*

TheZookie007

  • L Cup
  • 53945
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #225 on: August 17, 2006, 08:31:53 AM »
Quote:

Tim McGraw has a tough choice here.
Faith Hill is gorgeous.  But Dolly's got the bod....What would I do?  I would F--- Dolly, marry Faith, and then go kill Billy Ray Cyrus.


I would do Dolly, do Faith, kill Billy Ray, then marry Dolly and do her again and again and again.
AOC, HC, TW, BO, KH: FU. FUATH. 100x.

*

pedonbio

  • Oh My God Cup
  • 22949
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #226 on: August 17, 2006, 11:43:45 AM »
Quote:

Dolly is definitely not natural! Up until she was in her mid to late 20's, her breasts were maybe a C cup. Then all of a sudden, they're almost as big as her head. Unless she suddenly had a case of Virginal Breast Hypertrophy (VBH), then she's definitely siliconed!  With that being said, she looks great! If she was still a C cup, she'd still be beautiful. She seems to get better and better looking as she gets older. Though, I'm sure she'd had some help from plastic surgery (face lifts, etc.).  But if so, her surgery's have been very well done, and leave her looking naturally youthful without having that "pulled" look.

I've attached a 2 photo collage.  The photo on the left is from 1968.  The photo on the right is a recent one. (She looks really good in that one! )




I stand, most humbly, corrected.
Someday, chi1dren, this entire fuck-up will be yours.

*

Argyle

  • X Cup
  • 2236
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #227 on: August 17, 2006, 12:12:19 PM »
Quote:

Dolly is definitely not natural! Up until she was in her mid to late 20's, her breasts were maybe a C cup.  




I'd venture to say that the last time Dolly was a C cup was in 2nd or 3rd grade.

I agree that she has had numerous plastic surgeries over the years, but she was busty well before she started up with Porter.

She didn't dress very "flashy" back then, coming from a rural mountain upbringing, and I'm sure that she was more interested in impressing the powers that were with her voice.  

Later in the Porter years, you begin to see Dolly's figure more and more, and by the time she left that show, she had developed the glitzy Dolly persona we all later came to know and love.  She gained weight in the 70's, too, so that by the early 1980's she went through a very public depression about it, essentially making herself over into the waiflike Dolly of today.

But I have never seen anything documented anywhere that says she had silicone injections or implants or anything else prior to her well-documented cosmetic surgeries in the 1980's.

*

hugejugglover

  • P Cup
  • 1368
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #228 on: August 17, 2006, 12:25:05 PM »
Quote:

Tim McGraw has a tough choice here.
Faith Hill is gorgeous.  But Dolly's got the bod.



It wouldn't be a tough choice for me.  I'd pick Dolly in a heartbeat!  I prefer Dolly's face also.  To think that's she's 62 and still looks that good!  Actually, on a similar note... Dolly was on a talk show about a year or so ago.  I could see there was another woman sitting next to her, but I never really took notice of who she was.  My eyes were on Dolly...she really is eye-catching (and not just because of her chest).  Anyway, about 10 minutes into Dolly's interview, the host asked some question, and said "what do you think, Shania?"  It was Shania Twain that was sitting next to Dolly!  And Shania is not ugly herself.  But, if attention had never been called to her, the entire show would've went by, and I probably never would have even known Shania was there.  My point... that's how eye-catching Dolly is!

*

hugejugglover

  • P Cup
  • 1368
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #229 on: August 17, 2006, 12:39:16 PM »
Quote:

Quote:

Dolly is definitely not natural! Up until she was in her mid to late 20's, her breasts were maybe a C cup.  




I'd venture to say that the last time Dolly was a C cup was in 2nd or 3rd grade.



2nd or 3rd grade?  She would only have been 7 or 8 years old then.  I assume that was an exaggeration.  On another note, she was 13 when she did her first record.  Oh...and I stand corrected about her age... she's 60, not 62.

*

Argyle

  • X Cup
  • 2236
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #230 on: August 17, 2006, 01:00:47 PM »
Quote:


I'd venture to say that the last time Dolly was a C cup was in 2nd or 3rd grade.



2nd or 3rd grade?  She would only have been 7 or 8 years old then.  I assume that was an exaggeration.  




Maybe, but my point was that Dolly was no C cup in 1968.  Women with large breasts can hide their figures with modest and/or loose fitting clothing, and I think that's what your left-hand picture reflects.

And really, Dolly's breasts at present--and for the past 20 years or so--are not all that big, at least in comparison to how she looked in the late 70's and very early 80's.  They look big because they sit atop of disproportionately tiny body.  But I think her breasts were larger around the time of 9 to 5 and Best Little Whorehouse.

