Pages:
Actions
  • #16 by IronHeaver on 30 Mar 2017
  • NO
    Just no.

    Bodybuilders are beautiful human sculpture.They shouldn't ruin it with somebody else's lousy graffiti.
    It's like a house full of clutter,and bric-a brac.Visual trash.
    It seems like everyone is trying so hard to be unique...by copying the crowd.It just doesn't make the impression people think it does.
    Regarding the judging;it should count against a competitor.Skin should look healthy,and attractive on a physique athlete.
    But they won't have the guts to stand against something popular.it might cost the contests entrance fees.
    • IronHeaver
  • #17 by makko1 on 10 Apr 2017
  • NO for me too.
    I am very sad when I discover an fbb has chosen to tattoo. Except for very little spotty tattoos not hiding the shape and the simmetry I am not for them. But many fbb perhaps consider them a part of their personal transformation. I has to be tollerated, I think. But I don't like. 
  • #18 by TheFranksterChannel on 10 Apr 2017
  • I'm not into tattoos.
    • TheFranksterChannel
  • #19 by Soapbox on 20 Apr 2017
  • Another vote for no tattoos.
    • Soapbox
  • #20 by Gemma on 24 Apr 2017
  • It can be more attractive & I like the Celtic Armband type, like sa2009 has put in his post in the pic on the left but the spider web is growing on me,
  • #21 by DRF on 05 May 2017
  • Slightly contentious I guess, but personally I get turned off by tattoos and IMHO, I think it takes away from bodybuilders raison d'etre which is to maximize and accentuate the aesthetics behind their hard built muscles (physiques)....I don't mind Denise Rutkowski's ankle tattoo which is barely noticeable but sleeve tattoos for example would make the most beautiful woman, horrendous from my modest point of view...just an opinion!
  • #22 by xepha on 09 May 2017
  • tats don't add anything, especially to a muscular woman.  the irony is that tats were typically signs of subjugation, i.e. imprisonment, internment, concentration camps, etc.  now they are just empty signifiers. 

    the late 80s FBBers were the pinnacle - no tats, few with implants - and increasingly with time those physiques seem unimaginable now.  Pretty much any younger woman into physical culture now will also be susceptible to tats.  An exception who reminds me of that golden era is Chelsey Coleman, and I think even she has one (though I think it's hardly noticeable, not least bc the rest of her is so glorious).

    Bottom line is I'm too old...

  • #23 by sa2009 on 09 May 2017
  • I agree !  while i'am not against them all , a select few have them done tastefully . But sadly most are taken to the extreme for the sake of it . Find it interesting that something that came from the prison culture ..   is now so widely adored .
  • #24 by Kitamurafan on 13 Jun 2017
  • No tattoos at all is the best.
  • #25 by OldSchmoe67 on 13 Jun 2017
  • There's no box for indifferent.
    • OldSchmoe67
  • #26 by dad123 on 19 Jun 2017
  • the tats take away from what they are training so hard to achieve.the first thing you notice is the tats not the body.
  • #27 by Old Surehand on 19 Jun 2017
  • You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
    the tats take away from what they are training so hard to achieve.the first thing you notice is the tats not the body.
    You don't have to convince me. I remember posting some pictures or clips of Melody Spetko when she first came on the scene. To make a long story short, you was on one.  :laugh:
  • #28 by Old Surehand on 24 Jun 2017
  • You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
    Lower-back tattoos, not bad, either.
    They call lower back tattoos Tramp Stamps.
  • #29 by supergav67 on 04 Jul 2017
  • To each their own but personally,no.Ladies,just cause you got lovely canvas doesn't mean you have to draw all over it.
  • #30 by illestmuscle on 28 Jul 2017
  • I personally hate tattoos. Small or big, black or colorful, complex or plain they're not for me.
    • illestmuscle
Pages:
Actions