GoneA said:
i just don't see it in #3 ... from best-looking to not-so-best-looking:
1. #1 (no competition)
2. #4
3. #3 (meh)
4. #2 (there are several things wrong there)
Tsk, my sweet GoneA, we must differ indeed in our tastes
1. #4 (provided my nighttime fantasy thoughts before I fell asleep last night)
2. #2 (sexy, rip-the-tshirt-offable, geek-chic)
3. #1 (I wouldn't go near him sexually in a million years though, a zero-reaction for me pleasure-wise)
4. #3 (just looks obnoxious and arrogant to me, a total zero-reaction pleasure-wise)