Mine does.

It is a TERRIFIC looking photo, Lynette. What a body. You could still be in Playboy.

It doesn't take much to be a multi-million dollar company. I work for one and if you are wearing at least pants, they are fine with it.

It's the multi-billion-dollar companies you have to watch out for: Booz-Allen, Lockheed-Martin, SAIC, etc. If you have some weird-ass tattoo they will write off you and the company you are representing, but you won't even know it. They're passive-aggressive that way.

That being said, Marines rule. I have a Marine coworker who killed a Vietcong in hand-to-hand combat (in an underground tunnel no less) back in the sixties. Hooooooooo-rah!

I know people with tattoos, and you have to be pretty careful about getting a multi-colored one like this, if you are a beachgoer. The reason is that tattoo ink is usually broken down by UV rays, gradually losing the color saturation, and ending up looking kind of monochromatic and dull. That's one reason why tattoo enthusiasts tend to have fair skin. They keep out of the sun to protect their "work".

If you were going to get a tattoo it would probably be better to start with a dark-color design.

Or have the tattoo in a location that could be covered up easily on the beach, without giving you a weird tanline.

I'm not wild about tattoos. Lynette, if your body looks as good as it appears here, why add anything to it? My wife has smooth, flawless skin. I wouldn't want her to add anything to it.

For a photo shoot, you could always get a henna tattoo.

I also think the back tattoos are becoming passe.

But it's just my opinion, and if you got one, it wouldn't be the end of the world. But it would cost you about $1,000 to get it removed via laser...

That's cool, Lynette. I understand being disappointed in the results and maybe feeling like it wasn't worthwhile to try again. However, I feel like the self-portrait things I've tried in the past couple of months were way better than stuff I tried years ago. I'm always willing to go back and try again.

I think what should happen is that you get a concept in advance of what would look good (in terms of a pose and backdrop) based on photos and drawings you see. Then, just like when you look at clothes in an advertisement, you have to be realistic in assessing whether you would look the same as the original model.

The other element, which took me a while to get used to, is that you have to take a lot of photos to get a few that you actually like. I'm sure your S/O discusses things like exposure bracketing +/- when he is photographing you. It's tedious and time consuming sometimes. From that standpoint, I can understand why it would seem like a little bit of a drag to you.

My wife did some GREAT photos of herself about 17 years ago (right before I met her). I think she was enough of a ham to let loose and get the photos right the first time. I still have one of them in a secret area of my wallet.....

I'm not goading you into posting more photos or ones that you are uncomfortable with. I'm just saying that there is nothing stopping you. Since you appear to be into the graphic arts, however, it does seem kind of strange that you aren't comfortable playing the role of both artist and subject. I would have thought that self portraiture would have been a standard assignment somewhere along the way in art school.

Considering that most of the photos by women here seem to be self pics, I'm glad to hear that you aren't slamming them for taking them. RMM pretty much wouldn't exist without self-pic contributions.

Quite frankly, I'm more interested in your provocative sexual topics than your photos. As you will be able to see by the thread I just dedicated to you, I already have my own personal model and do not need yours to get my rocks off. That has always been the case here, and always will be. Except for maybe that one outside photo, though.....

Bobaloo had it right, Lynette. I wasn't being hostile, just emphasizing that there is nothing stopping you yourself from being both the photographer and the subject.

I think it is HIGHLY debatable whether you need studio lights or a separate photographer to get a good shot. Or to protect your identity.

And to prove my point, I will post something tasteful, but fitting on the RMM tonight (if at all possible) that I did myself with Mrs. Putin and a remote, to prove the point.

If you are indeed my intellectual equal or superior, you will take up the challenge and post something that you shot with a timer or remote.

Wait til Lynographer gets back?

For the love of God, don't you know how to work either the timer or the remote on any of the great cameras you have???

Pick up the user manual. It should take 30 seconds for someone from California's gifted student program to get through.

Spanish fly is made from some ground insect -- I guess a fly or beetle. The way it works is that it supposedly creates a mild burning sensation in the area of the genitals. I could have sworn it was in the urethra area. And the person who takes it is then supposed to be confusing discomfort with being turned on ( ). Having never actually known someone who consumed it, I don't know if it really works.

That being said, spanish fly is actually poisonous in higher doses, and I think the reason you don't see it around any more (even in sex shops) is that you could accidentally kill someone with it.

You could DEFINITELY spot us a mile away. We were wearing shorts and had our beach stuff with us in downtown Sydney in August (which is pretty much winter time in Australia -- even if it gets up to 65F in the summer time). People were walking by and practically laughing out loud at us. But, I feel like I had the last laugh because I visited three different nude beaches in one day... I fell in love with my wife all over again on Obelisk Beach.

