Update — Good news! Reader Scott Hall, who owns a card printing web site called Babyshere.com, offered to print our Christmas cards for less than FedEx-Kinkos would have charged. Only a few hours later my cards are now literally in the mail. Thanks, Scott!
Tonight I walked into the Fedex Kinkos store on Calhoun Street here in Charleston, SC to print our Christmas cards, only to have the clerk, Tammy Johnson, reject my order as obscene.
We Cringelys are known for our Christmas cards, I admit, because we make them ourselves and we’re naked. The tradition began by accident and now our cards are so popular friends remind us to send them. Making naked Christmas cards that are tasteful isn’t easy, either, but we do it. With three little boys you can only go so long until they begin to realize they are, well, naked. That leads in our family not so much to protestations of modesty as to demands for bribes. The price of this year’s photo session was $2 worth of sour gummy worms per kid. Yum.
This is the second year in a row we’ve been rejected by Kinkos. “I remember you,” said Ms. Johnson, handing back my USB drive with a look of disdain. It was hard for me to tell whether this was a different look of disdain from the one I got when Ms. Johnson had to put down her cellphone to serve me in the first place.
I appealed last year’s rejection to the store manager, a man. After all Kinkos — the very same Kinkos — had happily printed our cards the previous four years. We were posing last year in a fishing boat, wearing life vests, strategic shadows, and nothing else. “I see something there, ” said the manager, pointing at what would have been the groin of my six year-old if it hadn’t been well-hidden behind a light on the boat.
“What do you see?” I asked.
“You know,” he said.
“It’s a navigation light,” I said.
“I don’t think so.”
“It’s green,” I said. “It’s a green navigation light.”
Our cards show nothing. They are just for fun. Summer vacation photos that families print at the same store show more — lots more — than our cards ever do.
When we were rejected last year I was working two days per week in San Francisco, so I had the cards printed there at another Kinkos, South of Market. I told the whole rejection/obscenity story to the pierced and tattooed San Francisco Kinkos counterman, who found it hilarious. He threw-in a few extra cards for free.
The U. S. Supreme Court allowed years ago that obscenity standards could vary based on “local values,” but such values have to be uniformly applied. If a Fedex Kinkos in Charleston will print a picture of a girl in a bikini or a boy with his shirt off, then they should print my Christmas cards.
I’ll be calling Fred Smith, the founder of FedEx, in the morning. If enough of you tell your friends about this column before then, maybe Fred will be expecting my call.
Here’s the picture. What do you think?
Oh no, it’s a picture of the human body! We can’t have our name attached to *that*.
Sorry Bob, but there’s no First Amendment issue here. Kinkos has its right to print what it wants — or not. If you don’t like it, take your business elsewhere. Or write a column on it, send it out on RSS and show the world. Normally I like your columns but on this I think you’re making a big deal out of nothing.
There IS a discrimination issue, though, for exactly the reasons I explained. Also these stores aren’t franchised, they are all 100 percent owned by the company — a company that from it’s inconsistent behavior appears to have no policy on this topic.
Your kids have aged since they printed the first few sets. Your kids are older, and the fact that you had to bribe them demonstrates that they’re uncomfortable. So, no, he’s right, Kinko’s is totally within their rights as a privately owned company.
And you know what? It’s a shitty picture anyway. Not worth the hoopla you want it to be worth.
I’m going to take a stab and say that Ann Marie (or whatever her name is, she’s so unremarkably banal that I’ve already forgotten) is 5’5″, 250 lbs and doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of pulling off the picture as well as you and your brood. Kudos to all of you.
As for you, Ann Marie, perhaps you should spend more time reading your bible and fellating Jesus in your fantasies and less time judging others for having the temerity to engage in the unconventional. You’re a control freak because you fear your own urges (I’m guessing you’re a closet pedophile). It’s why you’re obese…you fight it and fight it and fight it but thenyou give in.
It’s sad.
In summation, Ann Marie, you suck.
I think that’s a really nice stove/oven.
I am wondering how an apron / smock doesn’t qualify as clothes? It’s definitely unique and humorous, but definitely the kind of thing that can get the panties in bunches of a lot of people, or at least, that pointedly sneers as them and challenges them.
This calls for a total world wide boycott of Fedex Kinko’s.
The issue here is if Kinko’s prints cute kittens then it must print cute humans otherwise it is discrimination.
Putting aside the controversy, great xmas card.
Thanks!
common carrier is a concept badly in need of wider application… i have plenty of print capacity in my shop – fedx/kinko was only ever a convenience so they’ve seen the last of my business.
Too funny. I remember last year’s photo and remember thinking to myself, are they nude? I guess this answers my question.
But please do tell, how does one start a tradition such as this? Much less by accident, though I suppose accidentally is about the only way… who would conceive it otherwise.
And hate to bring this up, but for your own sake, be sure to steer clear of Walmart.
Yo Phil F, lighten-up. He’s not threatening to sue. He’s saying one up-tight clerk in NC shouldn’t be allowed to ruin all the fun.
We just ran out in the front yard and took a naked picture because we couldn’t think of anything else to do one year. The next year we did a clothed card and people objected so much we shot another naked one to replace it. The rest was history. Some people keep our cards on their refrigerators all year long. Of course those people have issues…..
And how do we get on your Christmas Card list?
I sure hope none of your kids grow up to be famous, or those pictures are going to be all over the tabloids ^_^.
I think this is one of Bob’s secret agendas. He’s ensuring that his kids _never_ have a career in politics or government.
It’s a nice picture, but you cheated. You’re wearing pants and your wife is wearing an apron-dress. Those count as clothes.
On the flip side. It’s cute and clever, and about as obscene as a picture of puppies wrestling.
I’m wearing an apron that stops at my waist. She’s wearing a longer apron, but definitely NOT a dress. If it hadn’t raised we were going to shoot this year outdoors at a Christmas tree farm. This requires logistics….
The problem isn’t purely the amount of skin showing (though I wouldn’t show friends that much of my wife’s breast), but more the implications of naked people around each other – there is, for many people, a sexual overtone, and adding children to something with sexual overtones is problematic. If the photo were just you and your wife, I think it would be fair to say that the photo is intended to be sexy and suggestive. So what are we to think when you add naked children? The message is that the sexiness includes the kids – which is problematic.
So in your reality, naked=sexy?
We’re all born naked. Do you think a just-born baby is really sexy…because it’s naked?
This thought process (and it’s not just you) is truly bizarre…and very U.S.-centric.
-Erica
Kids naked, adults not. THAT raises some questions.
“What do YOU think?”
I think your cards can make a lot of pedophiles happy.
I would have turned you down too. A teen can be jailed and branded a sexual predator for his/her entire life for sexting. A teacher’s malware-ridden computer pops up a porno ad in front of a class of students and he loses his job.
Here you have some naked boys with strategically obscured naughty bits. So here’s what would happen. Someone – an employee or customer – would see it in the store, become offended and outraged – because even sorta-nudity makes baby jesus cry – and call the local press. A local public official trying to win an election doesn’t want to appear soft on pedophiles/obscenity and pillories the manager for distributing kiddie porn. So, can you really blame the clerk or manager? I don’t have a problem with the card but it’s just not worth the trouble.
Sure I can blame the manager. I’m good at that.
Not exactly obscene, but I have to say I agree with Brad. Cute idea and all, but let’s be real here.
How is this less real than any other Christmas card?
I think there is something wrong with the hinges on your oven door. Every oven I’ve ever had, the door will open to horizontal. It makes sense so he have a place to drag your baking out to a flat surface and then pick it to put it on the counter. So, please fix the door before someone gets burned and there is a lot of exposed skin to burn.
Sharp eyes there, Mike. The hinges have been broken TWICE by small boys standing where they shouldn’t. We haven’t repaired them this time because our plan is to remodel the kitchen next summer. That four-burner Viking range is going away, replaced by a six-burner cooktop and separate ovens..
Let’s make a deal: you tell us when the CHM is publishing NerdTV 2.0 and we’ll make some calls. 🙂 Happy Holidays.
Since you asked…
If I got your card in the mail I would not display it along side other cards.
I would not call it “tasteful”. “Tacky” would be a more apt description, or “tasteless”. That said, it’s clearly not obscene.
While the original “accidental” nude Christmas card may have been cute or even “tasteful”, the posing removes all spontaneity and frankly the kids look more embarrassed or put-upon than engaged in a “fun family tradition”.
It may be time to retire this tradition.
I always thought family pictures were ABOUT embarassment. When my dad and I go camping, he always tries to take pictures of me when I sneak off to pee. None of my brothers, just me. I have to get my brothers to distract him. Then he puts the pictures into the family trip slideshows. Now that my brothers and I all have cameras, we can keep him under observation non-stop and take pictures of him peeing. It’s weird, but it’s a tradition of sorts.
they’re gonna take your kids away
Bob – love the card! My estimation of you based on nothing but your columns just tripled!! 🙂 Love the bribery too, at 2 bucks per kid it’s quite the deal. Merry Christmas to your family.
That’s awesome, I love it! If I were the kind of person that sent christmas cards, I’d have to immitate your style.
I can’t understand how anyone could see *anything* “sexual” in this photo; it’s just a great, fun, family portrait.
Great picture! Cherish these days, it won’t be long before the older boys become self-conscious and develop acne and don’t wanna hang around making cookies no more.
I’m more concerned that you expect your Christmas cards to arrive at people’s homes before Christmas.
About what I’d expect here in SC. I’m surprised Ms (the way it’s normally done here) didn’t call CPD. At the very least, you can be sure everyone within a mile or two of Calhoun knows about the despicable Mr Robert victimizing his family in this blasphemous way (or something like that).
Oops! that was supposed to be “… Ms First Name (the way it’s…”
Hi, I’m a blogger for Babble.com. I’d like to do an article on this, and would love to use your card to illustrate the article. May I?
Bob, I for one am appalled. Being that close to the oven, your boys could have burned their …… cookies off!! Might I also suggest you do a few more push-ups before next years picture. Merry Christmas!!
OK, now I have to see the rest of the cards.
Hahahaha!
That’s a fantastic sense of humour. Brilliant. Do you have links to your previous years pictures? I’d be curious to see what you’ve done in the previous years.
Oh, and I checked with my mother. She smiled and said “No” in answer to your question.
This, of course, could only be made better if your sons were named Tray, Matt, and Mitt.
Eeew, breakfast toast and a nude RXC…too much detail…stick to the tech…nude if you like, but please, later in the day 😉
It’s sad that the whole world has gone so PC and every minimum wage clerk now see’s everyone as some sort of deviant if they show any more than a belly button.
The photo made me laugh as have the comments. My eyes lingered on that oven door too. So the photo is great, but the tradition may be short lived for the reason Grunchy says. Modesty is basically a good thing. Posing straps will never do, but I bet you can finesse this tradition into the future resorting to more apron-like props.
Hot Wife 🙂
Kids are kinda creapy :{
Great card, made me laugh 🙂 I do find it crazy that nudity is widely censored yet violence is considered ok. All countries are guilty of this to some extent but the US is the worst I know. It’s ok to kill people on mass on prime time shows but show a nipple in a wardrobe malfunction for a time best (or should that be breast) measured in millisecond and get a $550,000 fine? Crazy!
That is outright the funniest Christmas card I have ever seen. Cringely is a legend.
As a former Kinkoid I find that story hilarious!
We would have run it at any of the 30 stores I worked at. We printed way worse than that, we printed hard core porn at some locations. Heck one manager I had would come out of his office to actually help when the nude stuff came rolling in around Valentine’s Day.
That’s a nice photo, and it’s a funny idea, but here in Britain they wouldn’t just have refused to print it, they’d have called the police.
While it’s true that naked kids might appeal to pedophiles, we shouldn’t allow them to set the standards of our behaviour, neither directly nor indirectly by avoidance. The boys don’t seem more embarrassed–if they are– than boys tend to be when forced/coaxed/paid to pose for family picture. Provided sour gummy worms are the tools of corruption and parents its agents, of course.
> I wouldn’t show friends that much of my wife’s breast
That’s a fine specimen of what is known as sideboob to the experts. Laissez the bon temps rouler, ok?
I think you married above your station!
I think you’re strange.
PRINT THE CARD!
Looking good, Cringe…
Damn Californian! Have you not noticed that you live in the South, son? Charleston, especially, is not known as a hotbed of progressive thinking…
You’re lucky they didn’t call the law on you…
As a credentialed Netizen, you should have already known that, just as with most hosting companies, just the *hint* of controversy/illegality/violation of TOS is enough to get your account cancelled, with no recourse but to find another vendor…
You enjoy pushing the limits, obviously… Send it to Lulu, and see if they care…
That is the greatest family Christmas card I have ever seen. The kids will love it when you threaten to hand them out to their girlfriends when they get older. Remember it’s always good to have leverage on a teenager.
The best thing about a free market system is the right not to do business with someone.
As an artist who has great respect for your work I am in solidarity with you and will no longer be doing business with Fedex Kinkos stores.
Keep up the good work
Jim
Laughed at the card. Just way too cute.
But, and you knew there was a but in there. But this country (USA) is way too hung up on nudity. Violence, hey we can blow people up on prime-time TV, but don’t show that breast or those buttocks. Thus I’m happy to see someone who is demystifying nudity for their children at an early age. Might even make some medical procedures easier to take. 🙂
Good show and Merry Christmas.
Bob,
In order to give proper consideration to your issue, I feel it necessary for you post the other Christmas Cards.
BTW: That is freaking awesome!!!
–Bill
I have 2 comments.
First I think that FedEx is wrong – I don’t think it’s obscene but I believe it’s their call. and I would hope that Fred Smith would defer to the store manager to be the one to judge local conditions.
Second – and I have to preface this with the fact that for two years now my son has produced and sold an implied nudity calendar on the campus of his alma mater which features members of many of the clubs on campus. The clubs benefit from the sales. I think his calendars are wonderful. But Bob, I think your card is creepy. It may have been cute when the kids were little. And I have nothing against family nudity if that’s your thing. But I think in this context it’s creepy.
Maybe it would be less creepy if you were all completely nude on a beach or something. In a weird way total nudity might call less attention to it, but that would never fly in America.
As to Tony’s comment on sex and violence – it’s true. In America, sex is something you’re allowed to do, but not see on film in public. Murder is the opposite. What a country!
Don’t forget to wipe the floor where your son was sitting.
This is a fantastic card and tradition, and its something you and your family should be proud of. I must admit that it has piqued my curiosity to see the previous years. But your privacy is perfectly understandable here.
