Perfect from all angles ... I still can't figure her out ...
Repost nay-sayers aside, this is one of my favorite sets of
ERC (which I file under "hurts" with only a couple more). With her pics being #2 in my disk usage (well over 1GB), I've seen a lot.
What I can't get over is how "perfect" she is from all angles -- side, front, rear, etc... And when I say "perfect," I don't mean traditional ProfV "perfect" which means she's adorable in every way, especially with a little imperfection here and imperfection there that makes her so beautiful in my eyes.
I mean ERC is absolutely perfect -- which is actually a negative in my eyes sometimes -- sad, but true.
Jelena Jensen and
Shay Laren are other glamour babes I can't get enough of. But they have slight imperfections that turn my lust into overdrive, and I can't stop getting enough of them. But ERC, I'm still trying to wrap my head around her, as I've posted before, there are women who are "too perfect." I have the same problem with
Bettie Ballhaus in the more busty, slightly fuller realm (although Bettie looks to be a sub size-10, not quite what I call a FFW, although her porportions are larger). Because I lust for far more FFW (and even select BBW) because I that little, alleged "imperfection" is my primary lust (a wider, fuller figure -- especially when slender and fit).
But I think ERC is a more of a universal poster for "too perfect" than Bettie, largely because some would say Bettie's breast size is "too big" (and see that as an imperfection) or "softer" (which is just BS given her hardbody, just in larger proportion with soft breasts). It has nothing to do with breast size or other attributes -- I wouldn't mark ERC's "smaller breasts" as "less desirable" in the least bit. As you've heard me state over and over, I'm all about the woman's form as a whole, and when it comes to ERC, there is just something as "too much of a valuable package." Those hips, that rear, the apex and other aspects of her hourglass form. Her profile, that chin, those lips, the eyes -- and especially that smile -- there's no pose, facial expression or other view that gives her a "bad shot."
Yes, I get a little spiritual on this, I don't see how God Herself could have crafted ERC and let her be. There is no woman who is more universally appealing on this board because she has "just the right" everything. Yes, I know several would argue others by sheer post count, but with all her Playboy titles, one could argue otherwise. There has to be something else to it -- I don't believe in "randomness" and I believe there is a "single formula" for the universe (even if it's well beyond the order of math we will never discover in the distant future -- even that's probably beyond the limit of existence of mankind itself).
I've always talked about how God Herself creates woman in Her Own form. But in reality, God Herself must be of so many attributes of variation that are not discrete we could not interpret as mere men. So all I can believe is that ERC is the sum of all attributes and all features under limit, in a defined set of parameters that are most universally appealing to 3, 4, 5, maybe even 6 sigma. Especially since her absolute perfection without a single flaw keeps her from being in my favorites. It don't know if it's a built-in or socially constructed mechanism to my lust as a man, but I feel there is something chemical to it (and the former). Something like a defense mechanism that requires me to avoid experiencing a lust because any intimate encounter would cause a cardiac or other failure.
I'm sure people are laughing by now with all this analysis, but I would like to understand the nature of my own lust and, again, why ERC doesn't make it in my top favorites. Yet when I get into lust for her, "it hurts like hell" (figure of speech, not that she's evil). Hmmm, maybe there's even more to it than that -- man should not be allowed to experience her, or at least some men that are not adequate enough to please her in return. Again, I believe it's chemical and there is a natural law to it, but I'm just "reaching in the dark" for it. But if engineers and physicists like those from Howard Hughes to Sir Issac Newton found the female form to be an analytical enigma as well, then I don't think I'm nuts either. In fact, while many would say it's "a waste," there's been a lot of "waste" going on from even men of great engineering works and physical theories/law in our history, so it clearly is the "ultimate puzzle" for men.