<p>“How degradating is this thread”
Come on It ain’t meant to be taken so seriously!!!</p>
<p>This thread isn’t degrading…</p>
<p>It’s pathetic</p>
<p>there’s nothing wrong with loving hot chics</p>
<p>Its only as pathetic as the concept of cheerleading…</p>
<p>just kidding, it rocks</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I agree. If in the first place you allow schools to put very attractive women in tight, skimpy outfits and have them jump up and down in front of the students under the pretext of exhorting the athletic teams to victory, then it’s a little dishonest to suddenly get huffy and complain when people comment on what the women look like. Looking “hot” the main point of cheerleading.</p>
<p>When you see fat or homely women getting picked to be cheerleaders, THEN you can complain about these comments being degrading.</p>
<p>I don’t see anything wrong with this thread. We are simply praising the beauty of some cheerleaders. Now a while ago there was a thread making fun of MIT’s cheerleaders, which I admit was very wrong.</p>
<p>Florida State has very pretty girls, but judging by those pictures, I wouldn’t say prettier than USC’s. </p>
<p>USC is known for its pretty cheerleaders because they seem to tend to favor tall, blonde girls. The large majority of Song Girls are quite blonde, and taller than other cheerleaders. </p>
<p>The Southern unis people have mentioned: FSU, UGA or Kentucky: of course the girls are pretty, but they’re also petite, like most cheerleaders are. </p>
<p>USC cheerleaders are different because they’re often unusually tall for cheerleaders. Which means they have longer legs. And they’re blonde. Which, for many people = hooottt</p>
<p>As for UCLA and U or Miami: yes, both school’s cheerleaders are quite attractive.</p>
<p>For the person who mentioned Cal: they’re very pretty too. <a href=“http://netitor.com/photos/schools/cal/genrel/genrel/auto_original/83559.jpeg[/url]”>http://netitor.com/photos/schools/cal/genrel/genrel/auto_original/83559.jpeg</a></p>
<p>As for the person who mentioned MIT to insult the MIT cheerleaders: Come on man. Shut up. </p>
<p>It’s all right to comment on attractiveness, but making fun of people you personally don’t find quite as attractive is inexcusable.</p>
<p>More USC Song Girls pics!</p>
<p><a href=“College Football 2016 Pigskin Prognosticator: Tennessee”>College Football 2016 Pigskin Prognosticator: Tennessee;
<p><a href=“http://www.classicsportprints.com/images/Song-Girls-after-game.jpg[/url]”>http://www.classicsportprints.com/images/Song-Girls-after-game.jpg</a></p>
<p>By the way, there’s a thread for girls ranking what kind of athlete boys are more attractive (basket, foot, base). So what’s wrong with us praising cheerleaders</p>
<p>Those crazy feminists…</p>
<p>Some people need to seriously lighten up. Females have made similar “degrading” topic in reference to males on CC.</p>
<p>Peals-05</p>
<p>Hun…I’m sorry to say it but that pic of the UGA cheerleaders is so OUTDATED!!! Here’s the new pic!</p>
<p><a href=“http://georgiadogs.collegesports.com/traditions/cheerleaders.html[/url]”>http://georgiadogs.collegesports.com/traditions/cheerleaders.html</a></p>
<p>Good, you found a new picture of them.</p>
<p>But is it supposed to be an impressive picture or something?</p>
<p>Yes it is. It’s much more impressive then that crappy USC squad you slave for.</p>
<p>The UGA girls are too petite…</p>
<p>University of Texas</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.utexas.edu/athletics/cheer/home/randompic/Program%20Pic.jpg[/url]”>http://www.utexas.edu/athletics/cheer/home/randompic/Program%20Pic.jpg</a></p>
<p>UGA definitely, from all the pictures you’ve send.</p>
<p>“It’s much more impressive then that crappy USC squad you slave for.”</p>
<p>Aw, that was uncalled for. Anyway, it’s not true. They’re not crappy. Unless you don’t like tall blondes.</p>
<p>:( Poor Chia. Does someone need to take a time out in the corner and count to ten?</p>
<p>Trojans are great: <a href=“http://www.trojanwire.com/images/colins_132.jpg[/url]”>http://www.trojanwire.com/images/colins_132.jpg</a></p>
<p>Here are more Song Girls pics. You know why there are so many USC cheerleader pictures in comparison to other universities’ cheerleaders? Because people know they’re hot, and that USC sports in general are pretty darn good.</p>
<p>More Southern Cal:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.trojanwire.com/images/usc_cheerleaders.jpg[/url]”>http://www.trojanwire.com/images/usc_cheerleaders.jpg</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://www.trojanwire.com/images/imgp0662.JPG[/url]”>http://www.trojanwire.com/images/imgp0662.JPG</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://www.trojantalk.com/images/2004-2005/03-03-2005-mbball-usc-87-oregon-94/photos/IMG_8904.JPG[/url]”>http://www.trojantalk.com/images/2004-2005/03-03-2005-mbball-usc-87-oregon-94/photos/IMG_8904.JPG</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://www.trojantalk.com/images/2004-2005/02-12-2005-mbball-usc-82-asu-71/photos/IMG_7819.JPG[/url]”>http://www.trojantalk.com/images/2004-2005/02-12-2005-mbball-usc-82-asu-71/photos/IMG_7819.JPG</a></p>
<p>usc definitely…cuz they’re rich and have money for beauty products</p>