Golden slumbers fill your eyes - Smiles awake you when you rise - Sleep, pretty darling, do not cry - And I will sing a lullaby

Jul 12, 2026 7:09 PM

stardustLUST

Views

9320

Likes

409

Dislikes

33

ART: https://www.artstation.com/clausyu
LYRICS: The Beatles - Golden Slumbers (1969)

A wonderful work. Brings memories. Good eye! Thanks for the link.

2 weeks ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

a lullabaaaaiiiieeeeeee

2 weeks ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&channel=entpr&q=female+anatomy+references

2 weeks ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 4

Well, THAT'S browseable

2 weeks ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Maturing is realizing that Zora will rock your world!

2 weeks ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This song by the Beatles is too damn short.

2 weeks ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

Part of makes it perfect :)

2 weeks ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Great harmony tho

2 weeks ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

But you're gonna have to carry that weight a long time....

2 weeks ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

See you, Space Cowboy

2 weeks ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

2 weeks ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Wtf is up with this ongoing shitty body image where the woman has an eight inch waist? Where are her internal organs, in her ribcage? Has she worn a corset for the past 10 years?
I also enjoy looking at a beautiful woman, but how about taking an anatomy lesson next time asshole

2 weeks ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 37

The approximate WHR (waist hip ratio) is 0.55 as measured with a pixel map approach. It's uncommon but not impossible. Remember this is about the ratio. Many women have large hips.

A 36" waist and 45" hip measurement (circumference) is what this drawing equates to.

2 weeks ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's fairly obviously meant to be stylized. Might not be the style you like, but it clearly is not supposed to be a hyper realistic drawing. There may be other such cases in art media.

2 weeks ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Maybe its supposed to be a caricature?

2 weeks ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Why does the 2003 review by Edinger et al., PubMed ID 12927120, suck so bad?

2 weeks ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Come on - that's uncalled for. You think anyone wants to listen after a rant like that? Even those who agree would most likely choose to disagree out of resentment of how unnecessary it is to be that rude. Bad form.

2 weeks ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 6

2 weeks ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

It is not in fact rude to point out that this is outdated art. Worse than a Barbie doll. It does not represent the proportions of a real woman at all, and it is simply a stylistic fail. It looks like what AI would spit out if you asked it for a cartoon half naked woman.
That is my opinion, and I do not force others to share that opinion, just really tired of seeing anatomically incorrect, anorexic little girls sexualized

2 weeks ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 11

You didn't say it was outdated, though. And no one here said you were forcing people to share your opinion. What they said was that you were unnecessarily rude in the way you shared your opinion.

2 weeks ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Ok, next time I will be more polite and delicate when I point out the flawed proportions and disturbing baby doll representation. You can all continue on with your lives, I’m sorry I interrupted the mood with my rude behavior. I guess I just have a different preference when enjoying art and nudity in general, and get unnecessary riled up when I see anatomical inaccuracies, it’s like nails on a chalkboard to me. Sorry I was rude about it

2 weeks ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

This is moving the goalposts. Screaming "are you a f*cking idiot?" is not just asking questions and what you did was not just pointing out that this was outdated art and claiming that it was, is borderline dishonest.

2 weeks ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0