| Yahoo! News |
| How to recreate body art, Coachella-style |
| Among the style statements inspiring Coachella envy across the web this past weekend were some of the particularly amazing body tattoos and makeup on show. From the whimsical to the geometric, face an |
| 2015-04-14T16:30:06+0000 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Celebrity tattoos and the danger of regret |
| What are these illustrated exhibitionists thinking? Lena Dunham’s body is a human canvas, scrawled with seven big and small tattoos, making her resemble a zaftig prison inmate. With an estimated... |
| 2015-04-13T06:22:42+0000 |
|
|
![]() |
<-back next->
1 to 15 of 21 comments
 |
Danielle |
2009-02-22 |
| That's not actually what a "cover up" is... |
 |
SnOrK |
2008-12-20 |
| instead of rushing out with the $10 bucks you won at bingo, save up a few hundred bucks and get that properly covered. Tattoos are expensive for a reason. |
 |
oh miss |
2007-01-16 |
| sorry, you have to get a 1 for putting a dudes name on your bod in the first place. |
|
Genine |
2006-07-13 |
| I think it's nice...yeah you can tell there was a name, but what can you do...other than cover up the whole thing. |
 |
Kermie |
2005-12-18 |
| I think it looks way better than be4 -6- |
 |
Inksane Gina |
2005-06-16 |
| It came out nice but it's too obvious that there was a name there before. |
 |
Mandalyn |
2005-05-13 |
| LOL got rid of the guy for a new puppy? good job :P |
|
j |
2004-10-10 |
| Never get a boy's name tatted on you, sorry you had to get it covered. But much better than b-4 i guess! |
|
paddy |
2004-09-29 |
| HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHATha ts the worst cover up ever, should have stuck with wayne |
|
sacredly_scarred |
2004-09-11 |
| i so saw that one comming. good cover up |
|
Hayzie |
2004-09-10 |
Really good cover up.
(I think it looks better than b4 anyway) |
|
daphne |
2004-07-24 |
| Good cover up! |
|
patricia |
2004-07-14 |
| looks alot better than before nice work |
 |
Beth |
2004-04-27 |
| A decent cover up. A 7 from me! |
 |
Luc05Kay06 |
2004-04-21 |
| sry u had to get it covered up, but it looks great |
<-back next->
|
![]() |
|
