Monday, September 17, 2012

Lucille Ball Topless!

Wow! Wow?

If you're not my regular reader, but you've found this blog entry via Google or some other search engines, I suppose you are either a horny idiot just dying to look at how Lucille Ball would look like topless, or you're deeply envious of her beauty and are curious to see more of her, or you've heard/read some rumors about her posing nude when she was a struggling model.

Yes, Lucille was an extremely sexy woman, even while performing her crazy antics, she was still as desirable as hell. Yes, Lucille had been very poor when she was young, so poor that she would often go for days without food.

However, I do not believe that the woman in this picture is Lucille Ball. No sane person would ever identify this unclothed lady as Miss Ball! She doesn't even look like her.

If you're still as obstinate as a mule, I've taken the time and effort to use legitimate pictures of Lucille to compare with this incriminating picture. A picture speaks a thousand words, and the evidence is clear thereafter.

First, let us examine the most examinable feature- the nose. Look at the nose of... let's call her naked lady. By taking the red line from the end of the forehead to the end of the nose as a reference point, naked lady's nose bone is curved, but Lucille's bone is so much straighter.
Second, using the same picture above, notice that the tip of the nose belonging to naked lady is fleshy, but Lucille doesn't have this small lump of meat that makes one's nose tip protrude out. Naked lady's nose flairs, but Lucille's doesn't.

By the way, Lucille was really blessed with a beautiful nose. Do I sound weird, saying that?

Third, another bone structure that is to be inspected is the chin. Naked lady's chin protrudes out, and naked lady has a cleft that apparently divides the mouth and the chin, but Lucille's chin doesn't protrude out, neither does she have a cleft.
Let us now survey the ears. Naked lady has a bony ear, but Lucille's ear is fleshier and her earlobe is so prominent.
Oh well, you may say that the prominent earlobe may be due to wearing heavy earrings for an extended amount of time. Point taken, but there is one last feature that does not change in terms of size or shape from the moment we are born to our death.

The eyes.

 Naked lady's eyes and Lucille's eyes are obviously different. Lucille has the shape of her eyes similar to a cat's. She is blessed with big, beautiful, oval shaped eyes. Even when she looks down, the bottom eyelid is still semi-oval. However, naked lady's bottom eyelids are straight. Refer to the red reference line if you still do not get what I mean.
Another feature of the eye we will now look into is upper eyelid. Lucille is blessed with what we call deep-set, sunken eyes. Her double eyelid line is so far away from the eyelashes. On the other hand, naked lady's double eyelid fold is much nearer to the eyelash. Her eyes are also less sunken as compared to Lucille's.
I hope that you've enjoyed my analysis and concur that the picture of the nude lady is NOT Lucille Ball. Lucille was very shy with her body and was shy to even wear bathing suits in front of strangers. She only wore it if work made it necessary for her to, or in front of her loved ones and people she trusted. This has been confirmed via several sources. If you've read her biography, she has emphasized this, too.

Lastly, and I know I am going to digress, but let us not judge the naked lady in the picture. There are a thousand possible reasons for posing nude, and each may be more unfathomable as the next. She may be lustful, or she may love art. She may want to earn more cash, she may be dying of hunger. Or she may be needing the money to cure her sick mother. We will never know, will we? After all, that picture originated from the 1920s, still a long way before the 21st century, where perceptions of sex and sexuality have changed so drastically.


  1. That is not Lucille Ball. That doesn't even look like her. Cannot believethis bogus crap. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Anything to make a story, I swear. So sad.

  2. I love to see fakes exposed. Use to be "Fake Doctor" great work. Sorry here you have proven these are pictures of head shots at slighty different angles. I don't think that is Lucy, but you didn't prove it.

  3. the poses are different but the ears do give it away.

  4. The real giveaway, Lucy's tits are bigger.

  5. this is not Lucille Ball

  6. 'I suppose you are either a horny idiot just dying to look at how Lucille Ball would look like topless, or you're deeply envious of her beauty and are curious to see more of her, or you've heard/read some rumors about her posing nude when she was a struggling model.'

    Why make any suppositions? There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. Outside the USA, and yes I am supposing you're a Yank because of your evident prurient attitude towards nudity, humans of both sexes and all genders enjoy looking at the naked human form. Shock horror! They must be perverts then? No, not at all. So they must be envious then? No, not at all. Or they've heard rumours that some humans sometimes take their clothes off and are curious to see if the rumour is true? No, not at all.

    On the face of it, your analysis and comparison of the photos are excellent and very convincing (you have convinced me anyway) but because you betray your own prejudices so nakedly you undermine your own position. If you were cooler headed, more detached and less angry, less determined to insist that your heroine could not possibly be the woman in the photo (why, because nice American girls just don't do things like that?), your analysis would be even more convincing because the reader could see that you are not merely trying to prove a predetermined position.

    1. Nudity is classless no matter what day and age or culture. It is also a sign of having zero self respect. And yes, if you're looking at nude pictures, you're either a pervert or insecure. We're not savage wild animals, we wear clothes for a reason. She has every right to feel incensed that some idiot would accuse Lucille of posing nude, considering she had much more respect for herself.

    2. That is quite possibly the dumbest comment I have ever read. Nudity is NOT classless. Do you shower with clothes on? Is the Statue of David classless? Or the Sistine Chapel? You obviously led a very sheltered life and I feel sorry for you. If you have read the bible you would realize that even the first man and woman were naked until they were tricked in believing it was dirty. Now please, take your closed mind back into your safe little box and don't come back out.

  7. I would have fucked her back in the 20's

  8. She gave me one of the best blowjobs I have ever had in my life in 1980.

    1. Sorry, the BJ statement above was not referring to Lucille Ball, it was actually Shirley Booth.

  9. To: AnonymousDecember 21, 2014 at 5:44 PM

    The only thing classless around here is your drivel. The level of immaturity you display is nothing less than appalling. It is your own insecurities on display; not that of the model.

    A response like yours is sick.

  10. Whoever this woman was (and I hope it was Lucy) she is the essence of what beauty is all about and the only reason to consider believing that there may be a God, even for an atheist like me. Propriety is one thing but to completely cover something this beautiful and tasteful forever in the interest of prudish insecurity and fear would have been a travesty. Whoever you were, thank you and I hope that you had the same level of pride and confidence that you projected in the photograph.

  11. Funny how all the doubters really believe themselves and speak loudly about their beliefs. Well, unfortunately for them, it's been officially confirmed as Lucille Ball.