Smallest Pussy In The World
🛑 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
Smallest Pussy In The World
Edition US UK Australia Brasil Canada Deutschland India Japan Latam
California residents can opt out of "sales" of personal data.
Tap to play GIF
Tap to play GIF
Tap to play GIF
Tap to play GIF
Elite Daily writer Jamie Leelo spoke to a former vag waxer by the name of Mel who broke down all the ins and outs of the thousands of vaginas she saw, and came up with FIVE major vagina archetypes.
Of course, not all vaginas fit into these categories, and, hell, what are categories anyway? As Mel noted, "This isn’t a mathematic algorithm. This is just to help women understand this weird ‘secret’ [the appearance of our vaginas] we keep from our friends and society at large is not as scandalous or peculiar as we may have thought."
But, for simplicity's sake, we're gonna refer to the vulva here as a vagina, mmkay? Also, these all have "Ms." names, but ANYBODY can have a vagina.
The Barbie look features a vag where the labia majora (outer vagina lips) completely contain the labia minora (inner vagina lips).
This vag model is much more common .
Roger Krastz Published: July 21, 2015
2022 XXL Mag , Townsquare Media, Inc . All rights reserved.
Type of browser and its settings Information about the device's operating system Cookie information Information about other identifiers assigned to the device The IP address from which the device accesses a client's website or mobile application Information about the user's activity on that device, including web pages and mobile apps visited or used Information about the geographic location of the device when it accesses a website or mobile application
Men have been known to have a thing for little people and if you weren't aware of the trend, just check Mack Maine's Instagram to find out his love for tiny people. But Mack isn't the only one sharing his fantasies about small women on social media; several men have made it aware of their love for tiny people on IG by posting pictures of all the hotties that belong to the community, and we must admit there's some bad ones in this world! While some people have different ideas on what beautiful is, we at XXL appreciate all beautiful women and salute today the tiny hotties of the world.
*First Published: Jul 24, 2015, 10:05 pm CDT
More stories to check out before you go
Posted on Jul 24, 2015 Updated on May 28, 2021, 7:13 am CDT
Following rigorous competition and more than 130,000 voters, the World’s Most Beautiful Vagina Contest anointed a champion this week. It was a strange, difficult-to-gauge event—but that’s why organizers turned to scientists to tell us what it all means.
U.K. resident Nell, 27, won first place and $5,000 in the pageant with a vulva beauty ranking of 7.7 out of 10. Jenny, 23, of Bavaria, Germany, took second place with a 7.3; and Anita, 20, from Hungary, came in third. They each earned $2,500 and $1,250, respectively.
The contest was sponsored by Brian Sloan, who is also the manufacturer of the Autoblow 2 . It’s known as “the first truly realistic alternative to traditional pleasure products for men,” according to the its website .
These winners will also be flown out to Los Angeles, where their vulvas will be 3D-scanned to later be reproduced for the Autoblow device.
Sloan contracted a group of data scientists to analyze the contest’s findings for their scientific implications. The data was then compiled in “ The Vulva Paper .”
If you’re a visual learner, you can view photo examples of each class here .
The Vulva Paper’s website says scientists “used the contest data to assess the diversity in vulval morphology and voters’ preference for different morphologies.” A total of 182 women participated in the contest; 110 entries were examined for the study (if measurements could not be taken from the photo, the entry was not considered).
The scientists viewed each entry on a 15-inch computer screen, zooming in “until the genitalia were easily measured using a screen ruler,” read the paper .
They measured labia majora length, labia minora length, and clitoral hood length.
Finally, the scientists rated the complexity of the labia minora; they used the three categories of rugosity (smooth, moderate, marked) to do so. To prevent vaginal bias, the same person also conducted all of these measurements. The scientists later used this research to classify the contest’s entries into six different categories of “vulval morphology.”
A chart detailing the six classes is included below:
As far as methodology is concerned, a random assortment of entries was sent to each voter, who was then asked to rate the vulva pictured on a scale from 1 to 10. These voters were only able to rank one photo at a time, but could also vote on an unlimited number of entries. The scientists compiled 2,766,671 ratings from 134,707 contest voters.
“To reduce individual biases, we centered each voter’s ratings using their mean and standard deviation. This allowed us to reflect the preferences of voters on the same scale,” read the study .
According to the paper , each voter rated 21 photos, on average. Each vulva also received 15,285 votes, on average.
The study also found that “roughly 51% of voters preferred the first two classes of non-protruding, simple labia. The other 49% favored the four more complex vulva classes.”
“As expected from the rankings that we saw at the country and local levels, Class 1 vulvas are preferred over the others more often. But the combined percentages of voters who preferred more complex classes of vulvas far outweighed those who preferred the simplest style.”
The winners’ photos, however, were not included in the study—having been among the participants whose photos were not able to be considered. Moreover, the “doggy style” posture featured in these entries made it difficult for the scientists to complete the necessary measurements.