It’s a sad state of affairs that such an image causes any moral indignation (feigned or otherwise). Really people, there are plenty of serious problems in the world that need your help. Equating images like this to child abuse is not just disingenuous but distracts focus from the actual crimes.
Love your work.
Bob, you rock! And if you choose to fight a battle with FedEx / Kinky, oops, I mean Kinko’s – a battle that will mean absolutely nothing on December 22, 2012, then you go right ahead and waste your time. 🙂
P.S. – Why is it that women get more attractive with age and guys just kinda, well…
I think this is Hillarious! Continue this tradition as long as the bribes work – it will lighten many hearts. I also suspect many will not get it and that needs to be respected also. Perhaps it’s time to buy a decent printer & save the jobs of our friendly Kinko employees.
I think your x-mas card is very cool and shows a lot of originality.
First, I think it’s pretty funny that a store named Kinkos won’t print these cards (and I’m not suggesting that they are anything but funny). Second, I am pretty sure people would be asking to be removed from our mailing list if we did this. Happy Holidays!
Thanks for the cards. We have enjoyed them every year. We even enjoyed the “clothed” card. It was creative and cleaver too.
Each year when the Cringely family card arrives our first thoughts are of your neighbors. Oh the stories they must have…!
Sadly it won’t be much longer until the boys grow up a bit and stop cooperating. That is when parenting becomes more challenging — finding new and more subtle activities to do now, that will mortify your kids when they are adults.
I think your photographer is going to need some therapy. We will pray for his/her mental health.
The only problem I have with this card is your depth of field. You and your son in the back are a little out of focus compared to your sons in the front. Maybe its on purpose you seem like you know what you’re doing.
Extra points for nice sideboob though.
Nice photo. Your wife looks fantastic after 3 boys. You are blessed.
Nice concept of using xmas cards. Screw Kinkos especially SC.
Just go to shutterfly or any one of these online places (Apple even) and I’m sure they’ll print it for you.
Me thinks the boys are too old for this.
I think maybe it’s time to pause the tradition and resume it when the boys are all over 18. It’s starting to get a little creepy.
Peter G – Because it’s so much LESS creepy for ADULT children to be photographed naked with their naked parents??!!?
Cringely – I think this is an awesome holiday card idea, AND I think it’s a potential issue that the boys need to be bribed. Not, like, a CPS issue or anything, but just some food for thought for you and your wife. If they’re the least bit uncomfortable with being fully nude, I’d encourage you to drop it, or at least consider modifying it. Maybe you all pose with a length of wrapping paper placed strategically in front of you. Or, wrap a large appliance box in holiday paper and you all peek over/around it…. just some modification that still honors your tradition while protecting your sons’ right to decide how much of their bodies to display.
I see something
Nice kitchen!
Ya kow, reading through the other comments, it seems like the card is like an ink-blot test. You see what you want to see, and in commenting, you tell the world more about yourself than about the image.
Ain’t art grand?
I support you in your campaign to get the Kink into Kinkos.
The prudery of Americans no longer amazes, it has become plain depressing.
P.S. If anyone thinks this is kinky, they have issues.
Right is wrong and wrong is right, huh?
If you think pictures of naked boys hiding their genitals is the same as pictures of your boys in swim trunks, you are damn retarded.
Excellent taste in oven mitts. Loved it.
kw
It’s not the nudity, it’s the state of US law. When kids are charged with felonies for sending semi-nude pictures of themselves, is it any wonder that FedEx Kinkos is wary of “publishing” something that could be treated as child pornography by a prudish jury? Sorry, Bob, I respect your right to send the cards. But print them yourself. Don’t expect FedEx Kinkos to take the fall for you if the cards cause legal problems.
Well definitely in poor taste, but I don’t think it’s so bad that it requires judicial oversight.
Disturbing? A little.
Creepy? Uh-huh.
Distasteful? Maybe.
Obscene? No.
Get some clothes on. I wouldn’t print it either.
Me thinks your oldest boy was not holding the baking pan strategically enough…
| The prudery of Americans no longer amazes,
Actually it is not prudery, it is perversion. Only an obscene or perverted mind would see that picture as obscene or perverted.
I think your kids will either grow up to have a great sense of humor or spend a lot of money talking about the Christmas cards with their therapist. Hopefully it’ll the former….
I think it’s unusual in the same way I think clothes-optional beaches and hot springs are unusual.
It is arguable that the policy is stupid, but from the perspective of FedEx and their top management, they probably feel this is the policy that best protects their investors from legal risk; furthermore it is probably not a local issue in which local managers have any discretion: I would wager this comes from top management at FedEx. If there are naked pictures of children involved, they won’t have anything to do with it, tasteful or not. It is also hard to blame them, because the current political climate has overzealous prosecutors pursuing innocent people over child pornography, and in many cases they have gotten convictions with prison time. No prosecutor with political aspirations wants to be seen as soft on child porn. Given that environment, and the risk and threat that it poses to corporations and their investors, it’s quite easy to see why FedEx would decline to make decisions where judgment and taste is involved.
It may or may not be the personal prudery of the local (SC) employees, or it may be the counsel of Kinko’s attorneys to avoid litigation at all costs. Mind you, they define “copyrighted material” so broadly that they will decline to scan or xerox even a NYT article from yesterday; imagine their caution when it comes to anything remotely “obscene” or pedophiliac? The card is amusing and innocuous to me, and probably most anyone north of the Mason Dixon Line. So: get out of there!
Can I get on your christmas card list!!
You have every right to send these, they are far from obscene.
Me too.
I want to know who the lucky photographer was to be there taking the pictures of all the naked people! I do agree, poor taste and a little creepy, but not obscene.
Most cameras come with self timers.
The wide angle distortion of your wife’s head is a little off-setting and the lighting could be improved (a warming gel on the light in the oven? less shadow on your face?).
Who came up with this scheme first: You or Austin Powers?
As for the image being obscene…All I can say is that if folks are offended by your holiday greeting card, they’ll be really floored by the work of Jock Sturges!
Kevin
Norman Rockwell would be proud.
I think it’s clever and would think it’s funny if I received one. But I can see where, given the sensitivities of the times, the inclusion of your sons has probably reached it’s limit.
But by all means keep up the tradition with you and your wife… well at least your wife.
I remember when this used to be a technology blog…..those were the days.
Me thinks it’s time to hit delete in the news reader.
Exposure needs some work. Too many blown highlights. Some washed out shadows. Uneven lighting on the “models”. Inadequate depth of field.
The boy in the back *does not* have adequate placement of the baking pan.
Nice shot of a side boob (as previously noted) turns a cute photo into something raunchy.
You better pray that social service folks down there don’t find out!
What do I think? I think your wife looks phenomenal and I would pay to see the out takes!
Great card. Great family tradition. Thanks for sharing.
I just wanted to Add, to the people who are pointing out the boys in this, I am sure that they are perfectly delightful, my only response would be, “What boys?”
The uptightness of Americans with nudity is the only notable thing here. Cards are great. Keep it up (as it were!)
This should be submitted to awkwardfamilyphotos.com.
Pathetic but what the hell ! I want to be on your Christmas card list ! Please !
Merry Christmas and keep up with your good work.
I think the card is a hoot, but I can see it ending up on awkwardfamilyphotos.com 🙂
Kinko’s historically had a paranoiac, ad hoc approach to copyright, so this bit of nanny business doesn’t surprise me. This attitude is likely why Kinko’s got Borg-ed into Fedex, and has been swirling the drain to extinction.
Also, given what the gov. and other SC pols have been caught doing recently, I think there is a hypocrisy problem in the state. It’s apparently ok for Gov. Sanford to abandon his office and go ‘hiking the Appalachian Trail’ with a comely adulteress, but not for the Cringelys to take an oddball Christmas card picture. You’re not fooling anybody, Miss Kinko’s manager, you’re just losing business, and making another joke at the expense of South Carolina’s already tattered reputation.
Awesome card! It begs the question though…how did you “accidently” start a naked Christmas card photo tradition? Everyone just sitting around in Santa hats and skin when a camera went off? You have to share the story!
I can’t see dick. 😉 (Sorry, I just had too)
I think it’s a great card and I don’t understand what could be wrong with it. I also can see how it can be a much better and less awkward way to broach the subject of nudity and sex with your kids then some other methods.
Merry Christmas Bob!
That’s a wonderful card. Thanks for sharing it.
With respect to nudity…things are changing. At our comic book convention here in California, vendors used to put small temporary stickers over the occasional art containing exposed breasts. The convention contains mostly adults, but there are a few of the younger fans as well.
These days, however, most vendors don’t bother. After 16 years of anyone having access to nudity on the internet, and nothing bad happening after all, people are realizing that exposure to nudity is harmless.
As a general rule, wide-angle photo lenses have little use in artistic photography. I generaly recommend that beginning photographers never use them until they have a better understanding of composition and special effects. In this case, it makes your Christmas photo look distorted and unpleasant (especialy you wife’s head).
I think the oven lighting was an interesting idea, but obviously it has made for an unattractive photo. The lighting just is not working if the intent was an attractive result.
In regard to child pornography and child nudity there is obviously an issue. Child sexual exploitation is a very real problem in our country and I believe a lot of individuals are deeply concerned about it. Our culture is trying to address a lot of issues that emotionally (and otherwise) hurt various groups of individuals and the unfortunate downside is that a lot of spontaneous humour and relaxed attitudes are negatively impacted.
Nevertheless, my first take on the photo was to literaly laugh out loud. My co-workers came over to see what was “cracking me up”. I guess it was the context of the photo in this particular blog that struck me as very funny. I’m guessing your friends on your Christmas card list must see it as a running, insider’s gag. I’ve been reading your writing for many years and I would guess you have a wonderful family life and your kids are lucky to have parents who can have that much fun.
“The tradition began by accident” dude how do you accident make a naked xmas card?
1. Kinkos? Really? Surely there are better places to get stuff like this printed these days. The ones around where I live are depressing pits of brokenness, hostility, and incompetence.
2. Get yourself a good printer and a rotary paper cutter. Then you can actually say you “make them yourself”. And you’ll be able to print whatever you damned well please.
Reminds me of stuff that went on in New England in the 60’s and 70’s; likely California (or however Auhnuld says it) as well. Oh, Jock Sturges; got into lots o trouble with his vacation pictures. Of course, he’s an *artiste* so didn’t go to jail.
But, yes, the inbreds in the Red States (who pork anything with legs their related to, that’s where in the inbreeding comes from) would classify any form of naked kids as child porn. Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Please don’t ever invite me to your house for dinner.
Bob,
Nice card. While I can see some people taking issue with it, the tradition is a hoot. As for printing these, it would be easier to just go to a CVS, Walgreens or Walmart and user the self serve kiosk. No fuss, no mess and no issues.
Weird, but not obscene, methinks.
Not obscene, kind of cute. Very neo-hippy, which suits you, I think. Not the card that I would make for my family, but then, that’s the point.
Your wife is HOT.
This is obscene, no one is wearing a proper burka. And thats just wrong.
😛
Make sure you send one to George Costanza.
I thought this was supposed to be a naked picture. Your wife is wearing way too much clothing.
I have to agree, the aprons aren’t quite as clever as the life preserver, but, hey, some years have to be better than others.
I think it’s wonderful that you endeavour to do something creative and unique each year, and, yes, I really worry about some of the commenters here who think boys without clothes are in any way sexy. That moniker should be reserved for, in order:
1) Bob’s lovely wife
2) the Viking Stove
3) the heart pine floors
4) Bob!
I kid. Merry Christmas.
As the parent of 2 kids about the ages of yours… I agree with you that (1) Americans are too prude about nudity, (2) random Kinkos employees shouldn’t determine “obscenity,” and (3) there’s nothing actually obscene happening in your photo. HOWEVER, here’s what I have a real problem with: It’s totally disrespectful, and potentially dangerous, that you’re pushing your sons to do this when they’ve indicated they’d rather not – even using bribery to override their natural growing sense of modesty and privacy. Those feelings are there for a reason: that “voice inside” protects kids from the potential for inappropriate and dangerous viewing or touching. You want that voice to be strong and confident; but your behavior is showing your kids not to trust their instincts and that adults can make them do something they’re not comfortable with. If you and your wife want to pose for nude Christmas cards, go for it and no one should stop you. To me, the parental power play here is the real obscenity.
You are assuming he wouldn’t need the same bribery for a clothed photo shoot!
Getting 3 boys to pose for a family portrait is unlikely to be easy whatever they have on, or not.
Cringely,
Your wannabe reasoning that your naked kids are the same as kids in swim trunks is about as spot on as your barf faced reasoning in all your crappy ass columns.
You are a gigantic, withering douchenozzle, but everyone already knows this.
looks like someone is jealous of his hot wife
lets see the other years
Great picture and NOTHING wrong with it. For those that think the boys are too old for this…your minds are in a very sick place. Simple nudity is NOT sexual. If one of these boys was hurt and needed help with bathing….who’s gonna do it? If you can’t see, care for or love your child, just because they are nude, then you shouldn’t have children in the first place.
There is much too much prudishness in this country and the idea that simple nudity amongst family members is somehow obscene, pornographic or sexual is outragious and narrowminded. Those that think this way need to get their minds outta the gutter and take a good look in the mirror.
I say….keep on taking your family Christmas cards to whoever will print them for you. They are terrific.
I love it! Creative and funny !
Bravo to all of you~
Here in the UK the photo printers in supermarkets are stand alone machines, you stick you memory card in, select the pics you want to print, then put them in and envelope with the printout of the cost on the outside
no employee censors the pictures, and you could print most outrageous pics in reasonable safety, only someone being very rude looking over you shoulder could see what you are printing.
In the case of your pictures, I see nothing wrong at all, nothing is exposed that shouldn’t be, it’s just the same sort of pictures as the “calendar girls” pictures, with inappropriate bits covered in clever ways.
I hope you get somewhere with the Kinkos/Fed Ex boss, maybe recommend he follows the UK privacy model rather than exposing his employees to ridicule with his current policy.
Yeah…you’re a freak…
This photo is just plain creepy.
Freaks are awesome! More power to you!!!!!
This is a wonderful family photo. It’s too bad that Fed Ex Kinkos doesn’t understand the difference between the naked body and sexualized content.
More families should approach nudity (real or perceived) in such a relaxed matter. We’re all too wound up about such things. Guess what – no one is hurt if a family member walks from the bedroom to the bathroom without a robe.
Now I’m getting wound up. Bob: Find another printer and get your cards. Carry on!
