Ugh. This one is nearly as disturbing as the one with the entire family nekkid. Seriously, unless you are under the age of one year, you should definitely be fully clothed for family photos. And even if you’re under the age of a year, for family photos, it’s better to be at least wearing a diaper! Gah!
Donna A says:
Saved! I checked in and there was no picture. Then I remembered it was Saturday and I thought to myself this could be a very good thing. :lol
On February 23, 2013 at 7:52 am
Heidi says:
Yeah – where the heck is it? It was there. And it’s from my own collection, so the code should be right. :dislike
Gotta figure this out… :charmer
On February 23, 2013 at 3:03 pm
Heidi says:
Okay, it’s back! Funny thing—it showed up with Firefox just fine, but wasn’t there when I checked using Safari. Weird. :luvsmenot
On February 23, 2013 at 3:22 pm
Arlene Hittle says:
Oh lord. :drunklaugh
On February 23, 2013 at 3:56 pm
Ruth A. Chestnut says:
:drunklaugh :muahaha I have no words for that…..
On February 23, 2013 at 4:34 pm
flchen1 says:
Ugh. This one is nearly as disturbing as the one with the entire family nekkid. Seriously, unless you are under the age of one year, you should definitely be fully clothed for family photos. And even if you’re under the age of a year, for family photos, it’s better to be at least wearing a diaper! Gah!
On February 23, 2013 at 4:35 pm
Heidi says:
I actually suspect he *does* have clothes on…like boxers or something. But it just doesn’t look good, y’know? :splat:
On February 23, 2013 at 4:36 pm
Kathleen O says:
Can you imagine the therapy bills this family is going to have when these kids are teenager…. :splat:
On February 23, 2013 at 7:55 pm