« Go Chiefs! | Home | OMG!!1 DOG KRONSCHE-ATTACKS BABY!!! »

Nov 15, 2006

'GALGH'-itude

Um.

A little breathingk room please, People? GALLGH.

Errrrrrrg Errrrrrrg_2

Smoooooshed by a rackitude. Racks happen. Genevieve H., nice posing, and Tom P., nice shootin'.

Email to a Friend | Add to del.icio.us |

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b09f69e200d834fd1d2d69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'GALGH'-itude:

Comments

ummmm... I feel like a peeping tom...

ceejoe
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 06:53 AM

I'm with CeeJoe on this - despite the overwheening CQ (cuteness quotient) of these piks, I definitely feel a little dirty for looking at them...

Tony James
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 06:55 AM

Let's seee...I'm seeing in excess of 200 comments on this one.

jaypo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:01 AM

Yeah, definiely more intense than the average cat-in-rack photo ... but if you focus on the kitty (and imagine what that wet nose must feel like buried in your skin!) it's not so bad.

Is it just me or does he look kinda lion-ish in that second pic?

Rachel
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:03 AM

Very cute, very nice, very NSFW. I'm not a prude, but NSFW, guys.

Jen
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:04 AM

Hmmm. I swear to God I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud, but I'm a girl, and a "C" cup, myself. Here is the deal: Cats-n-racks needs to be divided into two categories: 1) cats who happen to be by a rack completely by accident (always cute), and then 2) cats who are intentionally smooshed into a rack that the owner has fully planned; having worn the lowest and most revealing attire that unintentionally makes the "rack--not the cat--the focus of the pic. Although the kitten is cute, these pics are forced....of the #2 variety, I believe. Not judging, just trying to enjoy "cute", not overwhelming boobs forced into a kitten's little face. I love C.O., I love Meg....just trying to present a vantage point that may help in assisting what's "cutest", in the inevitable picture screening process. Love and goodwill to all!

Denise in Nebraska
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:06 AM

I happen to love the pattern of that tank top.. and the girl in said pic needed a little less on to achieve a better tan..
Little marmelade kitty is adorable..*snorg!*

Faekitty
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:07 AM

Ditto to what Denise in NE said. She still has a rack even if her sweatshirt is zipped up. Seems like the focus here is more on the rack than the cat. Poor kitteh.

Tracey
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:09 AM

Umm... too much effort, too much staging...

Jen
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:09 AM

I agree that it looks a little too staged. Is that even a tank top and not her bra?

ShelleyTambo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:22 AM

I um well erm uhh hmm. Golly.
Guess I'll abstain from this one. (For now.)

Theo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:34 AM

Won't be sharing CO with my kids for the next few days... But, whatevs

Connie
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:35 AM

I bet if I asked The Boys to choose which was cuter, the kitten or the rack, I bet they would be silent for several minutes thinking (The Boys are cat lovers, mind you). In teh kitten's favor, he does look a bit like a young Stokes (part cat, part lap rug), which would swing it towards the cat for one of teh Boys.

cat
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:43 AM

Too staged for my liking, not worthy of CO! More cat, less rack, please. =D

Anna
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:44 AM

Kute citty!

jaypo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:44 AM

Titties! Ehrm, I mean.. Kitty!
But yeah, thats looks staged.

Too little kittie, to much tittie

TH
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:46 AM

aww it looks so comfortable! I want to huggle a cat/ some fluffy animal like that.
And i dont think i'ts bad for kids to see this, the only impact it will have is...they would want to huggle a cute animal to their chest ^_^
IF my hamster was big enough I would totally do that <3

Mika
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:49 AM

tee hee TH! gotta agree with ya there..

Tracey
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:49 AM

I can see how this might not be the typical photo for CO, but that's not to say that its NTSFW or indecent. After all, this is not as bad as some of the stuff you see on TV during the evening and at least here you have a cute kitten to cover up some of the "lewd" content.

I guess the pureness nature of the site is being questioned, but I personally am not bothered by this photo. As far as staged, yeah maybe it is, but what's wrong with that? Putting a pet in a costume and then taking a picture of it isn't candid. It's not like the pet put the costume on itself.