Too much of “obscene” is in the eye of the beholder. Therefore such standards cannot be uniformly applied. I’m not even an American and I’m still not surprised Charleston vs. San Fran is a highly dramatic example of this. 🙂
For people who think there is nothing wrong with this picture, do you think it would be appropiate if one of the boys in the photo was the next door neighbor’s kid who came over to play, and was bribed with an Ipod to participate in the photograph? What would the liability be for the company or person who printed it then? How do they know that these are in fact his children? How would you even prove that to the clerk?
EEk! What about the children?! s
This is a cool christmas card. To all those who think there is something wrong with this picture – get a life. It’s not pornography, you morons, it’s nature. Bob, be careful the fat doesn’t splash you – ouch!
Bob,
I love you to death…but you are a nut!…..
John Herndon
Carmel Indiana
The only one in the photo I was able to look at was your wife.
Why dont you put yourself at the front of the photo (in the line of fire), and put your kids in the background.
Your wife is hot!
I agree!
To each (adult), his or her own decision regarding nudity and the creative Christmas photo.
To each (child), perhaps some better parental judgment.
Have you ever had a visit from your state’s department of children and family services?
Not yet, nor will we. My wife is a professional who worked at the Medical University of South Carolina Institute of Psychiatry helping children who were physically or sexually abused. No laws are being broken here or even bent.
What do I think?
I think you have an understanding wife…
Bob –
I’ll admit that at first I was a bit shocked by your picture. Then I paused and remembered that sex and nudity are two different things. Sadly we have combined them in our country. I actually wish I would have grown up in a more open home like yours.
But — I agree with FedEx not printing the picture. That is entirely within their own rights due to the potential of legal action against them. Just the threat could cost them thousands in attorneys fees or in reputation.
Not everyone will have an open mind to your picture, FedEx is just protecting their business.
Kinkos should have printed this for you, but the photo is a bit creepy.
Welcome to the south, Bob. The Bible Belt is long and loopy and stops long before San Francisco.
Here I was just thinkin’ “Cringely, ah, there’s a wholesome fellow, straight as an arrow and always with something insightful to say,” and then BAM! I get this in my email.
I’m speechless to a degree. It’s hilarious but then it’s repulsive, sick and twisted, not just because your kids are in it but because I wonder how many takes it took, if you had someone else there taking the photo and therefore how long each family member had to endure each others’ nudity to get it right. Ugh, awkward doesn’t begin to describe that. But you all must be pretty comfortable with each other, that’s for sure…
Weird shit, and that’s coming from someone who likes weird. But I still would have allowed you to print them had I been running the Kinkos.
“Endure each others nudity?” I don’t think I’m the one with the problem.
Bob,
I agree that, judging from the picture reproduced here, your Xmas cards are not obscene, and Kinkos should print them. However, the impression I get, and of course I don’t know your family, is kinda creepy. The boys are getting older and all kinds of sexual issues are lurking beneath the surface. This isn’t unselfconscious nudity around the house, it’s a public display aimed to provoke and amuse. Maybe the kids don’t want to go nudie with their parents to amuse your adult friends.
“Maybe the kids don’t want to go nudie with their parents to amuse your adult friends.”
@ Artie, Don’t you mean arouse his adult friends?
So long farewell, auf weidersehen good-bye …
Bob,
Not exactly what I would do but definitely original. I’m getting the feeling that you’ve been watching ‘Austin Powers’ reruns.
As for FedEx Office (formerly known as ‘FedEx Kinkos’), I would have to side with them as they are just protecting themselves (the local employees to be more exact). American society is litigation-oriented so you will find certain businesses and people focus on CYA in certain situations. As long as your family does the same (CYA) you’ll be fine and a curious sight during the holidays.
I guess they decided the name “Kinkos” had to go since it was too kinky sounding.
fine for you and your wife but your kids have gotten a little too old for this.
“What’s the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
Some say your toes
But I think it’s YOUR MIND!” (Frank Zappa)
Sure seems like there are quite a few ugly minds out there. Just remember… underneath whatever you happen to be wearing right now, you are all naked. I think that those who find the photo “creepy” do so because they are not used to seeing nudity without tits and asses sticking out all over the place.
Here’s the BIG IDEA! – Forward all of this to Keith Olberman (and/or any other commentator on TV) and see what happens. CENSORSHIP AT FedEX! – THE BIG STORY! http://www.cringley.com will get a s**tload of hits and you can raise your rate, Cringely –
It’s all about the moola! Do you need an agent? PICK ME!!!!!!
🙂
you are almost as weird as steve wozniak.
Hi Bob,
I think the photo and the article are great.
Here in Australia the issue of photography involving child nudity has gone insane to the point where about a year ago the (liberal) Prime Minister (=President!) of Australia criticized an art magazine for featuring a nude child on the cover.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/rudd-v-art-critic-over-child-nudity-20080706-32n6.html
I am glad that you still have the liberty in America to continue your delightful family tradition.
I think its an amazing picture the time and effort to get the picture just right to work as art with out being too revealing must have been a project in its self. There and thousands of examples where naked people are just naked people. What if it was a painting not a picture would you view it as obscene? I wish i was that comfortable with my body to pull that one off.
I don’t blame Kinko’s. I think this is a little over the line. Personally I would have no problem with the photo if the boys’ genital areas were just a bit better covered. Move the oven mitt a bit clockwise, have the boy on the floor move his arm down a bit, and it’s a fantastic card. I appreciate the artistry involved and the idea is great, just a bit too far over the line for me.
Bob,
I can see how this started as a cute thing when your kids were babies, but with each year, it becomes less cute and more inappropriate.
Developmentally, children are great at developing modesty on their own – they run around naked until they are no longer comfortable doing so. Once they express discomfort, it should be respected.
I notice that you and your wife are in fact not naked, but have clothing covering your genitalia. If you and your wife are not comfortable being naked in front of the camera or in front of your boys, then why are you assuming they are comfortable being naked in front of you? There is a power dynamic at play that you need to consider.
Take a step back and really break this down: You are bribing your children with candy to get naked, even though they are not comfortable with it, and then photographing them. What are you teaching them? If their pastor, or the neighbor, or their uncle, or their teacher asks them to get naked for candy, or wants to photograph them in a way that makes them uncomfortable, will this experience make them more or less likely to do so?
If you had 3 little girls, would you still think this was harmless? Would your wife? Would the reaction of the Kinkos guy and the readers of this blog be different?
Finally, by publishing this photo on the internet, you have almost ensured that your boys will be teased or worse in junior high or high school when one of their classmates inevitably finds this photograph. It’s one thing for my mom to keep nude baby photos of me in an album and embarrass me by showing them to girlfriends, its another to have those photos posted on the internet.
As a loyal reader, I expect a thoughtful response to the questions that I have raised in this comment.
With the advent of the Internet THERE IS NO PRIVACY. Our kids know this even at 7, 5, and 3. We’ve taught them to deal with the inevitable invasions of privacy that come with what I do for a living. Readers passing through town ring our doorbell all the time. They think they know me. They did this before I had kids or was even married (I didn’t become a father until age 49). So I can either be afraid of everything and everyone, hide myself and my family, and maybe try not to be so provocative in my writing because SOMEONE MIGHT ACTUALLY READ IT or I can be myself. I choose to do the latter. And my kids understand very well about those people who ring the doorbell or come up to Daddy at the shopping mall. They had better understand, too, because there are real limits on how much I (or anyone) can protect them. They ultimately have to learn how to protect themselves.
So, because people ring your doorbell you have to post nude pictures of your kids online?
…
The worst part of this is that even if you wise up, you can’t take this picture back. It’s probably already been right-click-and-saved by creeps who are going to enjoy some private alone time with it later.
And your point is…?
It’s already been posted all over a few communities on LiveJournal.com.
Robin Levick took the words right out of my mouth, i was not going to comment until i saw your reply Bob… Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but why did you just pull a sarah palin and NOT answer some of the questions posed to you?
I’d appreciate it if you addressed if only one question – the one about how much you and your wife are covered up compared to the kids.. Just by looking at the picture, your son clearly covers your wife’s privates so there really would be no need for a full apron right? Or would that have been showing too much skin?
If you’re going to do something like this, then it should all be even right? right.
Bob, you said: “With the advent of the Internet THERE IS NO PRIVACY. Our kids know this even at 7, 5, and 3. We’ve taught them to deal with the inevitable invasions of privacy that come with what I do for a living”
Bob, when the government installs webcam’s in my bathroom I will agree with you, there is no privacy. Until then YOU control what is posted. If you want to post things, pictures, sounds, etc that are of and about yourself that is your decision.
Posting pictures of your children is a different story–those pictures would not exist had you not taken the time to create them… and those pictures would not be on the internet had you chosen not to post them.
So please, recognize a key difference between public domain information such as name, age, telephone number, etc which end up on the internet w/o your actions … and things like this picture that would not be on the internet if it were not for your actions.
Damn, America is just a bunch of prudes. Seriously, it’s a body, get over it. As long as nobody participating in the photo is uncomfortable, then it’s all fair game.
It’s ridiculous that most people commenting (and reading likely) are so put off by the human form that they have to call -you- weird in order to make their sensibilities seem rational.
More power to you, Bob.
Bob,
I know your views are different that mine, but that’s way more than I ever cared to see of you and your family. I honestly wouldn’t be caught dead showing off my kids to complete strangers like this. I would be to paranoid that some child perv-freak might use this picture to stalk and kidnap my kids and hold them for ransom or do something far worse. Not to mention you pined your famliy’s location to a 5-10 mile radius from your local Charleston, SC Kinko’s. This is a big no-no.
If I were you, I would lock your doors, arm the alarm, and sleep with a bat next to your bed just to be safe.
I think Santas little Elves are going to beat the crap out of dear old Dad when they grew up and comprehend the embarrassment he has inflicted on them
Your family and friends may understand but you cannot be surprised that other people are shocked. For any employee/company put in this position the default position is NO – it makes their life easier.
Why cant you create amusing Christmas Scenes without the nudity? Mind you any scenario involving the beautiful Mrs Claus gets my vote.
I agree totally with Lester Jordan. It is way better to live in fear. Fear everything.
Fear peadophiles, fear terrorists, fear woman’s bodies, fear children’s bodies. Just make the default position fear. Thats great. It’s really doing wonders for our society the way you and people like you promote fear. It’s awesome, two losing wars and a financial meltdown. I know!! How about some more heaped doses of fear!
Seriously the people who are objecting to this need to get their heads out their ass. Stop imposing your moral position on others. It’s people like you who will give entire lectures or speeches on tolerance but when questioned closely it’s discovered that it is all about tolerance you can handle. Religious tolerance? Sure, as long as it’s your religion. Sexual tolerance? Sure, as long as it’s the same as your sexual habits. Political tolerance? Sure, as long as it’s your politics.
Come on just get a grip, can’t you see how you’re contributing to the negative aspects of the society we live in?
Great way to humiliate your kids and ruin Christmas for them. Think they’ll keep doing this all through puberty? You’re going to damage them and your relationship with them.
Just in time to get the wife a boob job for Christmas too.
lol
If your kids are ok with it, and you send them to people who want them, then frankly it’s none of my business. And I’m ok with that. But Kinko’s is doing what any business in the terrified-of-sex US would: avoid liability.
As a Christmas card for your family, sure. But posting it online to make a point, I’m not so sure. Really, your kids might never hear the end of this from their classmates.
As to the implication of child pornography or perversion, I think the fact that this is done so openly should put everyone at ease. As a society in general, we should probably worry more about the pictures that are developed at home or at a stand alone photo kiosk, right?
Your wife is definately a hottie. 🙂
Yup.
Merry Christmas Bob and Family,
and thanks for sharing your great Christmas card.
Re Kinkos, never did like going there. Over priced, haughty employees and so-so work product.
Exercise your economic vote, as many do, and take your business elsewhere.
Best wishes for the New Year as well.
You are a creep for exploiting your children like this.
This is sexual abuse and obviously you are proud of it.
What will the kids think of this when they are older? They will resent the hell out of you for forcing them to do this.
Love the picture and the column. But, how exactly does a tradition of naked photos get started by “accident”?
The City of Charleston used to set up a lighted Christmas tree in the park across the street from our house. One day when Channing was three he streaked naked out the front door. Running to catch him I saw him with the lighted tree in the background and it struck me as the perfect picture for our card that year. Five minutes later, having shucked our clothes and picked up various wreaths and packages to cover the private parts, that first picture was done. The next year we did a clothed picture, shot at a seedy motel where there was no room in the inn but our friends were generally disappointed at the lack of nudity. And so a tradition was born.
your wife got a nice rack…..she’s all milf’d out….
I really wish you had refrained from posting the photo, Bob. I have children in that age range as well and while you and your wife are free to do as you wish, seeing another father put pressure on his boys to perform those poses bothers me greatly. It would bother me almost as much if no pressure were required, but that added element is disturbing. Please take that photo down, for your family.
Cat’s out of the bag, sorry. There is no point in taking-down a picture that is already on tens of thousands of hard drives. And taking it down makes the column prurient, which it wasn’t nor is it intended to be. There is NOTHING wrong with the picture.
might be creepy, if it wasn’t completely a recurring gag that grew out of the accidental, shared among friends.
nice side-boob!
I think you’re a very lucky man.
The same issues came up in the mid 1800’s when Édouard Manet painted “Le déjeuner sur l’herbe” and exhibited it – you can google for the picture. Its’ exhibition produced much “shock and horror” from the general public which didn’t subside that much when it was pointed out that the composition of the painting was virtually identical to the much respected “Judgment of Paris” drawn by Raphael some 300 years earlier.
Likewise today – most of the people complaining about the portrayal of naked children are quite comfortable in churches richly decorated with pictures and carvings of naked nymphs of about the same age.
I showed your picture to my wife and daughter (11years old) – we all think it’s a wonderful card!
The wife’s not naked enough.
What kid wouldn’t want to hang out with their naked parents? Nothing creepy about that.
hahah
One step above old guy in trench coat saying
“Hey kid take off your cloths and let me take your picture and I’ll give you some candy”
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Poor kids.
I doubt ‘haute couture’ existed around the firepit in the neolithic era. But I’ll reserve judgement until Alton Brown weighs in on the subject.
This is really upsetting, especially the bribery element, and the fact that you and your wife are somewhat clothed and yet you forced your children to be completely nude.
Please understand that photos like this can be used for purposes other than your intended purpose, especially when posted on the internet for anyone to access. Protect your children, take it down and never again force them into situations that they are rightly uncomfortable with.
