Is it me or this not as hot as some people seem to think it is?

As you may have heard or seen, Rose McGowan & Rosario Dawson have posed naked for the cover of Rolling Stone. I'm not posting it here for reasons which I'll get to in a second, but there will be a link in a minute.

The photo shows the two of them with their hands crossed over their breasts and ammunition belts covering their, shall we say, "bikini areas." Quite a few people seem to think this is hot stuff.

(Dawson was on the Letterman show the other night, and Dave couldn't get past the thought that the two women were posed back to back, and their buttocks came in contact with one another.)

Now, if you've been reading this blog for even a day, you know: I fall somewhere between being an appreciator of women, who worships them as goddesses for their many appealing qualities including but not limited to being hot and sexy and dazzling...

...and being a horny lech, the difference often depending on which way the wind is blowing. But the point is, when it comes to movie stars being naked, I'm all for it. I've even found Dawson and McGowan particuarly exciting in the past.

So why, when I look at this picture, is it all I can see are:

• What look to me like airbrush marks
• How they made the both of them look like they're made out of plastic
• How cold McGowan's eyes are
• And how their hair looks like doll hair

Again...is it me?