Uber picture contest - win moniez! (3077 hits)
Category: Humor -> Dirty HumorRating: 0.99 on 104 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by DonovanMD (View user info) at 2008-03-17 08:29:00 EDT
Alright Uber, heres the challenge:
Look closely at the picture below and tell me whats wrong with it. It has to be a well laid out answer explaining your theory.
I may give clues periodically.
The contest closes in 36 hours at 630PM Mountain time Tuesday March 18th and a winner will be named then.
If you give out a satisfactory answer you will win $50 via either paypal or another means if it's easier for you.
No this is not a family photo of mine, but it might be one of Shlongys.
And GOGOGO!
User Reviews
Submitted by DonovanMD (user info) at 2008-04-02 14:41:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Caul: The Answer is French Ingenuity.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2008-04-02 09:48:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
what's the answer%
Submitted by cshape (user info) at 2008-03-19 20:51:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The Mom only has one finger?
Submitted by darko (user info) at 2008-03-19 19:23:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
they look like ventriloquists
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2008-03-19 17:07:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
in my opinion the answer is that the woman has no legs nor does her chair
Submitted by Dexter-Brown (user info) at 2008-03-19 14:03:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2008-03-18 20:14:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
whats teh answer then?
Submitted by precision (user info) at 2008-03-19 11:46:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Wait...I just thought of something, is this one of those post mortems that I've read about... you know, a family portrait where one of the kids is dead?
Submitted by precision (user info) at 2008-03-19 11:29:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
That "woman" has some creepy eyes.
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2008-03-19 09:56:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The man on the right has no legs or feet.
WHAT DO I WIN???
Submitted by darko (user info) at 2008-03-19 01:22:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
This was really done with a Logitech laser mouse in MSPaint, with no copy and pasting - resizing - or text tool.
Submitted by HandZon (user info) at 2008-03-18 22:26:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Should the baby on the left actually belong on the man's lap as well?
Submitted by HandZon (user info) at 2008-03-18 22:22:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I'm jumping in late, but the right foot (left when viewing) of the baby on the right is doubled. I thought those old plate photos didn't get that effect.
Submitted by antluvdog (user info) at 2008-03-18 21:51:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The right arm of that right chair (meaning the right arm of the right chair if you were sitting in it) can't possibly be where it is in the picture. Based on the angle of the chair, it would be stabbing the dude on the left in the back. So somehow those people on the right were put there. Maybe superimposed?
Submitted by antluvdog (user info) at 2008-03-18 21:46:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The right half was painted in the picture?
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2008-03-18 21:33:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Donovan what in the hell are you going on about?
and don't you kids know that back in Shlongy's day little boys wore dresses? Ok, Shlongy still wears a dress but most little boys started wearing big boy pants when they got housebroken.
Submitted by Lije (user info) at 2008-03-18 21:30:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
It looks to me like water damage is what is wrong with this photograph, probably due to improper storage methods allowing for environmental factors to destroy the original clarity and integrity of the photo. Typically water damage leads to the growth of mold, or in the u.k., mould. Maybe the photograph got folded a couple of times to boot.
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2008-03-18 20:14:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
whats teh answer then?
Submitted by SPECIALk (user info) at 2008-03-18 19:46:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
the kid on the left stole the other kid's shoes and he's PISSED.
or the kid on the left has a claw hand.
or the chair leg in the back is floating off the ground...also weird
is this over yet? tell us the answer!
Submitted by Death_Metal_Dude (user info) at 2008-03-18 18:41:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
that man has no wedding ring, meaning he's unmarried, meaning that 'woman' isn't his wife, and considering that having children out of wedlock in those days was shunned, they cannot be the grandparents of those children, as implied by the filename
thanks for the money
Submitted by BlazinBull (user info) at 2008-03-18 15:00:15 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Well, what the hell is wrong with it?
Submitted by HurtByTheSun (user info) at 2008-03-18 13:21:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.ubersite.com/m/115627
When do I get my money?
Submitted by MudWhistle (user info) at 2008-03-18 11:35:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
its more of a problem of where they found two separate chairs with 1 arm each. they are obviously not sitting on a bench but the woman in a chair with one left arm (although it looks a little photoshopped) and the man in a chair with 1 right arm
Submitted by cocaine (user info) at 2008-03-18 10:56:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
yeah, i think there has to be a problem with that chair.
look at this: http://doit101.com/Collectibles/Images/chair3.jpg
antique chippendale / mahogany chair legs follow the same pattern throughout the entire base of the chair. not only does the pattern to the left (or to him, right) of the dude's leg no match the rest of the chair, the rear leg is a straight leg whereas the front two are curved.
