andaroo wrote:
1. Holding your hand over your breast, walking down the street, in public would not buy you favors from the police. Hands are not clothing.
2. Regardless of your thoughts on the above statement, I still find it rather odd that this actress is taking the time to differentiate her steamy oversexual Sin City performance, that is far more errotic (for me at least) than a basic nude photograph and pretending that she's somehow holding on to her innocence.
Strange, strange world.
But she is taking apicture, not walking down the street, hence the distinction. Its like a gril sunbathing with a top off at the beach.
I don't think she's innocent, but as I said those pictures are stnadard fair at this point in Hollywood. If one condems her then you need to condem Scarlett Johansesen, Natalie POrtman, Kiera Knightly, Kirstern DUnst, etc (wait Knightly went nude in afilm), my point is none of these girls should be condemend for posing with their hands over their breasts in a photo, we've seena thousand times. Its basically expected as this point. There is a diference between provactive topless photos, and a full nipple/[pussy bareing spread in playboy, I personally prefer the former.
Is she upholding the bastion of virginity and saintly no, has she really posed nude, no because in none of these pictures I can see more then what I could see at the beach if a girl were tanning and had undo her top. I cannot type in Jessiba Alba pussy in google and see a non fake photo.
[-X that will not do. :wink: 
she'll turn to the darkside like all the others.
