More Vanessa Hudgens Nude Pics
The best new nude pics of Vanessa Hudgens are in the post I put up last night. (Be sure to check the post again, I replaced the old pics with higher resolution versions – still censored of course.) But I was shocked to find that there are a whole bunch more!
But that’s not all! There where also eight more sexy shots from the set where you can’t see her tits. Although she still isn’t wearing much.
August 6th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
[...] Be sure to click here for part two if you havn’t already seen [...]
August 7th, 2009 at 7:59 am
Thank you for these Gregg =D
August 7th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
You’re welcome, Oisin.
I think this one is my favorite, even though she has clothes on. LOL
October 11th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
First of all, where are the 2007 nude pics of Vanessa? And secondly, why are her nude photos censored? There’s nothing wrong with the nude human body. Being nude has NOTHING to do with sex. Otherwise, people would never take baths or showers. After all, you have to be NUDE to do that. I’ve seen both sets of Vanessa now and none of the nude pics are even remotely sexual. In fact, censoring any nudity implies that it’s sexual when it’s not. There’s a big difference between nudity and sex. Don’t fuse the two together unless there’s evidence that said nudity is sexual. These photos and the 2007 photos (the nude ones) are NOT sexual at all. I admit, she’s a pretty young lady, but she’s not sexually erotic, as many people claim to think. So what she’s nude? Big deal. Like no one has ever seen a naked girl/woman before! Gimme a break! Nude is not lewd!
October 12th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Well out of respect first of all to censor nudity does not always imply sexual tendencies as you would be implying. The general population frowns on public nudity. It is a social taboo. So whatever reason one wants to give to censor the end result remains that people do not want to be exposed to it. If I’m wrong than why doesn’t all programs on TV use nudity? Because the masses do not want it. Yes there is a nitch or a portion of the population who find it exceptable and that’s fine but as for the majority they do not want to see it. No insult to any nudist but parents and kids and fans of Vanessa look down on her having nude pics out there.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Not even remotely sexual? I disagree. She’s clearly flirting with the camera in these photos. Nudity by itself isn’t sexual, but in this context I think it’s fair to say a lot of people see it as such. And because of that, I felt it best to cover her, so that I could still report the story.
January 9th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
What if people thought table legs were sexy? And, way back when, people DID! Table legs reminded some men of women’s legs and they had to be covered! Now, obviously, that is no longer an issue.
My point is that if people were to see nudity and get used to seeing it in non-sexual situations, it would no longer be an issue, just as the table legs no longer were an issue after men had better control of themselves. I know it’s not easy, but I believe if people can get over seeing table legs, then women’s legs and most of the body, why should nudity be any different?
In fact, because nudity is such a taboo in this country, it only makes people WANT it more! That’s a known fact. Ask any typical guy that views the female body as a sex object. If nudity became normal and typical, it would no longer be a taboo. That’s what I’m trying to get at.
January 9th, 2010 at 5:33 pm
By the way, women in bikinis are actually much more sexual than just being nude. That’s why men can’t stop looking at women in bikinis. They show off the very body parts they’re meant to cover up! Bikinis say “look at me”. Nudists without clothes say “talk to me”. Nothing stands out. It’s all out in the open.
I blame our society for brainwashing people into thinking nudity is a bad thing. Don’t kid yourselves. Our society is pretty sneaky about tricking people into believing almost anything. It tells people that nudity should never be seen by anyone other than your spouse for intimate moments.
Yet, in other countries where nudity is legal and acceptable, people there don’t have hang-ups about the human body and people of all ages…kids, too…are frequently nude. But, it’s not just about nudity. It’s also about respect for their bodies and the bodies of others.
January 9th, 2010 at 5:38 pm
Let’s face it…we’re all born nude, whether many people want to believe it or not. Other than protection from the elements, clothes have no other purpose in life. The fashion industry dictates what people must wear and people buy into it. The media’s no help, either, since most mainstream movies that show nudity are for sexual scenes that give nudity a bad name.
Nudists are not the same as swingers. They’re not at these places to engage in orgies that many people seem to assume. That’s what swingers are for. I’m not pointing out anyone specific on this site when I said “many people seem to assume”. I’m just saying people in general in this country.
January 9th, 2010 at 5:46 pm
That said, Vanessa’s nude photos are not sexual because they don’t hide anything that clothes do. It’s the clothes that make a person sexually appealing because they tease at what people WANT to see, but can’t. So, I’m proud of Vanessa for taking the step to have a nude photo. In fact, the 2007 nude photo of Vanessa is the most natural and non-sexual of all because everything is out in the open.
In the 2009 photos, on the other hand, only her top is exposed so it’s not quite as natural, but it’s hardly any more sexual than the full nude photo.
And, here’s another thing that gets me. Why is it okay when men have no top on, but it’s not okay for women? Why are female breasts regarded as more sexual than male breasts? If it’s about size, then what about some men’s “man boobs” or “moobs” as some have called them? Some of them are larger than those on some women. But, what gets censored? Women’s breasts…even then. Why?
January 9th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
My comment is very long and this site won’t let me post the entire thing at once. That’s why I’ve broken it into many smaller comments. But, this should be the last one since I’m just about done.
If female breasts are censored while male breasts are not censored, what does that tell you? If it’s not about size, then it must be about gender. And, that is sexist and prejudiced. I must be very unique among most people in that nudity does not make me feel the way that most other guys would feel. Clothing, on the other hand…! Okay, now I’m done. In closing, I just want to say four last words…NUDE IS NOT LEWD!
January 10th, 2010 at 7:02 am
us is affraid of topless teen girls where overseas not uptight.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:03 am
uncensor them.
January 10th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
In Europe, a topless woman, of any age, is more accepted. Come to think of it, North America is the only place where boobs are naughty.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Well, I’ll tell you one thing. If I had it my way, man-boobs would be censored.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:02 pm
“Table legs reminded some men of women’s legs and they had to be covered!”
And now table cloths make a lot more sense.
And as I’ve said before, I’ve covered her nipples mostly to cover my ass.
These are posted first and foremost because it’s news. I don’t have any problem with nudity, private or public. But I don’t control society at large (at least, not yet.
)
July 20th, 2010 at 4:51 am
What we reall should see is her spread her legs and let us see what’s down stairs mmmmmmmmmm yummy
October 1st, 2010 at 9:11 am
If you think you should publish those pictures, then be brave and publish the original ones.
Otherwise don’t publish anything.
For people who want to see the original pics, not censored by some silly people who pretend they are shocked but who probably watch them alone and feeling guilty, here they are : http://www.leaked-photos.com/vanessa-hudgens (and I don’t feel guilty at all !).
October 7th, 2010 at 11:48 pm
Thank you, What.
October 8th, 2010 at 1:04 am
U guys R weird! Lulz