Anyways, I don't want to start a riot, but I definitely have no objections to this entry.

Jason
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:50 AM

Gratuitous boob shots! You can almost see freaking nipple!

I'd bet green money on the esteemed Dudes of C.O. saying, "Say wha? There's a cat in those pictures?"

XD

Skwerly
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:50 AM

that's fine, kitteh. you can stop blowing now.


i said STOP.

finn
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:50 AM

How can boobs not be kid-friendly? Do I need to remind you of how much you depended on them in the early days? What is wrong with our culture?

Although clearly "staged," I do not find it unworthy. (After all Mr. Neckerchief Ferret pic was clearly staged.) And ultimately, it seems the owner of the rack does is indulging in a whole-hearted cuddle with kitteh. Just hope kitteh is getting enough air. ;o)

Redzilla
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:51 AM

These staged cats in racks are always a let down for me. I get so excited when my RSS indicates there is a new posting, and then all I see are breasts with a poor cat shoved in the shot. I have no idea how these even rate to get on here. I'm sure you could do a quick-o internet search if you're running low on material.

Jen
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:52 AM

ok...I don't see this kitten you guys are talking about.. heehee...kidding...he is a cutie patootie...butagreed that there is way too much boobitude.

daisycat
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:56 AM

Great! And I just got done telling a friend that this is a great site to introduce his little girls to. And that kittie looks a little ruffed up by those big girls. Poor baby.

Angiebabie
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:56 AM

pssst - can someone tell me what "NTSFW" stands for?

AmyH
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:57 AM

finn!! plse email me. Might be livin GF again :-(

jaypo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:59 AM

LOL, Finn!! "No, no, don't--POP!"

Okay, does anyone else have this feeling, when CO won't load? I feel like I'm a kid again at the amusement park, only I don't remember where Mom said to meet up if we got separated from the rest of the kids. I think, "Oh, dang it. CO won't load...where I am supposed to go? How will I find the other peeps?"

Redzilla
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 07:59 AM

"NSFW" is "not safe for work". Not sure what the T is, unless someone is doing "NoT Safe For Work".

I like the picture. they're both cute. And the kitten too.

Mark D
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:01 AM

RedZ, I had trouble loading it in Mozilla but it seems fine in IE.

jaypo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:03 AM

AmyH--

NSFW stands for Not Safe For Work. Not sure what the T stands for.

And while we can debate all day long on when Hustler got into kittehs, I think we can agree that cats in racks is cute only when the cat has a sufficient air supply.

Oreo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:03 AM

I'm with well-spoken Denise in NE, and those who follow her. In my opinion, this is more about the boobs than about the kitten. I'm guessing that softcore stuff like this is, well, already widely available on the internets - I don't really appreciate seeing it here. Love this site, love the Meg-language muchly - but not shots like this.

anne
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:04 AM

Um...cute kitty?

NebraskaErin
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:07 AM

I'm going to have to weigh in with the "prudes" here - I would not exploit my kitteh to display me rack - it's a lil sick - I'd never smoosh one of my kittehs into my boobs like that - I mean, would a guy stuff his dachsund down his pants for a "cute shot"??

(Hoooboy! Already regretting that remark - don't need to be giving people ideas here)

carolina
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:11 AM

So you're saying if kitty's in a pocket, a vase, or a shoe, it's cute. If it's in somebody's budge, it's obscene and staged. What is wrong with all of you? Getta grip, they're just tits!

Lisa Campbell
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:15 AM

Too funny jaypo - I see 200+ comments too.

chackler
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:15 AM

Long-time reader, first-time comment-poster, and here I am sounding like a pervert on this one... but seriously, this isn't that explicit. Your kids won't understand why it's interesting, but it won't damage them. The smooshing in the second pic is a little gratuitious, but the kitty seems to be enjoying the affection in the first image. And this image is feminine and intimate, which is one of the essential reasons it's also a little sexy.

Is it okay to use that word?

Jesse
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:18 AM

Remembers, peeps, CO was just written up in Maxim Magazine. Meg has a new readership segment to retain.