I don’t see the big deal beyond the fact that you’re too stubborn to buy a fricken printer for yourselves. It’s one thing to show your friends and family that you don’t care for certain socially imposed boundaries, but quite another to complain when the print shop refuses to be a part of it.
So how do I get on your Christmas card list?
And this: “You are a creep for exploiting your children like this.
This is sexual abuse and obviously you are proud of it.”
Please forgive the ignorance of people who confuse nudity with sexual abuse. They aren’t very bright.
This may have been cute when the kids were 0-5. Now it’s just creepy. I really doubt your friends would appreciate receiving this and are too polite to tell you so.
I’m gonna have to agree. I wouldn’t even push it to 5, though…0-3, maybe. I think it’s a bit creepy and awkward beyond that.
Thought I’d add that I’m finding the fact that they bribed the children with candy to get them to pose nude, however ‘modest’ the photos, is utterly disturbing.
I think you’re way hot. Lucky husband.
My sister forwarded me this for ideas for next year. We (my husband and 2 boys 7 & 9) sent one to select people wearing nothing but Santa Hats while standing in a bubble bath with nothing but bubbles covering our “private parts.”
However, knowing that not all would get my humor, the majority received the card where were are all sitting in the tub with nothing but our smiling faces above the mass tub of bubbles.
We got laughs from all!
I have no problem with the mom and dad as they are. As for the children, it’s pretty funny how the strategic parts are covered up. Still, I wouldn’t do this to my kids. I’d be afraid some employee would be too eager to report me for child pornography or something. Dressing the kids in Christmas-themed ANYTHING (gift wrap, tinsel, ribbons, etc.) would solve the problem. What a wacky family! I can’t see the children wanting to do this for much longer. 😉
“I’d be afraid some employee would be too eager to report me for child pornography or something.”
That is a realistic possibility. I wouldn’t want the hastle for the sake of a X-Mas card. And fear of kiddie porn charges is almost certainly why Kinkos refused toi print them.
For everyone yelling “censorship” directed at Kinkos in a constitutional context, please learn 1st Amendment jurisprudence. The 1st Amendment prohibits governmental restictions on free speech. A private citizen, corporate or individual, can restrict or censor whatever it likes without running afoul of the 1st Amendment. It’s is simply not applicable to non-geovernmental bodies or agencies. That is what makes it possible for you to, say, prevent someone from using foul language in your house.
It’s certainly true that “a private citizen, corporate or individual, can restrict or censor whatever it likes without running afoul of the 1st Amendment,” but people hollering “censorship” to protest that perfectly legal behavior are making a salient point. The FIrst Amendment recognizes freedom of speech; it does not create it.
It’s tastefully done. Everything folks may have a “problem” with is completely covered. I’ve seen more skin in the traditional baby-bear-skin-rug picture.
Well done.
Love your blog and have always looked forwarded to reading all your thoughts and whatever you do.
This time – very creepy, bob.
my wife and I looked at the photo and we agree – creepy.
Not good.
we have nothing against nakedness but I think having your kids in the picture and more obviously naked than you and your wife – very creepy. Strange.
Send out a semi or all nude photo of you and your wife and that’s fine … but adding the boys – sorry NO!!!
creepy. The only word this picture describes.
just have one with your wife
Let’s be clear, Mr. Cringely wanted Kinko’s to refuse to print those cards, because it makes his clever and precious little story about his clever and precious little family all the more clever and precious. Win-win.
The photo is cute and your wife is hot.
Get a life or a printer.
It’s not the nudity, or fear of the human body that makes me recoil in horror about you being a father and posting this online.
I can appreciate nudity when it is appropriate and am in no way shape or form a prude, let’s put that first
What terrifies and disgusts me is that you openly explain how you BRIBED the children into getting naked for the camera. If they volunteered readily, no problem. But you bribed them… I don’t think I’ve ever had my parents bribe me into something. If I didn’t want to do it of my own volition, I didn’t have to do it (other than the obvious: clean your room, do the dishes, walk the dog, etc.)
I’m also a bit shocked that you seem to think your 3 year old is already well aware of the difference between right and wrong and has to be able to protect himself from the big bad world.
You wife, who is a child psychologist from what I gather, should be able to tell you that for at least two out of three of your boys, that is a little young (and I’m even leaning towards all three). Psych 101, anyone?
Times may have changed but I didn’t realize parents had not been upgraded to go with the times and expand to make sure their kids are save regardless.
I know everyone likes to think their child is special and fantastically gifted and so much more advanced than the rest, but even if he’s a prodigy child, such expectations (knowing right from wrong and being aware when to protect himself because apparently he can’t count on his ‘famous’ father to at least try and maintain a semblence of privacy) are ridiculous.
Now they might understand that there is no such thing as privacy becuse of what you do. But now they also agree readily with whatever you say. They’re at that age. It’s not until well in their twenties they will realize just how much that has affected their lives and how different their lives could have been if Daddy at least had TRIED to keep them out of the public eye.
Good luck with your boys, hopefully next year they up their bribe, because they are worth so much more than 2 dollars worth of gummy bears. If you won’t teach them privacy, at least teach them the value of their own bodies. I imagine pedophiles pay way better than mom and dad!
For all those complaining about the “bribery”, it’s a pretty common practice for parents to reward their children for doing various things – whether its chores, homework, practicing, or posing for a picture. It’s a very common practice for parents to tell a child who has a hard time sitting still, “sit here and smile for the picture, then we’ll get a treat afterwards”. Call it bribery if you want, but few people would object to such a practice in other instances.
That said, I would never do that with my kids.
Wow, that’s a hilarious Christmas card. It’s kind of sad that people can’t understand the difference between nudity and pornography.
I gotta be honest… it’s pretty freaking creepy that you want to have a pic of you and your kids together in the kitchen with everyone’s private parts are “strategically covered”.
I don’t blame the Kinko’s for not wanting to get into this quagmire…
Anyway, don’t you know it’s dangerous to bake while nude?
I think Kinko’s made the right call.
You need to update your site logo to the same standards.
I’ll second a couple of comments: might have been cute when the boys were younger, but it is a bit creepy now. And you do have a hot wife.
Merry Christmas!
No wonder they refused to print it. Adults nude is one thing, but you’ve admitted yourself that the kids were uncomfortable with it and you had to bribe them. The fact that you’re willing to let total strangers see your children in such a state of undress should indicate to you that you just ain’t right in the head.
Get over your issues. This photo is only perverted to sick people who can’t look at something so tastefully done and not think dirty thoughts.
If you go to any nude beach (I’m not even talking about Europe… I mean like even one in America… like Black’s Beach in San Diego), you will see entire families there without any issues. You get over it.
Become an adult already. And stop rubbing yourself when you look at other people’s tastefully and humorously done greeting cards.
This is SO CUTE!!
I am absolutely sick and appalled!!!
That Kinko’s wouldn’t print your cards!! Your wife’s sideboob is lovely, and we see a lot more on any of the major networks that show any of the awards shows. All the women on the red carpet show more than that. Not to mention as you had the bikini’s! The kids are covered, your covered, I really don’t see what all the hubub should be, bub.
Anyway, great picture. More families should be in the kitchen making Christmas cookies too!!
Our ancesters left Europe because they wanted to continue to be prudes in a NEW land. Our country is based on being prudish (clothing opt beaches here vs Europe, anyone ?). Our politicians have to have kids, but can’t have sex. Our heroes have to be family men or women, but can’t have sexual thoughts. Even my mother will tell you that she’s only had sex twice (me & my sister) and, well, that’s that !!! To admit to anything else, well, “NOT ME!!”
In the nudist community it’s a perfectly decent Cmas card. It the real world some do-gooder will report you for “making” your kids be in this photo. Nudity in American will ALWAYS be equated with sexual things. America has raised her children to believe that the human body has to be perfect or rejected. Your worth is based upon your looks. Good thing Einstein looked like Tom Selleck, eh???
Even today, the CEO of the Cleveland clinic wants to NOT hire smokers or obese people. (see Newsweek) While both will eventually take their toll on his employee benefits health insurance bottom line (agree there), what’s between the ears is not given as much weight (pardon the pun). It’s all about the value of looks.
So, glad you found someone to print them.
I actually find the photo and the concept behind it quite hilarious. It’s a shame more people can’t see the humor while they’re whining about minor nudity. It would be a different story if the kids downright refused, even if their father offered $45 in gummy bears. I would assume that nearly all kids don’t want to sit down for family photos, and I don’t believe the nudity really played too big of a role in their apprehension. Bob and family: I can appreciate your sense of humor, and I honestly wish I had family members as creative and unique as you all seem to be.
Ok. So I think the card is clever. I don’t personally take offense.
But, you have to remember that posting a picture of this on the Internet is a goldmine for pedophiles. Whether ‘parts’ are shown or not, it only takes a pedophile’s imagination. Do you really want sickos looking at YOUR KIDS that way?
If you choose to do it, then keep it private to people you know. The last thing I’d want is some pedophile getting off on my kids. Even worse, you could get sickos finding where you live and trying to abduct them.
It’s what happens to celebrities and their children. Sickos and mentally disturbed people begin to stalk and harass them.
So, while I support you in your creative card idea, the first thing I’d do is remove the picture from the Internet.
Mrs C has nice tits.
The guy at Fedex Office was right to refuse service. He’s not going to know where the line is and it’s best to avoid coming close to it.
It’s not child pornography and it’s ridiculous to say it is, but it IS creepy and it’s not just a picture of the kids in the bathtub either, especially since you had to bribe them to strip down after they expressed that they were clearly uncomfortable with it.
I can’t figure out why your children are naked but you and your partner are not.
If you were ALL naked, I’d think: Okay, this family likes to be naked. Good for you. Interesting and progressive. But JUST having your kids naked seems weird and creepy to me.
That being said, the comments here are fairly predictable. Context is everything for people. If the story was “Weird Unfamous Guy Arrested for Posing Children Naked” people would be almost universally decrying the pictures as sick. But as a famous writer, people are almost universally saying the pictures are adorable and cute.
Also I agree with monnbrun who wrote:
Let’s be clear, Mr. Cringely wanted Kinko’s to refuse to print those cards, because it makes his clever and precious little story about his clever and precious little family all the more clever and precious. Win-win.
Absolutely. In fact, you wrote as much saying the cards were already rejected last year.
One could even almost a case that you bribed your kids to appear naked so you could be rejected and write a story about it. I don’t know if I’d go that far, but the fact that you again wrote as much that you bribed them to appear in the photo…
That’s not sounding good.
As a nudist, I do not find this in anyway negative. There are many nudist families in the U.S. and they can all tell you that their children are fine. Many get uncomfortable with nudity when they start maturing, but obviously that is not the case here. Children always have the right to refuse to participate in nude activities, and in an open family like this, there are many people who can step in if they see the parents being abusive. Additionally, nudist children are more likely to report wrong things (such as abuse) than most other children.
This is pure unadulterated creativity. Absolute Gold!
Screw the naysayers, I don’t care if you had to bribe the kids, the chances to do something this creative will probably dwindle as they get older. I imagine it’s a hoot trying to get the photo right. And I want on your list, too!
Some of the comments just make me long for a more relaxed society.
And screw those people who are going about about the degree of nudity and the ratio of kid/adult nudity and the idea that this was staged to be a pretty hat for your blog to wear.
Those folks should get a life, everybody in that photo looks like they are healthy/normal/having fun.
Of course you have to bribe the kids, most folks have to bribe their kids for a “vanilla” family portrait.
Yeah they made the right call…and you kinda have issues buddy. Here’s to hoping for an in house visit from CPS soon!
When the boys start dating and some of these end up on Facebook (or whatever’s around by then) they are going to hate you with a passion. The typical baby-in-the-bath photos in the 1st family album elicit enough embarrassment from the average teen, I cannot imagine what these will do.
Much as I like the idea of family and friends chuckling over these pictures I would have a hard time dealing with the fact that pedophiles are also cropping & masturbating to them.
BTW, I’m European and not particularly obsessed with morality or bothered by nudity. Various states of dress (or undress) are regularly seen in my house but not shared with the general public. Inappropriate my friend.
While I don’t see anything terribly wrong with the picture itself even if it’s not to my taste I’m a little shocked that it’s up here on the internet. Sure it’s a cheeky christmas card and I doubt anyone’s doing this for perverted reasons but there are sick freaks out there and putting pictures of your kids like this, even with everything hidden from view might put them somewhat at risk. At the very least some creepers out there are probably downloading this for their own collection. I don’t object at all to what you did, but I really don’t think people should ever post pics of their kids online for the public to consume. There’s just too many bad guys out there.
Yep. Completely agreed. This is how kids get abducted/kidnapped… you get some crazy pervert out there who grows an obsession.
Even if the creep doesn’t have it in him/her to actually abduct your child… the fact that you’re allowing the creep to look at your kids in a ‘wrong way’ is beyond poor judgment.
What amuses me is your idea that you have created a tasteful card. Judging from the comments here, I would say not everyone agrees with you.
Yea, gonna side with Kinko’s on this one.
I’m pretty liberal, and even I think this is a bit much. I also am willing to bet this was more of a “look at me!” stunt like the balloon kid and his family.
And it seems like the majority of commenters on consumerist.com don’t find it tasteful, either.
I love it! What a great sense of humor you all have.
Don’t let the idiots get you down.
Merry Christmas!
The Kinkos issue moot. You are a creepy guy and there are a ton of ways to have fun with your cards before you do this. If I got this in the mail, I might snocker for a second and then burn it.
Sorry… I’m a card carrying liberal & I just find this disturbing. On the other hand… probably better then everyone piled into a homemade backyard weather balloon.
Hello! I read about your story on the Consumerist website.
That’s an adorable family Christmas photo. Kudos for being more creative than most, and sorry to hear Kinkos was being so prudish about everything.
I would recommend not posting your Christmas photos on the internet in the future though. Why? Your school-aged children have classmates with access to the internet, and well, children are evil. It will cost you a lot more than sour gummy worms if they get teased at school.
I’m fairly liberal, and I don’t recoil from the sight of a human body, but the sight of a bunch of naked kids does seem creepy to me, and I wish it weren’t on the internet.
And I’m not at all surprised that Kinkos wouldn’t print them for you.
Will your wife pose nude?
The Baby Jesus told me that any nudity is a sin, and therefore you have sinned and you’re going to hell and I take a shower with my underwear on.
Jesu H. Cristo, people. There’s nothing wrong with the human body. I bet these kids will grow up with a far better body image than any of you puritans.
I’ll bet MOO cards would have printed them for you.
https://www.moo.com/
On better paper too.