I don't think we drank much beer at all in Australia. Instead, we were drinking wine. Australia has one of the best wineries in the world -- especially for blended wines. The winery is Rosemount Estates. They have the whole gamut, but the best were the Shiraz and Shiraz-Cabernet bottles. I don't know if anybody can beat them on a price/quality basis....

Bondi, after your last post, I do understand what you are saying.

Also,

Both countries experienced rapid development in certain geographic areas due to the discovery of gold (gold rush). In USA, it would be California. In Australia, I think it was Melbourne.

The size of both countries, leaving out Alaska, is very similar, too.

Really, Bondi? What about the ANZUS pact, which formally "Groups" the USA and Australia in a military alliance?

I tend to see a lot of commonalities.

As I recall, the USA and Australia both were settled by UK colonists. Australia is a latecomer to the multiculture thing (except, of course, for aboriginals). The U.S.'s immigration policy, in terms of who it allowed in, and when, is pretty similar to Australia's.

You could probably compare, to a certain extent, the Australians' relationship with aboriginals with the U.S.'s treatment of its own aboriginal population. The U.S. was worse, though.

See Wikipedia's Australia entry for the White Australia Policy, abolished in 1973. I think it still shows when you walk around there. I tended to see more Asians as the majority minority population than Hispanics (U.S. majority minority), though.

When I was there, it looked VERY similar to USA. Same architecture, especially in Sydney. The outdoor touring areas, except for 12 Apostles, were VERY similar to the USA's rugged outdoors areas. Also, desert area is much larger.

The people dressed a little better in the workplace.

Classified as having a Western-style mixed economy.

I think Australia should probably be grouped in with the United States and Western Europe. And it doesn't tilt the demographics/statistics very much because it has a population of like 20 million?

Scientists believe that the original purpose of pubic hair was to carry pheromones out from the body and attract a mate (probably during "dawn of Man" time and before wearing animal skins).

Anyway, pubic hair is natural. Shaving it off is a recent practice, and you would think that today's men couldn't find their way to the "hole" unless somebody created a carefully groomed landing strip pointed straight toward it. Maybe they should put training wheels on their tongues, too?

"Pull and shoot"?? As in confusing the landing strip with a skeet target???

1. The "landing strip, or less", as a phenomenon, has only been around about 20 years or so.

2. The full bush, however, has been around about 3 million years, depending on whether you believe in evolution or not. Even if you're a creationist, the full bush is about 6,000 years old.

3. During the time of the full bush, the human population grew to about 6 billion.

4. In nations with the "landing strip or less" (U.S. and Western Europe), there are actually relatively low birth rates.

The only logical conclusion - the landing strip is actually a turnoff to most of the world, and leads to less sex and a lower birth rate.

If you endorse Malthusian economic theory, though, that's probably a good thing.

Serious question -- would Hooter's let her in dressed like that?

It's an AWESOME shot. I love the natural lighting and the environment. It's a credit to you that you look so good in this photo without any special pose or accessory, etc.

I can't remember if you told us the story about it before, but I would like to hear it.

Lynette,

I definitely respect your desire to protect your anonymity, but I don't think anyone will recognize you from a heavily stylized, purple profile shot. Nice, but a little Goth for me.

With regard to a shot from the back, my all-time favorite photo of Lynette is the one from the back when she is walking through some park. It's somewhere in the middle of this thread and is definitely worth the search. That one is you, right, Lynette?

Considering the state of California's educational system, I think an IQ of about 100 would get someone into the MGM program....

Lynette, this will sound insulting at first, but it's really not. You are totally naive to the ways of adult boards if you think that some of these guys don't get some kind of payoff with their email come-ons. Even if they're batting an incredibly low percentage.

You're naive not because you are stupid, but because you haven't been a denizen of sites like vweb, which has people hooking up CONSTANTLY and semi-anonymously online. These people regale everyone with how they met on vweb and then post photos of their exploits later for EVERYONE to see.

So, does this approach work? Yes, but probably not here. And the PM's you receive are from newbies who don't understand that the culture is different here.

I wouldn't have guessed this last one at all. The hair is red, and you always have bangs in your other photos.

And I noticed this because my wife's hair is almost identical to yours in color and style....

Like a really unattractive guy hitting a bunch of singles bars, they are playing the percentages.

Even if the success rate is 2%, that means that out of every 100 woman the guy, hits on, he will score with two. For a desperate guy, that may be worth the effort.

It probably works the same way with unsolicited "equipment" photos. The same guy who sent you that photo probably sent it to every single woman on this site. And hopes that maybe one or two of them will actually send something back.

I hope the one's who do are trannies....