I never said tatoos are wrong, I'm saying that they made Megan unattractive to me.

 

I'm sorry, but I can't admire the female body with ink splotches covering every inch of it. They're disrupting to me.

 

you want a tat? Go get one for all I care. But don't call me wrong for finding them unattractive on women!

Actually, yes you did specifically state that Tattoos were wrong, that's why I specifically called you on it. Specifically, on June 24, you said:

Im sure both of those are significant to her. but her body is NOT where to broadcast them! she can wear clothes with the images on them if she feels the need to show them off. But inking her body and disrupting the natural look to it is WRONG!

Those were your exact words.

 

Regardless, Megan Fox isn't completely covered in tattoos anyway. She has one, relatively small tattoo on her forearm, one on her back, and maybe another elsewhere I haven't seen. She's not completely covered by far. I've seen people with full-body tattoos. Depending upon how the tattoo is done, the quality and artistic craftsmanship of the work, the composition and placement, and other factors, tattoos can enhance the beauty of the individual wearing them. By the same token, a bad tattoo can really detract from someone. Megan Fox's tattoos are not all that extravagant, gaudy, or even very large. They're very tastefully done, and, for the most part, easily concealable.

guys, it's 8 pages....

 

She's good looking, whats the argument!?!

 

Then again, I don't wanna know...

Who cares? She's engaged :P

 

she has the dude's name forever engraved onto her abdomen!

Eww I can only imagine when she's old and it's starts to sag :puke