Submitted by cocaine (user info) at 2008-03-18 10:47:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
i mean, could it be that the patterns (or lack thereof) on the chair to the left of the man's leg do not match the patterns seen on the chair in between his legs?
if so, gay.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2008-03-18 10:32:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The chair under the man on the left appears to have an M.C. Escher quality about it. The rear leg is connected to the front of the chair rather than to the back.
Submitted by sicosemen (user info) at 2008-03-18 07:53:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
These are white versions of the black, antique shlongy. http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/english/exhibits/black_history/pics/24785_1020.jpg
You need to know my paypal account?
Submitted by Tony_the_Tiger_is_a_Pedophile (user info) at 2008-03-18 03:49:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
also i meant its taller than wide, im almost smart enough to qualify for mnasr, thats the smart people one right?
Submitted by Tony_the_Tiger_is_a_Pedophile (user info) at 2008-03-18 03:48:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
the picture is wider than it is tal, the howizontal lines are longer!
victory is mine!
Submitted by PepsiCoke (user info) at 2008-03-18 02:05:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
The man's face seems to be made of two halves of two different faces.
Submitted by lungfish (user info) at 2008-03-18 02:03:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
I don't know if it's "wrong," (and hence, the right answer) but the woman appears to have had her left hand cut off...not by Photoshop, or maybe she was born that way. There's a rather grotesque looking stub protruding from under the left arm of the child.
But really, who's to say it's grotesque? I have hair on my big toe knuckles. Is that grotesque? To some, maybe. I think not.
And all you internet Lotharios blah blah blah....
Submitted by Danger_Ranger (user info) at 2008-03-18 01:12:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
the woman creature looks like shlongy
Submitted by SPECIALk (user info) at 2008-03-18 00:58:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
has anyone come close to the answer yet?
the lines? hmmm...and you put it under dirty humour..hmm
i don't know..the whole photo is wrong..wrong wrong wrong
Submitted by NotSteve (user info) at 2008-03-18 00:54:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by maiorano84 (user info) at 2008-03-18 00:29:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Donovan - I just said, the right side of the parents' faces are that of Shlongy's. There's no mistaking it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd agree with that but i think the right side of the man's face and the left side of the woman's face are half of shlongy's face and shit.
Submitted by maiorano84 (user info) at 2008-03-18 00:29:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Donovan - I just said, the right side of the parents' faces are that of Shlongy's. There's no mistaking it.
Submitted by X54 (user info) at 2008-03-17 23:53:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
This better be good.
Submitted by Jeanneee (user info) at 2008-03-17 21:40:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
It's dusty. And creepy.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 21:31:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Ok.
Guy on the left is the father with guy on the right on his knee as a kid.
Guy on the right is the kid on the knee on the left hand side all grown up with his kid (the guy on the lefts grandson) on his knee.
What lines? I can only guess you mean timelines??
Submitted by Bundaberg (user info) at 2008-03-17 21:26:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
That woman is fucking hot.
Submitted by DonovanMD (user info) at 2008-03-17 21:24:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Clue:
The Answer is in the lines.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 20:58:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
give us a clue then, Mr Heatwhore
Submitted by DonovanMD (user info) at 2008-03-17 20:48:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by triple_optics (user info) at 2008-03-17 13:42:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
They're both men & the one on the right has his penis inserted into the child.
--
WINNAR!
Just kidding, no one has gotten it right yet.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-03-17 20:06:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
It's probably worth it.
Submitted by Amontillado (user info) at 2008-03-17 20:06:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Guy on right is wearing a silky dress?
Submitted by darko (user info) at 2008-03-17 19:43:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I hope you aren't seriously going to give away 50 bucks for heat
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 18:08:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-03-17 13:49:09 CDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Like I read YOUR reviews, Toots.
Usually, your reviews read like "Hi G, you're lovely. Peace. I wub you"...or some fascimile thereof.
I WILL TAKE HOME THE CHECK IN THIS ONE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, mostly my reviews are either bitchy or 'hey sexy' *flirt flirt*
I said it first and I know I am right, grandad. :)
Sexy grandad :)
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2008-03-17 17:56:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
'Woman' on the right - Bubba's mom.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2008-03-17 17:46:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The dress of the baby on the left has chopped about halfway into daddies leg. Photoshop artifact, or Deviltry? Who knows.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2008-03-17 17:45:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Dexter-Brown (user info) at 2008-03-17 16:38:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
The children and the men are the same people and each are holding their childhood counterparts? The front right child looks like he has the same deviated septum as the back left man. The front left boy is dressed as a girl just like the back right man is dressed as a woman.
Submitted by Maddog (user info) at 2008-03-17 17:27:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
A. Both the adults are men. I mean, look at them.
B. The child with shoes on only has one leg. The other one is the mans elephantitis affected penis with a sock and shoe on it.