I’m going to have to vote with “creepy”. One question I do have is if it’s so cute to be near naked but covered, why are the parents fully clothed?
You should seriously consider the possible ramifications of posting this photo publicly online. It is no problem at all for anyone who pleases to download this image and repost it elsewhere. There are lots of perverts and weirdos out there, and are now free to recontextualize your family photo as they please, which includes framing it with pornographic content. It’s illegal, but can unfortunately only be punished after the fact, by which point it will have been published and cached. Why would you take that risk? Your story would have been just as effective with a description of the photo instead.
So have you now defined within your family the term “Christmas Suit”, much like the rest of us talk of our Birthday Suits?
imho the ‘bribe’ was probably to get the kids to keep still and not go all “Naked Time”
[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNNKTtdVvAs ]
during the picture taking.
creepy? no. offensive? no. kinko’s? idiots.
I have to say that this is very wrong on so many levels. I agree with everyone that said you and your wife should/could be nude, but your children? I think its wrong and disgusting I won’t be surprised if CPS or the police come a knocking.
As a former Kinko’s coworker, had you brought that into the Kinko’s I worked at, I’d have printed them for you. The only question I’d have asked would have been about copyright, and whether you had the right to reproduce it or not.
I once had a coworker from another store call and ask me what our policy was on copying pornographic or offensive materials. I told her to put it on the glass and press start. I added that if she had a problem with doing the copying herself, she should find someone in the store who doesn’t have a problem with it.
It looks like a fun family tradition that, like you said, was started by mistake. I mean what, your wife shows a little side boob. As a person that has two sons and walks around naked in my house (since we have two boys my wife used to walk around topless and naked until the boys started asking all kinds of questions and watching her undress.
I think it’s cool. Hell, my boys love going free balling, and its a struggle at times to make them wear clothes.
So I think it’s totally cool and looks like fun.
Logan
Love it, except for one little detail. No cookies on the cookie sheet! Attention to detail, please, Mr. Cringely. : )
That’s awesome.. every business should be run this way. Its no ones business to dictate what’s ‘appropriate’ or not. I don’t find anything about this christmas card offensive. Its adorable!
#1. You wife is definitely far more attractive than are you, which gives us insight to your financial stature.
#2. You look like a white Michael Jackson man. No wonder Kinkos wouldn’t print this piece — you have half-naked little boys all over the place and look like a perverted Santa Clause.
#3. You had to bribe them to be in this picture. Because they know more about Michael Jackson than you do. Like the fact he was a pervert. He (Michael) didn’t think he was a pervert but he was.
Just like you don’t think you are a pervert, but… you are! Maybe if you bribe the CEO of Kinko’s with candy, he’ll also believe you are not a pervert. And then the rest of us will stop using Kinko’s because “Kinkos funds Muslim terrorists”. I mean, Kinkos supports suburban pervert Michael Jackson dads.
Ask yourself America, do you support Suburban Pervert Michael Jackson Dads?
Seriously Robert Michael Psyuedonym Jackson Cringley, stop being a pervert. I don’t know what’s more disturbing, 1) you don’t see a problem with your own homoeroticism as applied vis-a-vis your children or 2) you are about to have three homosexual sons who turn tricks in the Castro for gummie bears.
Wow, Nick. Your comment is ridiculous and unnecessarily hostile. I will sum this up quite simply. Nudity does not equal sex. I don’t know why so many Americans have problems understanding something so basic and so natural. The photo is original and cute. Nothing else.
I don’t think that nudity == sex but kids get to an age where they begin to require privacy and develop boundries and they need to be allowed to develop them naturally. I don’t like the idea that this guy bribed his kids to do something they would otherwise be uncomfortable with. If they are uncomfortable, it’s time to start wearing clothes for your xmas cards.
That poor kid on the floor looks really uncomfortable. I feel bad for him.
And those “boundaries”, insofar as they influence personal thought, are ARBITRARY AND MADE UP. Nakedness and prudence (or prurience for that matter) should not be confused, one is natural, one is implied. The implied is a personal judgment that should be kept just that…
If he had to bribe his children, those boundries are in place and he shouldn’t be trying to displace them. End of story.
I completely agree, it’s unfair to the children. I have boys myself and I can’t imagine making them do such a thing, bribery or not. My older ones wouldn’t do it for all the gummies in the world and my 6 yo would, but would be upset.
Either drop the picture or send one of you and your wife naked. I think that you are risking federal charges as well, not to mention, you posted this on the net.
Okay, I seriously think this might be a joke, who would post their kids naked on the net?
why do Americans always think everyone else is an American? More importantly, why do Americans (like you, not myself) always take everything so seriously?
Justin,
Don’t sweat it. Nick is a bigger pervert because for years he sexually sucked on his mothers nipples for white excrement.
Breast milk is a secreted, not excreted.
It’s always great when the homophobe comes out. Explain how you rais eon to be homosexual? My mother didnt take nude pictures of me and raised two other sons who are str8. I know morons like you believe homosexuality is trained, and we “convert” people, but my question would be, what would it have taken to convert you? YOU ARE AN IDIOT AND A LOSER
Johnny — yawn. Am not homophobic… am sure gay friends would appreciate such jokes — at least over here they would. So uptight you Americans… you’re not even sure what you’re arguing about. A guy posts an obviously over the top comment and your reaction is so serious!
You are the fellows who proclaim free speech right? Guess it’s not life, liberty and the pursuit of being relaxed then is it.
@Nick: I got what you were saying. Apologies for the rest of us here, but it’s just that while your comments were indeed over-the-top in an effort to be funny, our airwaves are filled with people who make the same types of remarks, but with straight faces. On television. And radio. So you need to turn the over-the-topness up to 11 in order for us to recognize it as facetiousness. Our bad!
Nick, shut the HELL up. You clearly ARE an American and are covering for it.
Well, if you’re going to later claim you meant to be over the top and funny, the basic requirement is that you probably should have made sure you were at LEAST funny.
Question: Anyone uncomfortable that “nudist” parents are apron-clothed while kids requiring bribery are nude? This could be the photo in the picture dictionary next to the entry for “EXPLOITATION”. And yes, I’m quite sure that their friends ask for new naked pictures every year. If this is for real, think again for the sake of those boys who are real people, not objects for self-realization. If they’re models, their parents need to be “re-educated”.
Awesome photo! Boo to prudish Kinko’s workers! 🙂 We have friends who have been sending less amusing but also non-pornographic Xmas cards with a photo of their naked kids lounging on a bed. Last year, they put them in robes. I suppose it was the right thing to do (oldest girl was 9 or 10), but I felt a little sad that an era was over.
OK, you started it… how about showing the cards from past years?
There’s absolutely nothing sexual, provocative or creepy about the photo. Those that are perceiving something that isn’t there should probably not be looking so closely, however. If your first reaction is that the adults in the photo lured the naked children into the kitchen with handfuls of candy for their own sexual titillation, you’ve got some issues.
The fact that you had to bribe the kids with candy is what pushes this over the line for me. Nude holiday family cards: fun, sure, but only if everyone is 100% totally willing to be on board. Your kids are old enough that if they are the least bit uncomfortable with being publicly nude, you need to respect that and back off. What kind of message is that sending to them if you imply that it’s okay to take your clothes off (for photos, no less) for candy bribes?
I agree! the picture is cute, but the thought that bribery was involved probably means they should be ALLOWED. god, I couldn’t imagine the teasing my kids would get at that age.
BTW, the humour of all this aside, do you think it’s wise to post about it while living in arguably the most socially conservative state in the country? Those social conservatives elect social conservatives, & you just might have a DA who deems this pornographic. Doesn’t really matter if it isn’t.
Actually, it matters quite a bit. There are several determining factors in whether or not something is, legally, pornography. Since a claim that the image was pornographic obviously wouldn’t stand up beyond one or two appeals, and since the state would then be liable for the legal costs incurred by the defendants, it wouldn’t be worth the time and money to go after them. Considering we’re in a recession, and that conservatives largely have their panties in a wad about spending, it would also be unwise politically.
1: Fedex Kinkos is now Fedex Office.
2: How did you postion the private areas from being shown was it your personal doing or did you point a tell where things should go?
Im Naked Give me some candy!
As a card carrying nudist, I find it ridiculous that this attitude exist. As you point out, bikinis are far more salatious than simple nudity.
I think they should be impressed by the careful posing to not reveal too much. Great job.
whatz cooking….yummmmm
Man I’d totally do your wife. Sexy.
While I definitely think it’s weird that you print xmas cards with your kids in the nude, I don’t see anything negative going on in this picture. I do, however, find it disturbing that they’re all naked while you and your wife are wearing clothes. Can I be the only one? I didn’t feel like reading 300 comments to find out, but there it is.
You’re not alone. A lot of other people have similar thoughts.
You’re never truly naked in a Christmas Hat.
Dude, you are weird. There’s nothing offensive there, but anyone who would send that as a Christmas card is weird.
And this comes from someone who is far more of a heathen than you could ever dream of being.
Go rent some taste.
You have problems. Please, for the love of God and the sake of your poor children who are NORMAL (so far, considering even they saw the idiocy of this idea), get some fucking help.
And personally, I hope your kids put you in a home. An abusive one, you troubled fuck.
I find it offensive that people care so little for their “god” that they celebrate “his son’s birthday” in the middle of the *WRONG SEASON*. Since it *DOESN’T AFFECT ME AT ALL*, however, in the same way that this picture *DOESN’T AFFECT YOU AT ALL*, I shut the hell up about it.
I think the lighting is off and it is a bit too blurry, but other than that, pretty good.
While the picture itself doesn’t bother me, and is in fact clever in its use of obstructions in just the right places, the fact that the family is all together in the same place naked does bother me.
Sure it might be easier for YOU to get naked in front of your family members, but I know if my sister was walking around the house in the nude I’d have some kind of problem with it.
At any rate good for you and your family that you are secure enough in your bodies to be willing to forgo your privacy. I couldn’t see myself doing this.
Once something is on the internet, it’s there forever. You are fucked up to want to put this picture of your kids out “there” forever. Fucker.
Wow, there are a lot of people who want to push their insecurities onto the rest of the world. I spent a lot of time naked as a kid, and I’m pretty sure it didn’t leave me as f’ed up as, say, Frederica Rosario, Jared D, Yurra Twatenheimer, JamesP, etc. I dunno if the picture’s _funny_ exactly, but it’s clever.
your wife’s hot.
Yeah, cute idea, but I would have kept the bribing part to myself. You’ve basically decided that it’s more important for the Internet to see your kids naked than it is for them to be comfortable.
There’s also some consent issues here; do *they* know the photo’s up here?
Damn, I wish I’d though of this first.
I don’t see the green navigation light. Wait — I don’t see the life-vests either! Am I looking at the wrong year’s card?
Yes.
Oh my!
As an Australian.. this photo is simply awful.(Yes we are more couth than americans) What were you thinking?Those kids need to be taken into care for this.Embarrassing embarrassing embarrassing.This has got be some kind of yankee joke.Is it real>?Who would do this to their own kids?Seriously. Shame shame shame.
Sorry I have to say more.Here in Australia they would be reported to Human Services. Someone there be brave and report.
My only shock about this picture comes from the fact that I am surprised you have such a young family. No offense, but I assumed you were almost as old as my dad, having read your columns in my mom’s old computer trade weeklies way back when I was in high school/college, then seeing you in some docus.
Just checked Wikipedia; you’re 10 years younger than my dad. Still a surprise. Congrats to you and hope y’all have a great holiday. ❁ ☃ ✽ ✵
Have the children been collected yet? Serious injustice if not.
Ahh…this is site is on NAMBLA’s favorite list now.
InfoWorld and Mr. Stephens
Sue Over Fictitious Supernerd
By DON CLARK
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Robert X. Cringely and the Public Broadcasting Service told viewers a lot
about the history of the personal-computer industry Wednesday night. They left
out one interesting fact, though.
Robert X. Cringely doesn’t exist.
The host of the three-hour documentary, “Triumph of the Nerds,” is really
Mark C. Stephens, one of several authors of a popular gossip column in
InfoWorld magazine written under the Cringely pseudonym. Mr. Stephens, 43
years old, penned the column between 1987 and last December, when InfoWorld
cut him loose. But in a case with enough twists to give anybody an identity
crisis, the magazine and its parent, International Data Group Inc., sued Mr.
Stephens in March for trademark infringement to block his continued use of the
Cringely name.
So far, they haven’t had much luck. In April, San Francisco Federal Judge
Robert Keeton denied IDG’s request to bar Mr. Stephens from using the Cringely
name while the case is in court. The judge also granted Mr. Stephens’s
request to have the case moved from Boston, headquarters of IDG, to San
Francisco, where Mr. Stephens filed his own suit. It charges IDG with
copyright infringement for using his Cringely work outside InfoWorld without
authorization. He claims IDG owes him as much as $735,000 and vows not to
settle without at least joint rights to use of the name.
That he even has a chance illustrates some murky nooks in
intellectual-property law, as well as apparent slip-ups by IDG, a closely held
company with $1.4 billion in sales but no lawyers on its payroll. Above all,
the tale is testimony to the opportunistic traits of Mr. Stephens, who came to
realize that the Cringely persona was more valuable than his own, to the
point that some people wonder where Cringely ends and Stephens begins.
“I chose to promote Bob rather than Mark,” Mr. Stephens says. “It made sense
to keep my eggs in the most profitable basket.”
Cringely, the Series?
In the magazine columns, Mr. Stephens, the third Cringely author, transformed
the character from a Sam Spade knockoff into an oversexed magazine editor who
trades racy repartee with Pammy, a fictional flame. Mr. Stephens has used
Cringely as a platform for a lucrative career outside InfoWorld as an author
and pundit. “Triumph of the Nerds,” the PBS show, was based on “Accidental
Empires,” a successful 1991 book Mr. Stephens wrote under the Cringely name.
He is working on another Cringely book and a possible TV series, and commands
up to $5,000 for Cringely speeches.
But few outside of InfoWorld know of the ruse. In “Nerds,” Mr. Stephens, in
Cringely mode, tooled around Silicon Valley in his red Thunderbird
convertible, interviewing dozens of tech luminaries such as Bill Gates, Paul
Allen and Steve Jobs. Most of them didn’t know Cringely is just a pen name.
“It was months before I learned that he wasn’t named Bob,” says Stephen
Segaller, who co-produced the show for Oregon Public Broadcasting. Blindsided
by the IDG lawsuit, OPB executives told Judge Keeton that reshooting the show
to expunge the Cringely name would expose them to claims from distributors and
broadcasters who had put up money for the show. “The timing was
excruciating,” Mr. Segaller says.
