what you're doing to your sons...oh fuck. Just stop being such dicks and have a think about it for once eh?

[See also this discussion at Larvatus, the post is great, and is being engaged with/dismissed out of hand to varying degrees depending on the commentor]

75 pages/ pdf / english/ May 2008 / 18 mb

DOWNLOAD FROM RAPIDSHARE (18 mb)

MAXIM: PHOEMELA BARANDA
Even before she became so popular in local show business, Phoemela was already a big hit in HongKong and Singapore. I remember seeing her on life size billboards in several bus stops in HK and Sg. I was an instant fan.  

PLAYBOY Philippines: MIRIAM QUIAMBAO 
This is a big turn-around for the "good girl" Miriam. Let's see...

FHM Philippines: KRISTA RANILLO 
Ok, so her father is aghast over her appearance on this month's cover. Fair enough, I mean, if this happens to me, I will also feel the same way. But I am sure Krista is mature enough to know what she is doing. And hey, give it to the girl...if this is her way of saying, "if you have it, flaunt it".

Créditos a IMC

Andreia Rodrigues dá um brilho especial à capa da Maxmen de Agosto. A ex-apresentadora do “Toca a Ganhar”, fez uma sessão fotográfica num espaço de turismo rural, em Coruche, e resultado é encantador.

Andreia Rodrigues diz que as fotos para a Maxmen são “sensuais, subtis e ousadas” e nós concordamos.

Megan Fox

Three said 'No', while one said 'Yes'. I'm still undecided. 'Yes', because more lower end readers are getting their fix online (hence the popularity of Dennis' Monkeymag and IPC's Nuts.co.uk and NME.com). But then I also say 'No' because there'll always be an audience for men's mags in the lower end. They perhaps just need to make them less embarrassing to read in public. The Sun, which is still going strong, is a perfect example.

So, if by upscale, we mean put less pics of bikni clad women on the cover a la GQ and Esquire, then I say 'Yes - kinda'. I blogged about men's mags upscaling a while back (and probably contradict myself).

Still on the topic of lads mags, great article by the Mirror's Brian Reade today which pointed out the irony in Michael Gove MP blaming lads mags like Nuts, Zoo and Loaded for objectifying women. Brian wondered why Gove missed The Sun off the list, given that Page 3 was also a big offender. Surely nothing to do with Gove being a columnist for the Times, The Sun's sister paper?

(Con la camiseta de la seleccion, casi enseñando las tetas)

(Sara con un bikini blanco)

(Sara de perfil en bikini)

(La amateur morena Sara posando en una azotea en sujetador rojo)

(Sara representando a Osasuna en La Liga de las Mujeres de FHM 2008 )

AL DEJAR VUESTRO MENSAJE, PONER PUNTUACION DEL 0 AL 10, al final del mes, elegiremos a la amateur más votada.

I'd post the FHM photos, but frankly, they're fairly tame, and to me, this ad campaign she did with her then boyfriend for an underwear company are significantly more interesting. So, now that she's single, I just need you friendly readers to come up with enough cash to buy me a ticket to Beijing and she and I can get started on our life together. So dig deep gang.

The complainants said the publications, from September 2007 to July 2008, showed “obscene and erotic pictures/poses that show, depict or describe nude or semi-nude bodies, sexual acts, sexual intercourse, private parts, with no educational or artistic value, but intended to draw lust and arouse prurient interest.”

Abante said that with their complaint, they hoped to put a stop to the publication of such materials that he claimed “corrupted” minors.

“We do not want to see anymore of these in the bookstores or newsstands,” said Abante.

“If we are able to close printing presses publishing these kinds of materials, if we are able to stop all international porno magazines coming to the country, we have done very good work in this country,” he said.

Named respondents were editors in chief Allan Madrilejos for FHM, Pierre Inaki Calasanz for Maxim, Ramon Faustino for Playboy, Zak Zorro Zamora for Playhouse, Editha Asumbrado for Sagad, Joe Dalde for Toro, and the Hataw editor; and their managing editors, and general and circulation managers.

I googled Abante and found out that not only is he a member of the Philippine Congress but he is also a Baptist pastor. He also authored Manila's anti-pornography city ordinance no. 7780 when he was still a councilor in 1993.

Despite my antagonistic feelings towards religion, I actually understand the value of the class suit. Fighting pornography (especially those that can be easily accessed by children) is a good cause. If I were a parent, I wouldn't want my kids exposed to such material. BUT I have a problem with the list of magazines and tabloids named as respondents; I don't think that all of them can be termed pornographic in the real sense of the word.

I read FHM; my brother used to be a subscriber. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think it has this huge by-line in its cover that it's only for those over 18 years old. Basically, you're not allowed to buy it if you're a minor. The articles are entertaining, informative and often times funny; yes, most of the articles discuss sex but I don't get "hot and randy" after reading them. FHM is the male COSMOPOLITAN--it has a lot of articles about winning dates, keeping your women happy plus a lot of sex advice. Pornographic? I don't think so.

If any of you saw the June 2001 FHM issue which featured Mylene Dizon, I dare you to call it pornographic. This issue made my brother a subscriber of the magazine.

For something more recent, check out July 2008 with Diana Zubiri. She's naked and wet...pornographic? I don't think so.

Of course, there are other more "exposed" pictures in FHM that actually showed more--I think there were more than a couple which actually displayed nipples. There were other spreads that I found in bad taste and some were laughable but never pornographic. The regular items such as the Ladies Confessions are borderline erotica but technically not pornographic. You could say I'm a difficult person to arouse or it's probably because I'm female but that's the problem with obscenity cases; they're very subjective. What's obscene to one person doesn't necessarily mean it's obscene to everyone else.

Bottom line, I think Abante and his friends will have a hard time in court trying to prove their claim (unless the judge assigned to the case turns out to be a religious bigot). This reminds me of a case we studied when I was taking up media law; one of the many filed against porn king Larry Flynt. I forgot which case it was but I hope Abante and his cohorts are familiar with it; if not, they should just rent the movie.

More Teen Choice Awards pictures inc, Scarlett Johansson, Rachel Bilson, Fergie, Katharine McPhee, Lauren Conrad and more...

Scotty’s Ashes Don’t Quite Make It Into Orbit

Vikki Blows

(I bet she does.)

We really can’t get enough of taking photos of hot, sexy ladies.

Aside from attending the PLAYBOY party yesterday night, earlier during the day, we had a great shoot for a certain men’s magazine. Which one? I really can’t tell at the moment! I’d rather keep everyone in suspense!

Let’s just say the day was pretty much filled with images of a hot, sexy lady lying down and covered with hay.

The set up! Hey! Hay! And more hay!

Omar facebook-ing! Tsk!

And finally working his magic...!

The set! This is the stuff you don't see!

Caught on camera! Scandalous!