Maybe because not every man is infatuated with breasts? Yes, they’re nice, but attraction to a woman isn’t dependent upon them.
Hey, if women who look like 12 year old boys are your cup of tea, more power to you. But when talking about a woman’s figure, I think it’s generally assumed that, ya know, she has one.
That’s a MAN baby!
BULLLLLLSHEEEEitttttt!
Ahem.
Even “stargazers” or “mosquito bites” count as breasts, and we ALL like them, big or small, or one or the other, if we aren’t gay.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that… but…
OKay, Aesiron, I’ll concede our attraction isn’t “dependent”, and if my wife required a double mastectomy tomorrow, I’d still be attracted to her, but come on… All straight men love titties of one sort or another.
We don’t necessarily require them, and like you said, many more things are more important… but…
TAYTAYS!!! WOOOOOOOOO
If that’s what twelve year old boys looked like, I would have admitted to my bisexuality years sooner than I eventually did.
to the tune of the Penis Song by Monty Python
Isn’t it awfully nice to see some breasts,
Isn’t it frightfully good to stare at tits?
It’s swell to see some mellons,
It’s divine to catch a glimpse,
From the tiniest little A cups,
To the world’s biggest boobs.
So three cheers for your titties or your boobies,
Hooray for your shapely mamory glands,
Your mounds o’ flesh, your husband’s pals,
Your gazongas or your juggs.
You can wrap 'em up in ribbons
You can brush them 'gainst his arm,
But don’t take 'em out in public,
or someone will take a pic,
And you’ll wind up on Girls Gone Wild.
No need for Google for naked or part naked stars Celebrity Movie Archive is your quickest source.
No, really. kung fu lola isn’t kidding. I’ll see if I can Google one of the stories. Photo developers are calling the cops. Wal-Mart will return your pictures and will refuse to print your photos (there may have been an issue of them destroying stuff – I don’t remember).
The one that’s probably most Googlable is one where a dad took pictures of his kid running around the living room in his tighty-whiteys. I’m pretty sure he was arrested for child porn charges.
Whether or not he charges stuck is another issue. The news media have reported the complaints and arrests (in that outraged “Imagine! What is the word coming to?” kind of tone), but I don’t think I’ve ever heard a follow-up that had a parent going to jail or anything.
Eleusis - This link mentions a few of the cases in the U.S. where innocent family photos were treated as “child porn”.
From the link:
William Kelly was arrested in Maryland in 1987 after dropping off a roll of film that included shots his 10-year-old daughter and younger children had taken of each other nude.
David Urban in 1989 took photos of his wife and 15-month-old grandson, both nude, as she was giving him a bath. Kmart turned him in and he was convicted by a Missouri court (later overturned).
Cynthia Stewart turned in bath-time pictures of her 8-year-old daughter to a Fuji film processing lab in Oberlin, Ohio. The lab contacted the local police, who found the pictures “over the line” and arrested the mother.
All this talk of the child porn laws, and yet, movies like Pretty Baby got made.
I mean, seriously. Where’s the standard?
Minors can be naked on film without it being illegal, apparently.
It’s interesting that people are posting to this thread and saying they had never heard of Keira Knightley before now. So if they weren’t drawn to this thread by Keira’s name, we have to assume it was something else in the thread title that caught their attention. Do you think it was “give it up” or “we’ve all seen”?
It was the commas. They always spark interest.
Just to be clear: does this make you think of 12 year old boys?
Not specifically, no. But I do find that image to be rather disturbing. I can’t quite put my finger on why… I guess Keira Knightly is a massive ‘turn off’ in the Book of Finn.
Having never seen her act and only hearing the name I passed this thread a few times but those Comma’s finally compelled me to open the thread and I am glad I did!, I would just like to say DAMN!!, she is FINE!!.
Unclviny (who doesn’t understand the “12 year old boy” thing)
You don’t spend any time with 12-year-old boys, do you? No, she looks about three feet taller, and about 15 ‘maturity-years’ older. In other words, she looks like a damn fine young woman.
Hot?
What’s there to consider hot? Her body is basically shapeless. No hips, no curves, just flat nothing.
And if you hold your thumb over her head, she does have the exact same figure as my friend’s 15 year old brother.
Without contradictory evidence, it could be that your friend’s brother looks like a girl 
In case it wasn’t obvious, I don’t think she looks like a 12 year old boy. I think she’s a bona-fide Hottie H. McHotterton.
However, her face is a significant contribution to her hotness, so while the old thumb-over-the-head trick suggested by catsix doesn’t turn her into a boy, it does make her look like a million other skinny girls.
catsix, you might advise your friend’s brother to lay off the low-rise jeans. 
Half the time he runs around in his underwear anyway, so it’s not like he’s opposed to going without pants.
Anyway, I don’t think Kiera Knightley is at all attractive. The face is created with make-up, as it is for pretty much every Hollywood star, and the body - ew. Skinny wasn’t always a compliment, and she’s a perfect example of why.
There’s nothing about that figure that looks appealing to snuggle up to, nothing at all. No hips, no ass, no belly and no boobs. What’s hot about that?