Cringely has been an affliction to computer companies since 1986. The popular
column is rife with leaks about products, defects and consumer gripes. But in
the hands of Mr. Stephens, the line between author and alter ego blurred. Old
girlfriends of Mr. Stephens, for example, appeared in the column as
Cringely’s old girlfriends-and continued to appear after his ouster. Mr.
Stephens introduces himself as “Bob Cringely,” has a credit card in Cringely’s
name and sometimes ponders real-life options by wondering what Cringely would
do.
Mr. Stephens’s real life, meanwhile, at times reads almost like a novel. He
says he began writing obituaries for an Ohio newspaper at the age of 14 and
freelanced from Lebanon and other hot spots in his 20s. He claims a doctorate
in communications from Stanford University; it says its records show only a
master’s degree. An accomplished stunt pilot, Mr. Stephens once blew his
savings on a propeller company.
Lucky Nerds
“Accidental Empires,” which helped make Cringely a high-priced pundit, argues
that the industry was shaped by lucky nerds out to impress their friends.
That thesis grates on executives like Mr. Gates, chief of Microsoft Corp., who
also disputes an anecdote in the book that describes the billionaire as
scrounging in his pockets for coupons at a checkout counter. Mr. Stephens
stands by Cringely’s account.
InfoWorld initially thought Mr. Stephens’s outside activities were good
publicity. The magazine signed a 1989 contract that allowed him to write the
book, while reserving its rights to the Cringely name. But relations soured
between the writer and Stewart Alsop, an industry analyst and InfoWorld
executive vice president. In December 1994, Mr. Alsop fired Mr. Stephens, but
asked him to keep freelancing for $1,500 per Cringely column.
InfoWorld, however, neglected to get Mr. Stephens’s approval to use his
articles outside of the magazine. After negotiations over a license to his
copyrights stalled, InfoWorld in December 1995 dumped Mr. Stephens altogether
and demanded that he stop using the Cringely name. Mr. Stephens refused,
demanding that IDG pay him $250,000 for violating his copyrights by publishing
his Cringely articles on the Internet’s World Wide Web and elsewhere. That
was when InfoWorld and IDG sued him for trademark infringement.
“The issue is the confusion,” explains Patrick McGovern, IDG’s chief
executive officer. “We have a terrific column coming out as Cringely, and Mark
Stephens has nothing to do with that at all.”
Character Issue
Courts usually side with trademark holders in such disputes. Actor Clayton
Moore, the Lone Ranger in the old television series, was blocked from
appearing in his Lone Ranger mask for five years by a company that was
promoting a movie using a different actor. But in the Cringely case, Mr.
Stephens makes the novel claim that his years of molding the Cringely
character entitle him to joint trademark rights. (The column is still running
under the Cringely name, under at least two different writers since Mr.
Stephens left.)
Judge Keeton mused in an April opinion that Cringely had indeed become a
jointly created fiction, raising “fundamental” legal questions that might
trouble even a legal Solomon. “The Robert X. Cringely of this litigation,” he
said, “is indivisible.”
Claude Stern, Mr. Stephens’s lawyer, says IDG abandoned the Cringely
trademark by not adequately supervising Mr. Stephens’s use of it. Veronica
Devitt, a San Francisco trademark expert, thinks such a defense won’t work but
agrees that IDG erred in failing to get a copyright license from him. Says
Mr. Alsop: “We will not disagree with our opposition that we are human and
we’ve made mistakes.”
To some, the case mainly points out the way the telephone and electronic mail
make it easy to sustain a fictional identity, in a way that perhaps can fool
even its creator. “It’s a tale of Narcissus for the digital age,” says Paul
Saffo, an analyst at the Institute for the Future, a think tank in Menlo Park,
Calif.
Insists Mr. Stephens: “I am Bob.”
Seriously, its time to get the wife a new rack if she’s going to keep doing these nude cards. Do her nipples actually touch her belly button the way they appear to? I bet they splay backwards and slap you in the head when you do her from behind, don’t they?
Kids don’t look comfortable either, in fact, it looks as though they wish they were dead. Huh, well, at least you’ve got the smacking sound of your wife’s saggy tits to keep you happy.
YYYYAAAAAAYYYY MISOGYNY. You’re a dickbag, fuck off and die you piece of shit. >:C also, this card is weirdddd.
Nudism in America is in such a sorry state, there certainly should be more tolerance. Most Americans are faux-prudes: We can’t handle a little butt or side boob, but affairs and porn are ubiquitous! Hysterical.
We will take our kids to see movies featuring crime and murder, but not skin? I have skin, we all have (or are the result of) sex, but I am pretty sure no one I know is a murderer. Again, hysterical.
Ms. Cringely is absolutely lovely. The whole family is adorable. I do agree this will get more and more awkward with the kids, but that is Mr. and Ms. Cringely’s and the boys problem, not mine.
John, I’ll be frank. Regardless of whether you are a nudist or not or how ‘prudish’ someone is perceived to be, there is a certain level of acceptability. You would not be able to display this picture on your desk in a corporate office as it would be considered inappropriate – just as bikini-clad women or thonged men are inappropriate for such an environment. Therefore, why would you think a retail corporate environment would be OK printing this?
I really recommend getting your own private set-up to print these out or utilizing businesses that cater to nudists.
Would Kinko’s have a problem with reproducing an image of a woman clad in a bikini? I don’t think they would. Seems to me that whether or not such a photo would be tolerated on display in a corporate office is completely irrelevant, as that is not its intended purpose.
Since you can purchase snarky greeting cards featuring women in bikinis (and a whole lot worse) at any major retailer who sells greeting cards, which have the express intent of being mailed to your family and friends as did this card, it seems that there should be no problem here.
Yeah…you’re wife is hot.
I wouldn’t personally do this…but I also wouldn’t enter into a gay marriage (I am straight). I personally find this offensive…BUT…you can’t see anything…so yes…this does walk ON the line…but does not cross it.
Fact is…being in the military…alot of people have seen me naked…and I have seen them…these are your kids…my parents saw me…its natural. You’re comfortable and that is fine…but I really think doing this one more year…could have a negative outcome.
If you do want to continue…you should cover the kids up a little more…and you’re wife a little less 😉
You don’t worry about what some overzealous DA, so why should FedExKinko’s? They should care more about your weird pictures than their jobs! Fools!
Any business has the right to refuse service… as long as they do it without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin. Which Kinkos clearly, DID NOT.
Quit your bitching and find a store that will print your “Original”ly weird-ass Xmas cards.
you’re wearing clothes, your wife is covered. your kids are naked. why aren’t the boys in santa boxers like you? they are too old for this.
and posting it on the internet is the worst part. this picture will follow your kids forever. what a douchebag you are.
[…] their naughty bits with a strategically placed item or two. Bob tells all in his blog post “Fedex Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card“. We Cringelys are known for our Christmas cards, I admit, because we make them ourselves and […]
that shit is creepy. anybody that thinks a whole family naked together is cute, IS A PEDOPHILE
I’m speechless, I cannot believe you would make your kids post naked all for your jolly’s to make a Christmas card. How do you feel about your Christmas card being viewed by pedophiles all over the world?
This is just highly inappropriate and I sincerely hope Child Protection Services comes to your home. It’s one thing for you and your wife to partake, but it’s just wrong to put your kids through this and now allow them any privacy.
As a murderer I must say that I am appalled by what is perceived as possible nudity. Sure, I kill people for a living but at least I’m clothed and not really hurting anyone else (excluding the murder victim). You, on the other hand, made a fedex/kinko’s employee almost see a nude person.
But seriously, this is great and pioneers like you (nudist) take the arrows! Keep it up until all of the prurients are flushed from America (along with religion).
http://blogs.babble.com/strollerderby/2009/12/17/naked-christmas-card-funny-or-obscene/
http://digg.com/comedy/Naked_Christmas_Card_Funny_or_Obscene_Strollerderby
This is just two of the sites that have already copied that image and rehosted it on their site. Remember, the internet is “forever”.
Is this image bad? eh, that’s really his call to make (I’d say no, just a tad odd and odd is ok). But more importantly is the fact that this is forever now thanks to your internet rant. Not so cool for the naked kids in the photo (or even your wife.. was she ok with being posted for a billion people to see?)
The original card and image were odd but, posting it on the internet was a terrible idea I believe.
I am sure this will be lost in all the noise, but…
I write the software at my company that would print this Bob had uploaded it to our web sites. I also write to software that let’s the department handle approving photos. I asked the head of that department and they said that in her daily work she would reject it as offensive. But she also said that she would approve it if the customer pushed since all the “vital” parts were covered.
Kinko’s was right to initially object, but wrong to continue the objection.
Simple
So… if they were wearing tight speedo’s then everything would be fine?
Everyone needs to grow up. It’s a nice picture, of nice people, and it shows a close and caring family. It’s very creative and in no way sexual, demeaning in explicit.
For everyone that thinks it’s trash, why don’t you pull out your chisels and start chipping away at all the statues with penises in museums..
I think you and your wife can do anything you want, but I personally wouldn’t send out naked photos of my kids, nor convince them that it is ok for parents to send out naked photos.
Funny shot, but I certainly wouldn’t be putting it on the internet or mass mailing it.
This is child pornography. I am totally appalled by this picture. How dare you put your naked children on the internet? You asshole. What are your young boys going to think when they grow up and realize that you sent their naked picture across the globe unwillingly? This is bait for all of the pedifiles out there. Do you know that when you search for a charleston christmas card this is the first link that comes up?
Liar!! I just tried, and it’s more like the third or fourth link… also learn how to spell so you don’t embarrass the rest of the human race with your idiocy!
As far as the children are concerned Im sure the day will come that there will be a natural progression to a new Christmas card format. Otherwise this is truly a cultural thing. There are places in the world where nudity is, well, not even and issue.
Does no one else have children? The necessity for a bribe can have *nothing* to do with if the behavior is actually okay. Sure, he bribed the kids to be in a naked photo— I’ve bribed my son to be in a DRESSED photo. Lots of bribes to behave in church, be quiet in the car, clean their rooms… Just because a bribe is involved does NOT mean the behavior is wrong in and of itself.
Thank you for bringing this up, because if no one else did then I was going to. Having been a child at one point myself (and I’m pretty sure the rest of you were too) I can certainly attest to the fact that sometimes, kids don’t want to do things their parents want them to do.
One can make a reasonable argument that parents should not resort to bribery to influence their children, in fact it’s one I would make myself. However, whether or not said bribery occurs does not alone determine the inherent level of decency in the act.
I went back in your December 2008 archives and saw last year’s card. It was from further away and the only part of the children showing was above the waist. This year’s card is substantially different. It is close-up and shows their whole bodies, with a couple of parts obscured. The kids are posed, not just standing behind a boat railing as last year. Last year’s was fun and funny. This one is salacious and creepy. The boy in front makes me uncomfortable – something I would expect to se on a pedophile’s computer.
It is one thing if the children had wanted to go along with it but, by your own admission, they were not keen and needed bribing with sweets (which in itself is evocative of far worse situations). I find this exploitative. They seem to just be props for the amusement of your friends. Also, the fact that you then put the image online were anyone can look at it is also worrying to me. They are your kids, no laws broken, do what you want… but the oozing “what is this world coming to” in your tone is not justified. More exploitative than cute or funny.
Your wife has nice tits though. More of them please.
So the kids had to be bribed with sweets. . . what kids enjoy taking ANY family picture for Christmas cards? My brother and I sure were never keen on it, and we wore regular clothes (or possibly embarrassing Christmas themed sweaters).
And, it is a valid point that people take pictures in bathing suits all the time, and those are often more revealing than even underwear! Not to mention the classic photos of little ones in the tub with bubble-mohawks, or running sqealing through the house after dropping their pull-ups. Are those dirty pictures? I’m sure the parents who took them don’t think so. And if you do, maybe YOU are the one with the problem.
People need to get past the puritanical kneejerk reaction to nudity and stop demonizing others for appreciating humor and the human body.
Genetically modern homo sapiens existed for hundreds of thousands of years before an especially clever animal twigged to the idea of tying the skin of something it ate around its waist to make sitting down more comfortable so I don’t really see the big deal here.
Wait no I mean OOK OOK AK AK OBEY THE TROOP’S SOCIAL NORMS
Do you have an archive of previous shots? I think your images are awesome! The do show something though – they show a family enjoying life to the fullest! Very nice work…
Bob
Stan, it seems to me that the bribing with sweets is not to make them pose nude, but just to make them pose at all. Have you ever tried to get any young child to stay still in a certain pose for any length of time? What possible “far worse situations” do you see being evoked from children being bribed with candy to pose for a picture? Because that’s what it is: a picture, with the artful editing out of “offensive” material with everyday objects the only difference in their holiday greeting card and that of almost any other family in the nation. Their reality is not yours. I’m sure like most families in the world, you and yours are and were taught that nudity is not for public or even semi-public (just around the house) consumption. That’s fine, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But as long as no laws are broken, no one has any right to dictate anyone else’s morality or ethics.
I do agree with the objection to the pic online. However, Stan, don’t get your undies in a kink because someone does something you don’t like. This is the internet. Your opinion has been counted and discounted.
Very cute. Only people hung up on their own bodies and/or phobias would object (which these people did). Still, you should have taken the card somewhere else since you knew that Kinkos had given you problems last year. But the photo is NOT obscene.
I think you’re a little too desperate for attention.
So, you paid your kids to get naked in the kitchen, while you and your wife are at least safely covered. Sick.
you sir, are an outstanding parent. in fact, maybe you should send some of those cards to your local DCF so they can at least place your children in a home that won’t whore them out on the internet for $2.
I’ll bet your anatomy is very small. You don’t mention your sex, so either a small penis or small breasts, either way – they must be small. As is your brain. Your attitude. Etc.
First – the image of a naked child – boy or girl – is historical in Art and even into the teens, or have you never seen “David”.
Second – I think if I had been one of the boys lucky enough to have had this done at that age – I’d be very proud of it. After all, nothing says “I got it” then a little nakedness.
Rock On Stan!
Sorry, I got the name wrong. Should have been
Rock On Bob
What the hell was I thinking?
😀
Don’t feed the trolls.
