Welcome to Thunderdome

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 9:52 am**

Please examine the following picture:

Explain why this is hotter than if the girls didn't have tattoos.

Isn't this the same as having random artists with FAR less talent go around with spray paint and adding their own touches to existing works of art?

I'm sure the Mona Lisa would look a lot better with a Bart Simpson in the corner...

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 10:16 am**

"In the dark" it doesn't matter, but when I can see her I wonder what is wrong with her. I tend to look at women holistically.

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 10:54 am**

The only value to tats is signalling. A chick with tats is more likely to put out than one without. I should get a grant to study that. It's like the modern version of "if she smokes, she pokes"

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:37 pm**

I vote "hotter with." In this case, however, I will note that choice of image is critical. The tattoo on the blond chick's left leg is one of those, "Christ, I hope that's temporary" ink jobs.

Edited By Malcolm on 1370986653

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 7:41 pm**

In my experience, girls with large tattoos are more likely to go naked because they feel a bit less naked with the tats.

And I approve of naked girls.

Welcome to Thunderdome

Hotter than without? NWS - NWS Poll