C. The "lady" is actually Michael Bolton with his hair cut.
Submitted by joedaddy (user info) at 2008-03-17 16:54:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
the little girl is flashing a gang-sign?
Submitted by MyNameIsTim (user info) at 2008-03-17 16:45:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
dude on the right is wearing clothing that's not from that time period.
dude on the right looks like shlongy
dude on the right's left hand looks like he's giving the middle finger / goosing the baby
shadow for the right chair is messed up, as if it were lit from an alternate light source than the rest of the picture.
baby on the left's left hand is wacked out.
baby on the right is retarded
Submitted by Dexter-Brown (user info) at 2008-03-17 16:38:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
The children and the men are the same people and each are holding their childhood counterparts? The front right child looks like he has the same deviated septum as the back left man. The front left boy is dressed as a girl just like the back right man is dressed as a woman.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-03-17 14:49:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Like I read YOUR reviews, Toots.
Usually, your reviews read like "Hi G, you're lovely. Peace. I wub you"...or some fascimile thereof.
I WILL TAKE HOME THE CHECK IN THIS ONE.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 14:17:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-03-17 17:57:36 GMT (#)
Ranking: -2
I GOT IT.
The kids are photoshopped onto the parents laps.
The "dad" is holding a "baby picture" of the mom...his wife.
And the "Mom" is holding a "baby picture" of dad...her husband.
PAY UP!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I ALREADY SAID THAT!!!
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-03-17 13:57:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I GOT IT.
The kids are photoshopped onto the parents laps.
The "dad" is holding a "baby picture" of the mom...his wife.
And the "Mom" is holding a "baby picture" of dad...her husband.
PAY UP!!!
Submitted by Rhymenocerous (user info) at 2008-03-17 13:51:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The kids have to be photoshopped into the picture. Isn't it odd that the parents aren't holding them? How often do you see someone sitting with a child in their lap, not holding on to them?
Submitted by triple_optics (user info) at 2008-03-17 13:42:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
They're both men & the one on the right has his penis inserted into the child.
Submitted by Siren (user info) at 2008-03-17 13:39:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The kid on our right must have moved his/her foot during the photo session, because it blurred, making it look like there are two right feet. Taking a photograph in this time period took a long time, and the subjects had to remain very still (which is why very few people smile in pictures like these- who wants a smile cramp?)or else you get this doubling effect. The end.
Submitted by Ltap (user info) at 2008-03-17 12:56:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by F.J.Bell (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:42:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The man's face is half in shadow but the woman's isn't
-----------------------------------------------------
Isn't it just that the woman's face is casting a shadow on the man's?
--------------
wait, that's a woman?
Submitted by MudWhistle (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:45:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
pishah...how could a family that can only afford shoes and socks for one child pay for a picture like this
GET THAT KID SOME FOOT COVER DAMN YOU!!!!
Submitted by F.J.Bell (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:42:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The man's face is half in shadow but the woman's isn't
-----------------------------------------------------
Isn't it just that the woman's face is casting a shadow on the man's?
Submitted by corn_nugget (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:41:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
As far as the lighting goes, it is possible that it was lit from their right and there was some sort of reflector (like a mirror or white sheet, etc... I dont know if they used that stuff back then) down to "her" left, on a lower level than the light on the right. Which would explain why the shadow is more defined on his face than "hers".
But yeah, it does look photoshopped.
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:34:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Hmm, someone else said it first but this isn't a real pic, it is a composite of several different photographs.
The man's face is half in shadow but the woman's isn't. If the photo was real, you would expect her to have a shadow on her face as well.
Unless the light in this picture broke every physics law in the universe because all the people in this photograph look like they were lit from different sources.
Submitted by beer-turtle (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:26:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
the extra foot on the baby is an exposure issue, the baby moved it's foot during the long exposure time from the old-timey photo stuff... silver oxide or something I think.
Submitted by beer-turtle (user info) at 2008-03-17 11:25:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
shlongy's face superimposed on the wife's head?
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:56:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
DID YOU BREAK INTO MY HOUSE AND STEAL FROM OUR FAMILY PHOTO ALBUM?
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:55:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I may be wrong, but didnt anyone notice that the children have blonde hair and the parents are darkhaired? I mean I know alot of babies are born blonde but their hair gets darker as they age... oh who the hell knows.
Submitted by Berty (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:52:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I reckon maybe nothing is wrong with the picture other than that it is from olden times and you just said there was something 'wrong' with it to fuck with people's heads.
Submitted by maiorano84 (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:43:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Very cool photoshop. Whoever did it knew what they were doing.
The right side of everybody's faces were replaced with Shlongy's.
The left side is their own.
