Do you think this is real?
http://www.smh.com.au/ftimages/2003/09/09/1062902042282.html
There are a number of cats this big, a large percentage of which seem to become Internet stars.
Seems some people have nothing better to do than overfeed their pets and post pictures. Pretty sick stuff.
It’s unfortunately real.
That lady has a monster pussy, no?
What?
I thought it was going to be this picture.
The picture in the OP doesn’t look like a photoshop, but then that’s the whole point of photoshop, isn’t it?
But the head is the right size; if it were just an enlarged picture of a fat cat, I’d expect the head to appear bigger, but then that might also have been cleverly tweaked, oh I dunno.
Most people who post here know about Snopes, me included. 
Amateur photoshopper here, and that pic looks doctored. From the tongue look down the entire length of the body, a little off center left. That whole section looks like it’s been expanded. it’s just a few pixels off being as crisp as the rest of the cat.
my WAG is it’s a fake. very good one at that.
Thanks for the response, Phlos! It’s very helpful.
I don’t imagine that it’s a fake at all. The area that would have had to have been expanded still has the texture of hair, and you can see individual swirls of hair every here and there. The pattern of the coat remains intact, etc. The fur is convincingly 3-dimensional, with tufts clearly recognizable.
Can’t really use pixellation as an argument for it being fake - The jpg compression was done poorly - Just look at her hands.
It’s not likely to be a fake. There are lots of real pics of morbidly obese, overfed cats that are at least that big all over the net. We’ve had several threads on this very topic over the past few years with some SDMB posting pics of their big pussy. It might be worth a search.
I hear Auntie Em has quite a large one… at least… I think I’m remembering that correctly.
FYI: The world’s biggest pussy is Russian :eek:
Yeah, except that that’s not a Siamese. It’s a Tabby.
You expect ** The Pravda ** to tell the truth?? 
The photo has now been acknowledged as a hoax by the newspaper and the person who sent it in.
Don’t believe everything you see, folks.
Sorry, I thought the link would be the same as what’s in my first post; apparently it’s not.
http://www.smh.com.au/ftimages/2003/09/10/1062902101901.html