The wife is hot. One moar picture here.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://www.charlestonrealestate.net/agents/maryalyce_thumb.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.charlestonrealestate.net/agents.asp&usg=__1swjKI58ar8wvgxvKvpCsA5bF-4=&h=133&w=100&sz=10&hl=en&start=2&sig2=BAEa88K0pEI6YluMYvOu-w&um=1&tbnid=Mo5kURzaWI0TiM:&tbnh=92&tbnw=69&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmary-alyce%2Bstephens%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rlz%3D1R1GGGL_en___US345%26hs%3D46M%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1&ei=Y8UrS7WNM9CRlAf_44yZBw
duuuude WTF? there’s no cookies on that cookie sheet! how can you bake without cookies?!
and yeah I second Stan, more pics of the wife
Let’s see, what say’s “Thinking of you as we celebrate the birth of our lord and savior”?
I know! My white ass!
Too bad we can’t feed you to the lions. Your lard was born in September not Decemember, moron.
Actually Probably July.
You and your wife are not naked. Swimsuits expose far more. However, you have bribed your young children to appear without a stitch of clothing. You’re a creep, and this is something that will make your children resent you for the rest of their lives.
This is disturbing. It might be different for the people who know this family. As a third party observer though, this is kind of offensive. I can’t believe that the kids do not have a problem with this. Aren’t their laws about this kind of behavior? What about child pornography laws? It wouldn’t surprise me if a child pornographer has seen this picture and has gotten off on it.
Jim,
How can this be called pornography? The word is defined as:
“Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.”
I don’t know about you, but pictures of little kids and families, naked or not, don’t do anything to get MY motor running. And aside from a little side-boob, you’re not seeing anything that you wouldn’t see at the beach! Not even an exposed bottom! Far from scandalous.
I’ll never understand why our society is so Puritanical about the human body – it’s nature, folks. Do you shower with your bathing suit on? I doubt it. Nudity, in and of itself, is nothing for us to be offended by, especially in this type of context. It’s an innocent, if a bit goofy, family photo. Let it go.
OK man, it’s as simple as this: if you find something offensive… LOOK AWAY!! As you say, you are a third party observer, so you chose to look at whatever is there; if you say you didn’t they you clearly didn’t read the story before the picture, which makes you a troller, and that’s just as bad…
*can’t stand this third party offensive bullsh*t
at first hearing about this card I figured I would laugh and think it was funny… not so.
Same here. I thought it’d be something fairly hilarious, but I found it mostly cringe-inducing. Mom and Dad are practically fully clothed, while none of the (totally naked) kids appear to be enjoying themselves at all. Knowing that their participation had to be won by bribery really doesn’t lower the creep factor, either. The photo itself is pretty poorly-composed, as well, IMHO.
Whether or not the photo is any good, though, I was with it until it was posted online. Sending out a naked joke photo to family and a few close friends is one thing (though I’d argue that really, the kids’ expressed discomfort with it should have been enough to put an end to their participation), but posting it online? Dude, all it’s going to take is one of their classmates to get hold of it, and their lives at school are going to be hell. If Mom and Dad are happy to put themselves out their on the internet where anyone can look at them, that’s fine, but I really don’t think it’s right to be making that kind of a decision for the kids. They may not care now, but I suspect they will later, and they won’t be at all pleased. The card itself is one thing, but posting the image on a public forum like this is wildly inappropriate and shows a real lack of respect for any boundaries the kids might have.
Can we get a copy of the picture without you and the children? Your wife’s body is banging!
I think it’s weird and a little creepy. Certainly not illegal or anything like that. And I’m no prude… I like weird crap. But I can’t say I’d enjoy getting a semi-nude Xmas card of my friends’ families.
That said, I don’t think I’d refuse you if I woked at Kinko’s. It’s not illegal.
The tradition began by accident? That sounds like a good story in itself.
As far as the card…seems more appropriate (or, humorously inappropriate) with adults, but it’s downright cringe-worthy with the kids.
Boo on the Kinko’s that wouldn’t print your pics. Clever touch to a holiday tradition that can be rather boring and ho-ho-ho-hum. Perhaps Mr. Smith will authorize some sort of “hall pass” for you to use in the future, provided no Laws of the Land are broken.
Peace,
Sorcha
I am as liberal as they come, but what you are doing is disgusting. Bribing your children to get naked for the entire internet with candy…wtf
“Here’s the picture. What do you think?”
no harm imo. it’s not like the kids are spreading or anything… people are too damn uptight and quick to enforce their beliefs on others.
I agree with Stan here… your wife has a pretty smile & a nice set. Would love more of her!
These are not obscene, but they are in poor taste and seem unfair to make the children participate in. Something doesn’t need to be utterly wrong to still be best not to do.
Man, I’m all for classy adult nudity in art, but not with kids. You may think you are not harming your children but I beg to differ. How are they going to feel when they realize their innocent CHILD bodies are exposed to every demented Pervert IN THE WORLD! If you and your wife want to show your bodies for all to see, I say go for it. However, you need to put your children’s dignity and innocense as your highest priority.
The Kinkos employee should be applauded for her decision.
God bless you,
Mark
It is a shame that this country has ended up in a state where someone such as yourself can state that children’s nudity is neither “innocent” nor “dignified,” and hordes of people don’t respond and outright call you a lunatic. Well, I’m doing it. Lawn Guy, you are a lunatic.
Please try not to take offense, for I mean none. You and most others in our society today are lunatics, and it’s not entirely your fault. Somewhere along the line, someone made you feel guilty about your body and now you feel it is only right to continue shaming others. What precisely is it about the transformation from childhood to adulthood that magically changes the naked body from undignified to classy? I’d love to know.
Please let’s not forget that there are countless classic works of art which depict children in the nude, which exemplify the ridiculous shift in attitude the world has undergone in the last few centuries.
this guy should be reported to local child services.
I am spamming this on forums all over the internet to have them report it to his local child services
As a photographer I can understand what you’re trying to do. However, this type of art / photography is controversial and you must take steps to avoid breaking laws / FUCKING UP.
You took pics of your naked kids while you and your wife are wearing clothes.
If you want to do a real nudist shot, everyone should be naked, with objects covering genitals / wife’s nipples.
The uproar over this card is a testament to a lot of what is wrong with America today. Others have already cited the sad truth of how simple nudity is shunned but violence is celebrated. If you are human, then you spend at least part of each day naked and are thus familiar with the naked body. If you can handle the sight of your own naked body, why should anyone else’s cause such scandal? Certainly the sight of a body belonging to the opposite sex raises some questions in the beginning, but they are questions which deserve answers. Indeed, once a person is familiar with the look and functions of the opposite sex’s naked body, suddenly it becomes no big deal.
That said, I do have an issue with this card and it’s that Mr. and Mrs. Cringely are not in an equal state of undress as their children. They seem to be unwittingly teaching their children that there is a double-standard in life, the old “do what I say, not what I do” bit. The children, perhaps, already realize that their parents don’t want to seen nude and thus begin to think that perhaps nudity is wrong and that they shouldn’t be seen nude either. So it goes. Now, I also understand that I don’t have the full story here, and perhaps the Cringely household is open enough with nudity that the children are being taught that there is nothing shameful about the human body without clothes, male or female, irrespective of which one you are and which one you see. If that is the case, then I cheerfully withdraw my criticism.
the fact is that their children do not have a say and were enticed to get naked. You wont see me complaining if theres a nudist beach or a photoshoot but to have your kids get naked by enticing them is wrong and illegal. Those kids are young enough to have self actualization but not old enough to make their own decisions without being peer pressured into it.
That is hilarious. Those kids are lucky that their parents are fun loving and enjoy life.
I cannot believe that some people are offended by this.
To them I say, “Lighten up, relax and get a life!”
Wow. Lets send provocative pictures of our entire family, including the children, to all of our friends. What, are you retarded? Better yet, take the pictures that kids themselves did not want to take and post it on the internet for everyone to see. Brilliant, you sanctimonious goof.
How about you allow your children to have some sort of dignity and not have to explain to the world for the rest of their lives why their asshole dad thought it would be neat to post naked pictures of them on the internet.
Get a grip, douche bag.
“Hey, Bob. Do me a favor, and take me off your Christmas card list, okay?”
“Huh? But…why?!?”
“Nothing personal, Bobbo. I like you and all, and your family is nice. But if I’m being honest, the only thing I want to see less than your wife’s funbags is your 12-year-old son’s junk.”
“B-b-b-b-but ‘strategically-placed shadows’…!”
“Let me ask you a question, Cringely.”
“Okay…”
“I’m your BOSS, Bob.”
“Uh-huh.”
“I’m guessing if you think that it’s appropriate to send me a picture of your ten-year-old daughter in which it is just barely possible for me to tell that her pubes are starting to sprout because the fishing pole she’s holding barely covers the outline of her hoo-ha, that you’ve also sent this to others with the same reckless abandon. You have, haven’t you? Friends. Other co-workers. Relatives. Grandparents. Maybe even Clergy, which is an entirely SEPARATE can of worms I’m sure you haven’t considered the implications of as it applies to your son.”
“I’m not sure I follow you, sir.”
“Of course you don’t. Bob. Of course you don’t. How could you? I just can’t help but think that among all of the people who get this ‘card’ of yours every year, fewer than 1% of them put that sucker up on the mantelpiece along with all the others they’ve gotten. ‘Merry Christmas from the Cringelys!’ Good lord. It’s like some nightmare out of a horrible movie.”
“…Sir?”
“Just…get back to work, Bob. And take this card with you. I’m sort of tired of wondering if the tacklebox in front of your penis really has to be that big.”
“Yes, Mr. Johnson.”
Irrelevant Fark snark.
Have you ever submitted your cards to http://www.awkwardfamilyphotos.com? Because I’m relatively certain you’d be the star of that web site.
You have to bribe your children with sweets?
Why is it the three boys are completely naked but you and your wife are covered?
This is really sick and it shouldn’t be done. You are not going to be liked much by your children when they hit puberty.
Try to think of a more normal way of a family photo.
Also you do realize that many people have reported you. Good Luck with that.
Great job on an embarrassing card. You do realize they’re popular with people you know because they probably think it’s the biggest joke.
So…when’s the 4chan Party Van gonna pull up? It’s one thing to do the naked picture thing, but see, the problem here is that only your young boys are naked. Sideboob doesn’t count. So no, I feel no sympathy for you guys, and I hate the fact that you cried to the consumerist.
I’m concerned about the safety of the kids. Please be very careful around a hot stove….
When I first read an artical about this I thought Kinko’s was probably in the wrong, but this picture is CREEPY. I can’t believe you think this is appropriate. This has nothing to do with body shame or nude phobia, if it was just you and your wife I’d tell you to do whatever it was that you wanted, but these are kids, and you are posting semi-nude pictures of them on the internet.
It borders on disgusting, and I really hope someone reports you to DFCS for this.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the photo.
Your over-the-top attention whoring on the other hand is just sad.
Nice picture. What’s everybody sobbing about giving the kids candy to cooperate on a nice idea for a photoshoot – which has come out nicely, at that? Nothing can even be seen; if anything, the photo is prude!
If your kid has to take a bath and he’s crying and doesn’t want to, does that make it bad if you make him have one? Of course not!
Now the motivations for taking a picture like this are slightly different, but not enough to make it a complete taboo — except, perhaps, in America, where it’s apparently not normal to be born naked.
This picture is not in any way selfish or bad, it’s just cute. And it sounds like a fun tradition. Something they should be proud of, and if they’re too young for that, well, big deal if they get candy.
I do agree though, that the parents are way too covered and clothed to allow for them being called ‘naked’. They’re clothed.
Wow, you people are all psycho. This picture is adorable – I really don’t understand all of you. He’s not “whoring” out his children. This is nothing more than taking naked baby pictures, which my parents did when I was little. Sure, it’s gonna be embarassing for these kids when the folks whip them out later in life and show their kids’ significant others, but I sincerely doubt any real “scarring” will be going on. If the kids are harmed mentally from this debaucle, it will be because prudish nuts like this website’s commentators made a big deal out of something on the internet that was merely supposed to bring some holiday chuckles.
You people who are offended just need to get over this. Nude underage bodies are NO MORE AND NO LESS “forbidden” than nude adult bodies, EXCEPT when portrayed in a sexual way.
This photo is obviously NOT sexual. Just get over your prudish selves, people! If you don’t like looking at these things, the answer is simple: don’t look at them. And while you’re at it, don’t bother the rest of us with your opinion on the matter. We don’t care.
Regards,
Weasel
Honest opinion? Besides the kids being naked…which I don’t quite get (what is the point of the picture, what story is being told? That you cook naked?)…the picture isn’t really lit well either. I dunno….I guess I probably would have said no to printing it as well…in addition to having it all over the internet now.
Not sure that’s cool for your kids.
I have no problem with nudity for art sake. I love Sally Mann’s work, for example. But there was purpose with her work.
I guess what I’m trying to say is….I don’t get it.
woooo hooooo. merry christmas. damn your wife has some nice tits!
Well, send this to the local sex offenders and they can get together in the new rehab film school and make a movie called “Honey, I FUCKED THE KIDS”.
Man, what kind of idiot would put their children on display in such a manner.
Fucking New Age/Doofus/Something morons………………
That is bordering child porn in my opinion and I am sure your kids are gonna be hating you when this photo ends up making the rounds at their school.
More nakid pics of the wife please. She does have a nice set of fun bags. Tell her to write me.
You can make an argument that this is artistic, sure. But you’re still taking pictures of naked children and expecting a business to print them for you. I wouldn’t print it if I were a Kinko’s employee either. Even if it isn’t child porn— and you can easily make a case either way— it’s wise of the employee simply to avoid the potential controversy anyway.
Put more simply, and more crassly: if you have a picture of a horse fucking your wife, and you put a little black box over the point of insertion, it’s still a beastiality picture, isn’t it?
There is nothing wrong with this, it’s amazing that those protesting don’t see how silly they are.
Creepy picture; your friends and family members are going to think somethings not right with you… Anyway, I’m expecting some child molestation charges within the next 10 years by this guy.
Man, people do get excited by having opinions don’t they? I mean, really stupid people get excited.
LOL, you sir are a true American retard. Your 2 oldest kids look nice though :D, pretty do-able. Shame boylover.net doesn’t exist anymore, i could post it there 🙁
Bribing your kids with candy to pose naked already knowing they will be too embarrassed to do it later in their life, how cool xD. I wanna be a friend of the family!
I feel bad for the kids. It must really suck being raised by perverts.