Submitted by sicosemen (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:41:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
OOOh....I think I finally got this. They are twins, procreating, and the results are twins, one of which has 3211113i0190 legs.
Submitted by F.J.Bell (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:13:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Weirdest camwhore EVER.
Submitted by Blinkish (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:12:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
the kid on the right has three legs.
and the 'woman' has a mustache.
Submitted by NotSteve (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:06:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
To me it looks like all 4 people have the same mouth. It looks as if it has been photoshopped and resized and rotated to fit each face/person accordingly.
Submitted by sicosemen (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:06:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
They are Siefried and Roy! I WIN!
Submitted by DrogoRoch (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:05:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The child on the left is levitating. She doesnt look to be sitting down and she isnt standing on anything. So either she has the strongest right hand of any child that age ever or she is the Devil.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:04:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
So, the man is holding the woman as a baby and the woman is holding the man as a baby.
There, got it out in the end.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 10:00:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
i think sico is onto something.
Maybe, the man is photoshopped so he is holding a picture of the woman as a baby - if you know what I mean, and the woman is holding a photoshopped baby of the man.
?
Submitted by sicosemen (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:52:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Starting with front right and working in a clockwise rotation, they are all the same person, cross dressing as a little one, then a man, back to a balding woman. What do I win?
Submitted by LittleMonster (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:40:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
OR! The faces of the man and the woman have been swapped over.
Submitted by HurtByTheSun (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:40:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.thinkflood.com/blog/images/OldPortrait.jpg
========
Holy crap, that baby has a GIGANTIC PNEUMATIC PEDASTAL INSTEAD OF LEGS?!
Submitted by LittleMonster (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:38:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Everyone in that picture is a seperate photograph. They have all been spliced.
Submitted by Tom (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:38:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
It's all in the eyes.
I think the parents are blind. That's how wifey can look so awful yet still be married to a man. But look at their eyes. Kind of glazed over looking, and maybe it's just the quality but the guy on the left looks like he has cataracts.
Also look at the way their heads look. http://www.thinkflood.com/blog/images/OldPortrait.jpg Check out this picture. They seem to be looking at something. These two really aren't, they look like they had their heads positioned and were told not to move.
That's my theory though.
Submitted by pen_name (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:28:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
caul is a woman?
Submitted by MudWhistle (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:14:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
i think forensic is on to something....i think both kids are photoshopped into the picture
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:10:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The child on the left looks Photoshopped into the picture. Look at the hem of the dress. The cloth above the hem should be scrunched around the knee and should have a more natural, realistic drape.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2008-03-17 09:10:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SPECIALk (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:49:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
ummm, the shemale on the right looks like emilio estevez?
===
thats the funniest thing ever...today.
Submitted by F.J.Bell (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:52:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
That dude is wearing white socks with black trousers and shoes.
What a dumbass.
Submitted by SPECIALk (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:49:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
i don't know, but that it is one creepy picture.
ummm, the shemale on the right looks like emilio estevez?
Submitted by MudWhistle (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:49:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
the front of the chair arm seems to be photoshopped into the picture for some reason
Submitted by Fungah (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:44:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
THIS PICTURE IS POSESSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Submitted by Fungah (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:44:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The child on the left is glaring at me evilly.
Submitted by DrogoRoch (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:42:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Ahhhh The She/He on the right has no Feet at All!!
Submitted by skrapmetal (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:41:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
1980's Eric Idle went back in time and kidnapped 1970's Eric Idle, then they both went forward in time to the 2090's so 1970's Eric idlecould get a fully fuinctioning transgender reassignment operation, then the happy couple of Erics went back in time and fucksturbated in the 1890's and had two kids, then made this picture. And that's just wrong.
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:41:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Actually 2 right feet.
Nuuuurrrrr!
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:40:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The child on the right seems to have 2 left feet.
Submitted by MudWhistle (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:38:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
white sock with black dress slacks and black dress shoes....i mean come on
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:38:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Hang on!!! You can win 50 dollars? Isn't that like 10 pounds?
HAhahaha.
Submitted by LittleMonster (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:36:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Jesus, check out "her" hands!!!
WTF?!
Submitted by DrogoRoch (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:35:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Well I think it is scandalous that children that age are showing so much ankle.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:35:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
They are both men. There can be no doubt. Surely?
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:34:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The kid on the right has bonkeyes and must be a distant relative of Hurty.
Submitted by Rhymenocerous (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:33:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Kinda looks like the parent holding the baby with the extra foot is a man.
Submitted by DrogoRoch (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:33:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Is that supposed to be a female? I mean she looks damn manly to me.
Submitted by DrogoRoch (user info) at 2008-03-17 08:31:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Wow, baby on the right has an extra foot