"Readership" used loosely.

EliottM
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:18 AM

I'm with Redzilla on this one. Staged, sure. Whatevs. But still cute. Both the kitty and the surrounding environs. It all looks soft and cuddly and I'm having no problems with it. Maybe the "surrounding environs" are being a little aggresive. (Kitty says "Halp, I can't breeeve!) But otherwise I'm cool with it. And before anyone starts - I'm female. Straight, too.

M
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:19 AM

I think it's funny - that kitteh looks like a little kid being smooshed into some auntie's chest as he arrives at a family dinner.

tiny bubbles
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:23 AM

As per my previous post, once we get a "Pups in Pants" category, I will shut up.

;)

carolina
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:23 AM

I've seen more skin than this on "What Not to Wear." And badly dressed at that.

jaypo
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:23 AM

Don't know about anyone else but my first thought was,

"Shouldn't she be wearing underwires?"

Doesn't look like it from the flimsy strap but us ole gals know that gravity gets to all of us over time. And from the left one's upper curves, it's borderline "perky/support me now!" time.

Kar
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:23 AM

I have definately been feeling like Denise. Cats and Racks was cute when it started as a cat slipping into someones shirt, or someone holding a cat next to the rack that just happened to be in the picture. But squishing a poor kittens face into your chest is not all the cute, it's kind of disturbing. I'm not offended by this or anything, just don't think it's right to smother a kitten just for the sake of getting your rack on the internet. there are other ways to acheive that!

Melissa
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:26 AM

My first thought on these has always been "Why do these women dare put animals with claws down their fronts?" Lacerations and bleeding on sensitive bits? Now, that wouldn't be very cute. But then I've always been a practical person...

AmyH
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:26 AM

I agree with Jesse, in that your average squee-ing 7-year-old isn't going to be uncomfortable with the *searches for word* bustyness of these pics.

My 14-year-old daughter, however, had a mixed reaction to it. She laughed at it, since it's so obvious that it's a little silly; but she also sighed over it and was a little unhappy, since she's in a stage where she's comparing herself to others.

She still loves CO though, as do I.

EliottM
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:26 AM

yeah, skanky is never cute. boo for staged cats&racks! in that one pic from a few months ago, u could see her nipple. kits r cute, nips r not :)

s.
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:27 AM

I am definitely not offended by this, but it is not my favourite... It's the staging that blows it for me. I am not too fond of the pets in costumes, either :)

But that's just my view, hey? The kitty is still cute.

And EliottM does indeed have a valid point ;)

pendlerpiken
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:31 AM

Caption:
"To the top of Mount Everbreast, or bust!"

pyrit
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:31 AM

Long time viewer, first time commenting..definetly not cute. Not because of the way too ample rack, but because poor kitty looks very uncomfortable and unhappy. This is more like the cute or sad section(?)...would be my guess anyway.

Heather
 |  Nov 15, 2006 at 08:31 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

« Go Chiefs! | Home | OMG!!1 DOG KRONSCHE-ATTACKS BABY!!! »

Sizzearch

  •  
    Web
    cuteoverload.com

CuteMail

  • Receive the daily content of CuteOverload in your email box. Free!

    Your email address will only be used for this purpose and not given out to any other third party.

    Enter your Email


    Powered by FeedBlitz

Cute Caps!

  • Did you know you can add CuteCaps to your own webpage? Try it!

Got Cute?

  • Think you have a cute photo, Punk? [Clint Eastwood voice] If you think it fits our seriously stringent requirements, send it to us. We just might post it! But if we don't, it's really for the best [patting your back.]

Choosey bloggers choose:

  • TypePad!

    If TypePad helps your blog survive a Slashdotting, you know it's strong.

    Set Up Your Blog For Free with TypePad! If I can do it, you tewtelly can.

Email Me

  • press-related: press [at] cutelabs.com
  • business-related: meg [at] cutelabs.com
  • submissions: cuteoverload [at] frostdesign.net

Press Coverageses

  • Don't miss our Press page for ALL pattings on the back!

Sitemeter

Powered by TypePad