*

hugejugglover

  • P Cup
  • 1368
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #231 on: August 17, 2006, 01:18:52 PM »
That may be true.  I see what you mean.  But I still say she definitely had implants even during her "9 To 5" days. That's a pretty tight fitting outfit in the left photo (from 1968) of the attachment I provided in my earlier post.  And in that photo, she's no where near as busty as she became just a few years later.  Plus, she doesn't seem like the type that would try to hide it if she had big breasts.  My guess would be she got implants sometime in the early to mid 70's.

*

ninjrk

  • F Cup
  • 684
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #232 on: August 17, 2006, 02:37:59 PM »
One from the late 60's.  They're nice, maybe a C-D cup, but not as wondrous as they were in the 70's.

 

Matt
Be nice to everyone you meet, but have a plan to kill them if you have to.

"the only thing unnatural about my tits is how fucking amazing they are!"  LOL

*

hugejugglover

  • P Cup
  • 1368
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #233 on: August 17, 2006, 02:45:37 PM »
Quote:

One from the late 60's.  They're nice, maybe a C-D cup, but not as wondrous as they were in the 70's.



Her face looks REALLY good in that one! She looks adorable! Thanks for the post.

*

Argyle

  • X Cup
  • 2236
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #234 on: August 17, 2006, 03:14:30 PM »
Quote:

One from the late 60's.  They're nice, maybe a C-D cup, but not as wondrous as they were in the 70's.
Matt




Rebuttal:


http://www.raredolly.com/gallery/view.asp?gallery=Dolly%20and%20Porter&pic=Dolly_Porter9.jpg

*

hugejugglover

  • P Cup
  • 1368
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #235 on: August 17, 2006, 03:34:50 PM »
Quote:

Rebuttal:



Do you know what year that photo is from?  I'm thinking it's probably early to mid 70's.  


I was also thinking about the photo that you posted, ninjrk.  I'm thinking that photo may be even earlier than the late 60's.  I'm thinking maybe mid 60's.  She just looks so young in that one.  She was born in 1946.  I'd say she looks to be no older than 20 in that photo.  Any idea exactly what year it's from?

*

Argyle

  • X Cup
  • 2236
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #236 on: August 17, 2006, 03:53:01 PM »
Quote:


Do you know what year that photo is from?  I'm thinking it's probably early to mid 70's.  




Not according to the website.  There are a host of photos there, sorted by decade.

*

ninjrk

  • F Cup
  • 684
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #237 on: August 17, 2006, 05:43:39 PM »
Quote:

Quote:


Do you know what year that photo is from?  I'm thinking it's probably early to mid 70's.  




Not according to the website.  There are a host of photos there, sorted by decade.




Yeah, but that's from the generic Porter Waggoner section, not the 60's section (or at least I didn't find it there).  This 1:1:1 picture rule is a pain in the butt, but I'd link to these:

When she was 15
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v614/ninjrk/6.jpg

and then again at the start of her career:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v614/ninjrk/60s_11.jpg

Remember, she was on the Porter show from '67 to '74, so the pic with her and Porter could be from anywhere in that period.

If you have an established date for the pic, that's a different story, of course.

Oh and the young Dolly photo that I put up was from her first Monument Records session, so that would be late 1965.

Matt
Be nice to everyone you meet, but have a plan to kill them if you have to.

"the only thing unnatural about my tits is how fucking amazing they are!"  LOL

*

hugejugglover

  • P Cup
  • 1368
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #238 on: August 17, 2006, 06:17:16 PM »
Thanks for the links!
Quote:

and then again at the start of her career:



Actually, the start of her career was 1959, when she was 13.  Her first record was "Puppy Love" for Goldband Records.  http://docsouth.unc.edu/sfc/goldband/sound/45-8213-1.ram  

*

Argyle

  • X Cup
  • 2236
Re: Dolly Parton MERGED
« Reply #239 on: August 17, 2006, 06:30:55 PM »
Try this:

hxxp://www.raredolly.com/gallery/view.asp?gallery=60s%20Photos&pic=Essential%201.jpg

Bottom line is, I don't think you can make the comparison you want to because of the changes in her act, and her  wardrobe.  It's going to be tough to find full body concert photos fom an era when she was more of a studio recording star.  In none of the photos you've posted is there a convincing angle that would show precisely how large her bust was at that given time--the clothes are either too loose, or the angle is inconclusive.  

Additionally, assuming that as an 18-19-20 year old she was a "mere" D-cup, from a purely physical standpoint, women develop at different rates.  I know many who "blossom" early and then grow into their bodies, and others who suddenly sprout curves in their twenties.  Then again, others stay lithe until their metabolisms slow down in their thrities, or even forties.  Look at Michelle Angelo, who was a D in her modeling career, then turned into an I-cup by the time she was nearing 50.  

How are you going to reconcile all of that with your idle speculation that she had some help, based upon a few photos?

Historically, Dolly's weight *has* fluctuated, and her breasts DID appear larger during those times.  I think that, unless you've got some pretty compelling evidence, this is one of those arguments that you're doomed to fight without proving anything.  But we can agree to disagree.