Kimkins pics: she's huge & has lost her hair

RRzVRR wrote:
Jim wrote:

Roger Zoul wrote:

Jackie Patti wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::: Hollywood wrote:
:::
::::: Kimmer remains a fascinating person.
:::
::: Why? Must be that Jerry Springer thing.
::
:: Naw, it's WAY better than that.
::
:: You have a very charasmatic sociopath manipulating people in a
:: cult-like group vs. a bunch of irrational nutcases who just hate the
:: heck out of her.
::
:: Currently, I have no life... so the Kimmer story is fascianting as
:: heck
:: to me.

When you put it all together I can see how the story can be
fascinating. I just don't necessarity see why "kimmer" is, though.

I saw it as one of those....well, we're all getting entertained by
the sleaziest amongst us.


Reminds me of a classic American Success story. P.T. Barnum.

"There's a sucker born every minute." type of behavior leading to
success.

It captures our imagination and spirit in some way.


I read up on this the other day and found it very interesting, but had a
different take.

What makes it interesting to me is the sadism and submissiveness. If it
was just about money, then any eating plan or special food combination
could be used in the ploy. But to manipulate people into starvation,
pushing the goal of being SNATT (semi nauseous all the time --their
lingo) shows a special brand of sociopath. Likewise those who would be
convinced that SNATT is a reasonable means to the end goal of weight
loss would is a special form of victim. Its seems very much more like a
cult than just a scam.

To my view, that's way it all seems so hard for the rest of us to
understand their fanaticism.


Yes, there is some specialization into contributory and self harmful
victim behavior that differentiates it from simple financial fraud or
deception.

One could imagine this as being an "externally justifiable route" to
eating disorder behavior.

Ya, maybe she has an infection and needs to avoid underpants for health
reasons.

I was very impressed, when she stopped her career for marriage and a family,
but then she got divorced. Oh well.


"Hollywood" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 14, 6:48 pm, "FOB" wrote:
Did you hear that Britney Spears was spotted without underpants again?
What
is with that girl? I guess some people like attention even the bad kind.

What's wrong with going without underpants? I don't have a problem
with that.

I prefer to have my tender parts protected, what if you sit on something
sharp -- or just icky.

Hollywood wrote:
|
| What's wrong with going without underpants? I don't have a problem
| with that.

Ew, spreading her infection everywhere she sits.

I certainly wasn't impressed with her choice of father for her children.
Seems like fathering children is his only skill.

Cubit wrote:
| Ya, maybe she has an infection and needs to avoid underpants for
| health reasons.
|
| I was very impressed, when she stopped her career for marriage and a
| family, but then she got divorced. Oh well.
|
|

I'm a bit fascinated by the kimkins story.
Poor abusees, poor lady too if you ask me.

But anyway.
I was looking at the Kimkins logo and just said too myself
"Hey, even the name of the company is not real. The real name of the
company is Komkons, according to the photos."

Who here has some time to kill in order to redesign the logo?
Too cruel, am I ?


Huey (not my cleverest post ever, I know)

I don't follow the story closely, but I am impressed with how much money can
be made with just hype.

It seems a careful criminal can be quite prosperous.


"Hueyduck" wrote in message
...
I'm a bit fascinated by the kimkins story.
Poor abusees, poor lady too if you ask me.

But anyway.
I was looking at the Kimkins logo and just said too myself
"Hey, even the name of the company is not real. The real name of the
company is Komkons, according to the photos."

Who here has some time to kill in order to redesign the logo?
Too cruel, am I ?


Huey (not my cleverest post ever, I know)