“Indeed, pictures depicting contest entrants in a doggy style position obtained ratings 2 points higher on average (p <0.001) than others. Other features, like piercings in the clitoral hood, didn’t affect the ratings,” read the study .
So basically, the “doggy style” photos generated “influential excitement” among the contest’s voters—an important competitive advantage for all future entrants to consider.
Photo via mislav-marohnic /Flickr (CC BY-ND 2.0)
‘You can taste the lack of effort’: Dunkin’ customer says ‘dumb’ teenagers are bad at making iced coffee, sparking debate
‘It’s f*cking laughable’: Worker says her job would rather replace her with 6 people than give her a raise, sparking debate
‘You can’t just tell a customer to Google it’: Walmart manager fires employee, sparking debate
‘It’s just a job’: Worker cries over email she accidentally sent, sparking debate
*First Published: Jul 24, 2015, 10:05 pm CDT
More stories to check out before you go
Posted on Jul 24, 2015 Updated on May 28, 2021, 7:13 am CDT
Following rigorous competition and more than 130,000 voters, the World’s Most Beautiful Vagina Contest anointed a champion this week. It was a strange, difficult-to-gauge event—but that’s why organizers turned to scientists to tell us what it all means.
U.K. resident Nell, 27, won first place and $5,000 in the pageant with a vulva beauty ranking of 7.7 out of 10. Jenny, 23, of Bavaria, Germany, took second place with a 7.3; and Anita, 20, from Hungary, came in third. They each earned $2,500 and $1,250, respectively.
The contest was sponsored by Brian Sloan, who is also the manufacturer of the Autoblow 2 . It’s known as “the first truly realistic alternative to traditional pleasure products for men,” according to the its website .
These winners will also be flown out to Los Angeles, where their vulvas will be 3D-scanned to later be reproduced for the Autoblow device.
Sloan contracted a group of data scientists to analyze the contest’s findings for their scientific implications. The data was then compiled in “ The Vulva Paper .”
If you’re a visual learner, you can view photo examples of each class here .
The Vulva Paper’s website says scientists “used the contest data to assess the diversity in vulval morphology and voters’ preference for different morphologies.” A total of 182 women participated in the contest; 110 entries were examined for the study (if measurements could not be taken from the photo, the entry was not considered).
The scientists viewed each entry on a 15-inch computer screen, zooming in “until the genitalia were easily measured using a screen ruler,” read the paper .
They measured labia majora length, labia minora length, and clitoral hood length.
Finally, the scientists rated the complexity of the labia minora; they used the three categories of rugosity (smooth, moderate, marked) to do so. To prevent vaginal bias, the same person also conducted all of these measurements. The scientists later used this research to classify the contest’s entries into six different categories of “vulval morphology.”
A chart detailing the six classes is included below:
As far as methodology is concerned, a random assortment of entries was sent to each voter, who was then asked to rate the vulva pictured on a scale from 1 to 10. These voters were only able to rank one photo at a time, but could also vote on an unlimited number of entries. The scientists compiled 2,766,671 ratings from 134,707 contest voters.
“To reduce individual biases, we centered each voter’s ratings using their mean and standard deviation. This allowed us to reflect the preferences of voters on the same scale,” read the study .
According to the paper , each voter rated 21 photos, on average. Each vulva also received 15,285 votes, on average.
The study also found that “roughly 51% of voters preferred the first two classes of non-protruding, simple labia. The other 49% favored the four more complex vulva classes.”
“As expected from the rankings that we saw at the country and local levels, Class 1 vulvas are preferred over the others more often. But the combined percentages of voters who preferred more complex classes of vulvas far outweighed those who preferred the simplest style.”
The winners’ photos, however, were not included in the study—having been among the participants whose photos were not able to be considered. Moreover, the “doggy style” posture featured in these entries made it difficult for the scientists to complete the necessary measurements.
“Indeed, pictures depicting contest entrants in a doggy style position obtained ratings 2 points higher on average (p <0.001) than others. Other features, like piercings in the clitoral hood, didn’t affect the ratings,” read the study .
So basically, the “doggy style” photos generated “influential excitement” among the contest’s voters—an important competitive advantage for all future entrants to consider.
Photo via mislav-marohnic /Flickr (CC BY-ND 2.0)
‘You can taste the lack of effort’: Dunkin’ customer says ‘dumb’ teenagers are bad at making iced coffee, sparking debate
‘It’s f*cking laughable’: Worker says her job would rather replace her with 6 people than give her a raise, sparking debate
‘You can’t just tell a customer to Google it’: Walmart manager fires employee, sparking debate
‘It’s just a job’: Worker cries over email she accidentally sent, sparking debate
Rule34 Web
How To Get A Girl To Fuck You
Barbara Palvin Legs