Does anyone else find it incredibly annoying how common the stupid mistake of rendering an internal cross-section with the tip of the penis pressed to the cervix, while at the same time, in the normal image, it is clearly represented as just the head being inside is made?
Cogitation said: Does anyone else find it incredibly annoying how common the stupid mistake of rendering an internal cross-section with the tip of the penis pressed to the cervix, while at the same time, in the normal image, it is clearly represented as just the head being inside is made?
Well anatomy tends to go out the window in these types of images, so its to be expected. Though I do agree, that IS annoying.
Cogitation said: Does anyone else find it incredibly annoying how common the stupid mistake of rendering an internal cross-section with the tip of the penis pressed to the cervix, while at the same time, in the normal image, it is clearly represented as just the head being inside is made?
That's an odd hang-up. Anatomic fidelity isn't really something I spare much thought when viewing these types.
Cogitation said: Does anyone else find it incredibly annoying how common the stupid mistake of rendering an internal cross-section with the tip of the penis pressed to the cervix, while at the same time, in the normal image, it is clearly represented as just the head being inside is made?
Cogitation said: Does anyone else find it incredibly annoying how common the stupid mistake of rendering an internal cross-section with the tip of the penis pressed to the cervix, while at the same time, in the normal image, it is clearly represented as just the head being inside is made?
To begin with Hitting the cervix is not an easy task. And if for most of the women any even touch on the cervix can be painful or even do real damage.