Hunk? NOT!

[pierrelemagne]

I don't know about you guys - - - but I get pissed when I open a site that advertizes "HUNKS" and find anything but "HUNKS!". . . . . . . . . . !




Now, this following guy has looks that turn me own, nice body and a great cock - - - BUT I would not consider him a "HUNK!"
http://fapomatic.com/show.php?loc=0710&f=nohunk38.jpg

NOW, the next guy is a real border-line case! Maybe in a year or two he might grow into a "HUNK," but now he just misses the mark even though he has a bigger than average cock!
http://fapomatic.com/show.php?loc=0710&f=almosthunk14.jpg

The following stud, I would consider a "HUNK" par excellence. It's not the tattoo, but a certain 'je ne ce quoi' - - - Does age have anything to do with it? Maybe! I have seen few twinks that I would classify as "HUNKS" and I certainly would have kicked few of the others out of my bed.
http://fapomatic.com/show.php?loc=0710&f=hunk_09.jpg

But - - - A HUNK is a HUNK is a HUNK!

Am I the only one who thinks this way?

:thewave: :thewave:

 

[elchiple]

Number 1 and 2 are definate studs in my taste. Number 2 needs to ripen. Of course, only my horney and humble opinion.

 

[Dr Feel Good]

The first one looks very creepy and stalker like.
I agree with you one the second guy.
Not too sure about the last one.

 

[snclas]

No, you are not the only one, I'm with you and I am sure lots of other people are on the same page.

You're right. A hunk basically needs to have a "macho" look. Not only does he need to have a great body and a great cock, but the look of his face, I mean, gosh, it's the deadiest part. If a guy has a fanstactic body, great pecs, nice packs, he is still not regarded a hunk until he has an "experienced" look.

Here is a set of examples of whom I would call hunks. Bless them

http://galleries.blueloot.com/galleries/1700/Sig_Fabricio_3/Fabricio021.jpg

http://a1gayfreepics.com/index-page86.html

http://a1gayfreepics.com/index-page91.html ( love him, so kinky)

http://www.fratpics.com/archives/2007/02/28/hung_jock_aj_jacks_off_at_sportsdudes/9.jpg

http://www.fratboys.ws/galleries/fratmen/0370/taylor/pics/04.jpg ( This fellow is close but since he is so raunchy, I've decided to give him a chance anyway)

Good grief, I have to wait for twenty years to become a hunk.

Will post more pics.

 

[horean71]

thanks for sharing your thoughts, however, each individual's defination of a hunk is different!

 

[pierrelemagne]

thanks for sharing your thoughts, however, each individual's defination of a hunk is different!

You are right--as in all things personal preference is just that--PERSONAL!!!

 

[Hawkman]

thanks for sharing your thoughts, however, each individual's defination of a hunk is different!

Absolutely! It's a matter of personal choice. Some of the pics y'all have posted really turn me on, and some don't.

Who cares what you call 'em? Your "hunk" may be my loser, and vice-versa.

It's a good thing we don't all have the same taste!

 

[Oogleman]

number 2 is a hunk in my book...........phwoarrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[modernaire]

What's your point? If you think number 1 and 2 are worth fucking, why philosophize about how to categorize them?

As for me, I think the first two look handsome and healthy. Number 3 is a typical homosexual: a thirtysomething who wants to be ten years younger, been hanging out at discos too much. I like men up to forty if they act their age, though.

I agree, word for word

there may be hope for JUB after all!