Lonelygirl15

veriteblesse wrote:

leocass86 wrote:

NillaWafers wrote:Holy crap. There are babys born with a lot of hair, you can even see the pleats of the labia...for goodness sakes. Don't make me post pictures of crowning babies for comparison.

Please do, to end this argument.

http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/bab ... loseup.jpg


my EYES.

Alright, you win.

NillaWafers wrote:Also. I'm pretty sure the painting is a Ren Painting...anyone have any ideas?

I fully agree about it being Ren era. I know I've seen it, just can't remember if it's a portion of a painting or the whole thing. Been trying to search through famous Ren artists images, hoping that if it is a portion of a painting that I'll catch it.

veriteblesse wrote:

leocass86 wrote:

NillaWafers wrote:Holy crap. There are babys born with a lot of hair, you can even see the pleats of the labia...for goodness sakes. Don't make me post pictures of crowning babies for comparison.

Please do, to end this argument.

http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/bab ... loseup.jpg


my EYES.

ohmygod...*im blind*
I think now we should all agree that the pic IS the ... baby birth... omg

leocass86 wrote:

Dunneh wrote:

leocass86 wrote:What baby have you ever seen that is born with that kind of head of hair? It doesn't happen. There's no blood or mess or anything. It doesn't really look like a birthing baby.

and, to add, the size proportions are way off.

I just looked up 'baby being born' and 'baby births' and found an entry, full head of hear, and very obviously a newborn. Luckily, I hadn't eaten.

Not a head of hair like the one we presume is in that image. If these assumptions are correct, that baby is born with as much hair as an adult. You can't even see scalp! Baby's hair is too thin not to show scalp.

um, you can clearly see scalp through the hair in the picture.

Lol, well that was a pleseant diversion...

You maybe shouldn't post links, they're graphic. If people want to see 'crowning babies' they can look for themselves, they got little fingers to type into google with. XD

Also, I don't see 'as much hair as an adult' on the CiW picture. I see some hair but not more than some crowning pics I saw.

And that was the first pic I meant, incidentally. lol.

Dunneh wrote:You maybe shouldn't post links, they're graphic. If people want to see 'crowning babies' they can look for themselves, they got little fingers to type into google with. XD

Also, I don't see 'as much hair as an adult' on the CiW picture. I see some hair but not more than some crowning pics I saw.

And that was the first pic I meant, incidentally. lol.

Yeah, let's not post links, let's just put the pictures up. You knew what the picture was of, if it grosses you out, don't click it. Simple.

Heh. Anyways. It's not the last supper I checked. I thought maybe some da Vinci or Raphael....

NillaWafers wrote:Heh. Anyways. It's not the last supper I checked. I thought maybe some da Vinci or Raphael....

thought the same, not Michelangelo (sp) either

If it fallows the trend, it's referencing a place. A place where a chalice, or a cup similar to a chalice, would be exchanged.

Could be a church/temple/whatever going with that thinking. The place the ceremony will take place.

But something about it throws me off. The Chalice itself is very fine and detailed, but the hand and arm (presumably) are incredibly cartoony and dull...

Thought it was the "Death of Socrates" for awhile but it's not it.

Woah. Check it out. If you look at the middle right image upside down, it looks like it's a weight at the bottom of a body of water, and the person is floating from it, tied by a string. Maybe not hanging, afterall.

leocass86 wrote:Woah. Check it out. If you look at the middle right image upside down, it looks like it's a weight at the bottom of a body of water, and the person is floating from it, tied by a string. Maybe not hanging, afterall.

I thought we all knew that already