>>1968036Hot clothes and stupid censors are of the same concept to me. They both tease you without showing you what's there. As for
>>1967961, I didn't evne know she wasn't nude under there. The added layer of mystery to it is what makes it exciting, kind of like the Bubble threads where they cover up evidence of bikinis to make them appear nude, though I imagine you won't be a fan of those either. For people into this kind of thing, they have little or no interest in the uncensored versions, that negates the point of this kind of thread in the first place. I'll be the first to admit that yes, this is a weird as hell fetish, but eh, different strokes for different folks. I don't expect you to understand it any more than I understand peoples' foot fetishes, and that's fine.
As for the sources to the western images, Google doesn't find them either? I'm the one who posted
>>1967764 and as far as I know, no uncensored version exists, that was just a progress shot of another image that was also censored in some way. I can't tell if any other images are of western origin so I hope that cleared that up.
