OK, explain this to me: you want girly girl up there in the header to have clothes on, but you'll slap us in the face with that picture in the previous post. I just don't get it...

There is absolutely no chance of any type of sexual arousal with the previous picture. NONE! Like Maggie said, it's a good thing to keep looking at if you're wanting to lose weight. ;) Oh, and the pic below, is a man.

Like Jeff, I thought that it was a picture of a woman, too.

Either way, s/he still just grosses me out.

That's a man? Oh crap! Does it mean I'm gay if I...oh nevermind.

Guess the facial hair wasn't a dead give away.

Puh-leeze, peoples, puh-leeze. I knew it was a man. My comment was on the double standard of nudity.

Or something like that...

This is what I keep trying to explain to my husband. When a woman looks at a picture of a nude man, it doesn't necessarily 'arouse' her. However when a man looks at a picture of a nude woman, it does. Women view mens bodies more as utilitarian, a means of transportation, or good for moving furniture; stuff like that. Of course if he were nude in piles of money, that would intrigue a gal.

Nice call on the gender though Jeff, it actually was difficult unless you noticed the facial hair. Of course that doesn't mean anything, I know a woman who can grow a full beard.

I'm happy to see her back up there. You can put clothes on her. Just, don't cover up those eyes.