I think you are weird (@cringely)
Dear Bob,
I just wanted to thank you for this wonderful picture. You could consider me as part of a small group of American’s who really appreciate this kind of art. I mean, it is so hard to find pictures of almost nude children on the net these days with all of the government intervention saying “it’s wrong” to look at children in a sexual manner. With the obvious lack of child nudity I would have to say it has been some time since I, you know, pleasured myself, but now since this URL is now in my favorites I will have a source for many more of my enndeavours. I do have one request however, could you please post the names of your children? usually when I do this kind of thing I like to have a name associated with a face/body. For now I will just call them Ron, Harry(like Harry Potter) and little John Doe Jr.
Thanks chap,
John Doe
P.S. None of the above is real, all fake, there are sick people in the world. Quit fucking up your children’s lives you sick fuck.
I think your son– the one sitting on the floor– looks uncomfortable, awkward, and sad. I feel sorry for him.
Great photo Bob, hopefully your uncoventional attitudes will inspire your kids when they older to be more open minded than the dimwits critising you.
BTW I’ve seen more far more naked families on the beach, but not on a Christmas card, well done.
Getting this card printed and sending it out to your friends/family isn’t the issue. Putting it online for millions to see is. I can assure you that the image of your children has been masturbated to dozens of times by now. Merry Christmas!
Hit it on the nose Justin.
These people have NO common sense.
I am disgusted because I would think people would spend at least a tiny bit of time asking themselves “How could this affect my children?”
Most parents worry too much about their children’s safety, yet here no thought was given.
Not to be too paranoid but I woudl not be surprised if they were part of a pedo ring, doing the not get caught due to plain sight tactic.
What kind of friends wouldn’t say hey – you should take that offline?
The kids in no way have a joking look on their faces!!!!
Look, you’re going way too far in suggesting they’re part of a pedo ring!
There’s nothing wrong with the concept. It’s apparently obvious the family is having a little fun here. So long as the children weren’t coerced, and there’s nothing to suggest that they were here, there’s no problem here.
I think the children will take a LOT of shit for this over time, but there’s nothing to suggest implicit sexuality, in the picture,
To Someone who made a comment about the children not being coerced…I do believe that a bribe was mentioned, last time I checked that IS coercion. Wonder what else those poor kids have to do for candy.
I think you may be a little confused about the concept of coercion.
THIS
Congrats. Sick – idiots.
Rather YOU think it hides everything or not some pedos are out their jacking off to the sight of your children now.
Kinkos did the right thing.
Kids do not have the right look on their faces for what the parents are attempting to describe their intend as.
Law enforcement dig deeper.
Could easily be a hiding in plain site approach to a pedo ring.
I live in Ravenel. Because your wife is hot – I’m going to stick a knife in your husbands throat before Christmas and then show her what getting naked is all about. I’ll stop by in the middle of the night – or maybe at the real estate office. God bless you and what I’m about to do to your family.
Pass by my house first won’t you. I’ll be sure to have an ambulance waiting for you
brought out all the wackos, didn’t it?
and KINKos wouldn’t print it.
my, what a wonderful world 😉
now, if Eldrick Woods had gone in, that might have been a much more internet-y post ….
Are your kids boys or girls? It’s hard (no pun intended) to tell, let’s see some dinkies or vajayjays!
Did you not even consider, before you put this online, how much shit your kids are going to take at school because of your grandstanding and need for attention? Seriously? Your poor sons are going to be mercilessly teased with this for years. What were you thinking?
Cute pic. Screw the Victorian prudes at Kinkos. I like your humor and creativity. But, is it wise to encourage the boys to bring their private bits so close to an open 350-degree oven? Why, the last time I made pizza while nude at home…
I think your card is hilarious, ingenious, and just a little bit risque. I love it, wish I’d have thought of it. What bothers me is that you folks are in California, one of the bluest states out there, and you had problems with three nipples. Man nipples, even. I live in a state that has always gone red. Every election, from the time it was incorporated into the union-full on, no holds barred republican. ‘Round here, I’d expect the small-minded townsfolk to call the cops if I brought a picture like this one in. Out there, I don’t see what the big deal is.
Have you thought that there’s a perv (or a hundred pervs) who are pedophiles jerking off to that picture RIGHT NOW?????
Ugh.
So full of wrong.
Yes, I’m sure he, and his wife gave it careful consideration before posting it here. Bob has a world class intellect, despite what some may say. He’s not going to post a picture of his family, much less this picture, without discussing it with his wife.
Look, there’s nothing wrong with this picture. Truth is even if they were completely naked with everything showing there would be nothing wrong with that picture.
THE PROBLEM is how you’re thinking about that picture.
Yes there are going to be some sick individuals doing god knows what to the picture, but the truth is there are sick people doing that to pictures they’ve taken of YOUR fully clothed children, or your neighbor’s fully clothed children, or any child for that matter.
I wouldn’t have posted a picture like that of my children simply because there are people like you, teaching their children that pictures like this are wrong.
I tip my hat to the Cringely family for this picture.
Merry Christmas Cringely Family!
Well, that was an interesting 20 minutes. Reading: Oh, it’s funny! No, it’s cool! No, they’re sicko pervs! over and over again. I suppose I’d better throw in my 2 bits.
I’m going to guess it was about 60/40 in favour of the negative responses, which largely explains why Bush served 2 terms. Too many hardcore bible thumping Republicans running around shouting how YOU’RE GOING TO HELL! … but they’ll be OK. ….. they’ve done the Lord’s Work ………… or something.
But you DID put it on the internet, which WAS necessary to get your point across, however you must know there’ll be REAL sicko pervs out there beatin’ it wondering what your children’s genetalia must look like hidden behind that oven mitt, etc. … Not to mention, all these kids buddies at school are going to see this. Honestly, if one kid sees this, the whole rest of the school will see this. And they probably will never live it down. And they’ll probably grow into fine young men who are able to laugh at themselves and be comfortable in their own skin. All my girlfriends have seen the picture of me in the bathtub with the bubble beard and bubble afro ( I’m white BTW) bubble boobs, and my junk sittin’ there for all to see. BIG DEAL! It’s been WHAT?!?!?? 25 years now? I’m more pissed off about the candy.
Which brings me to the candy. Why didn’t I get any candy? My parents made me do stuff I didn’t want to do ALLLLLL THE TIME when I was a kid. AND I DIDN”T GET ANY CANDY TO DO IT!!!!!! It didn’t make me hate my parents at all. Oh, sure … when it’s “Get up and put the Atari down” ( OK, I’m dating myself) or “Clean your room” you think to yourself “Oh, man! This sucks!! I’m such a prisoner in this life!” But upon reaching maturity, you realise that they were right (my God … never, ever tell them) but they were right.
Oh yeah, the candy. I ate hardly ANY candy at all when I was a kid. I just wasn’t allowed. Or sweet cereal. Cheerios and Shreddies and Corn Flakes, Oh, my! And my folks spent a couple grand getting me braces and the whole bit. Well, my teeth are straight but they’re just rotting right out of my head. I doubt I’ll have any real ones left by the time I’m 50. So give your kids some candy, damn it! And chase it with a root beer! Why not?!?
I am now anxiously awaiting the barrage of responses from the members of the AMA, etc. to pile in telling me why I’m such a bastard for endorsing your use of enamel corrosion to promote your children’s “expoitation.”
Right after I send an e-mail to Fred Smith.
Sincerely,
Michael K.
LOL. You’ve nailed it. The kids will take a lot of shit for this, but in the end they’ll be better adults for it. Was it necessary? — No. But it wasn’t necessary for my parents to take naked pics of me as a child either, and while I might not care all too much for it, when they pull those pictures out, even still today, I can handle it.
Did one better and called my local Fed – Ex here and told them to tell Fred Smith to “Free The Cringely’s!”
Honestly, I can care less about the post and the pic. The comments, however, are priceless. I am amazed at people’s half-hearted attempts to intellectualize their opinions on why you are wrong for creating this image. What’s even more frightening is that these people vote, give birth, and consume alcohol. Isn’t freedom just great? Merry Xmas and keep making these for your friends and family! cheers!
My suggestion? Print your own Christmas cards next year. It’s all well and good to point out the similarities with scantily clad women, but these are *children*, and thus I can understand why FedEx Kinkos refuses to print them. It’s one thing if it were just adults in the photo. But when children are involved, it becomes rather “iffy”.
Dude, you have to be kidding me.
How much skin are you and yoru wife showing? I’d say your wife is barely showing anything. Some legs below the knee? A little side? There are dresses that reveal more. You have your chest showing. And part of a knee. That’s it. Your kids? Almost fully nude with just their privates masked (barely at that).
Were it the other way around, and your kids had most of their bodies obsured, I would sympathize. But I’m sorry, this pic is disturbing and you should be brought up on charges…
nice side boob
Came here to post this
That is OBSCENE! That floor is crying out for a coat of varnish.
Hey there Mr.Cringely(YEEEAAA,I caught the Last-Name-Effect)…Hope you & Bubba(The Prison Princess) get along GREAT!!!CONGRATS!!!hahaha…
Wonderful picture! As someone who spent her childhood in Europe and was very, very upset when her parents confronted her at age 11 and told her she would finally have to start wearing a swimming suit at the beach or at the public pool, I am happy that you for one see the human body for what it is. It’s not controversial, it’s not something that is ever meant to be politicized, and it is by no means obscene.
I love the photo! Thank you so much for sharing.
Nothing’s showing, it’s silly Euro style creative fun, but sorry Bob it’s just creepy. Naked infants and bare naked ladies always work, but naked boys especially sitting on the floor is innocent I guess to you but the whole thing has a pervy edge. Maybe if it was done better (poor depth of field/focus, blown highlights, no cookies), but hoo, it’s Christmas so I’m gonna assume you mean well, hope your kids get over it.
Happy Christmas Meru:
http://kuro.hanyuu.net/sample/6ed75090bb3d02d4d2e8c17386b10f46/Konachan.com%20-%2055971%20sample.jpg
Isn’t it interesting how everyone seems to think there are legions of paedophiles lurking furtively on people’s family websites eagerly awaiting the a glimpse of small child abdomen?
Dear outraged internet users, paedophiles are rare, their preferences are not mainstream and one small glimpse of child flesh does not suddenly awaken heinous tendencies in, for lack of a better word, normal humans. Besides, considering the availability of rather more explicit material on the interwebs, it seems somewhat unlikely that hordes of drooling weirdos are even now fapping furiously to this man’s family Christmas card. If this picture arouses that instinct in you, the problem probably doesn’t lie with it or the chap that created it.
Pretty much what I’ve been thinking all through these comments… There is no sexual intent in this image whatsoever, if by chance someone with paedophillic urges were to come across it, I doubt they would raise more than an eyebrow. Lets face it, there are far more revealing images of kids legally published in naturist magazines and websites for all to see.
And yes, I agree that if someone DOES see something sexual or perverse in this photo, it says more about them than it does the image…
That’s brilliant! ^_^
It’s amazing what the media and the feminazi’s have accomplished over the past few years. Kid’s don’t even have to be nude any more, just show a bit more than victorian era skin. and the first thing adults, and even kids, in this fine “morally correct”country of ours think is SEX!!! PEDOPHILES!!!!! It is even considered obscene by a majority (or so the media and feminazis have us believe) for ur 2yo to run na
It’s amazing what the media and the feminazi’s have accomplished over the past few years. Kid’s don’t even have to be nude any more, just show a bit more than victorian era skin. and the first thing adults, and even kids, in this fine “morally correct”country of ours think is SEX!!! PEDOPHILES!!!!! It is even considered obscene by a majority (or so the media and feminazis have us believe) for ur 2yo to run naked from the bathtub, soon it will be illegal and obscene for new borns to be born without clothing.
Get a life people, it’s just a naked child, boys have a penis, girls have a vagina, they are all born with one or the other, and if you are so worried about someone touching your precious little Timmy or Susie, do what these parents are obviously doing, SPEND SOME F^CK!NG QUALITY TIME WITH THEM!!! instead of sitting here on the worthless blog obsessing over something that is never going to happen, while junior is off running around with his potential rapist 95% of all child rapes are committed by someone the child knows, and 50% of those are committed by someone who lives in the same house as the child. THINK ABOUT IT!!
It’s amazing the difference between the comments of 2008 and 2009. The 2008 comments are well wishing and the 2009 comments are very condemning. Your family photos are personal and the way you captured your sons and your wife may be risque but it doesn’t show anything illegal. If your children were wearing speedos, the material would be covering about the same. I’ve lived in 5 major countries in Europe, Asia, North America and have seen more nudity of children than expected. It is their culture and is public. Most of the children didn’t wear bathing suits until age 10. Didn’t think anything about it. I am very conservative but you and your family have a Merry Christmas.
Personally? I think its in poor taste. Especially cos the kids are involved in it, and that they arent infants or 1/2 yr olds for it to be “oh-cho-cuuuute/chweet” kinda comments for.
I gotta agree with folks above. putting kids (not infants) in the nude is distasteful. i dunno if it lures the paedos, but its not tasteful. (altho the more so since the adults are umm clothed, kinda.
Will Someone in Charleston SC please report this to the local police department? This sick fuck gets off on pushing pics of his naked kids who he has to bribe with candy. THIS guy is a pedophile and and the wife too. This is not a harmless card. This card will do severe psychological damage over the years. This guy is a pedophile pure and simple. Someone save these kids from this disgusting people!
Your naked children may be cute to YOU. But publishing them like this on the internet is sick, an early christmas present for paedophiles. Especially the poor lad sitting on the floor; he looks most unconfortable. II notice the mother is fully clothed – if nakedness is ok for her kids, why not for her?
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
FapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFapFap
I don’t think it’s child porn, or exploitation, but man, are those poor little boys going to have an awkward time bringing someone special home to mom and dad!
(Also the first naked card happened “accidentally”? Was the fam just relaxing in the buff with strategically placed cups of cocoa and an open-minded photographer friend one day?)
This is hilarious. Oh, I’m supposed to be offended. MOAR cookies and that the adults are wearing clothing! RAWR
Is it just me or does the image is seem stretched? Also, is the panel to the right of the flowers on the left of the image rippling or am I having an acid flashback?
*stares at ceiling*
Pædobear approves!
Excellent picture, as a parent myself I see nothing wrong with it. Part of what being a parent is supposed to be is making sure your kids are brought up in a rich and loving environment.
Those that are flipping out about how pervy they think it is, should consider that THEY are the ones that are sexualizing the children. There is nothing even remotely sexual about this picture. These are the same people that get all bent out of shape about breast feeding.
don’t you think it should be up to the children if they have naked pics of themselves all over the place? these are permanent pics that they may not appreciate when they get older. The children look uncomfortable and not happy at all, especially the one sitting on the floor. If the parents want to pose nude that’s their decision but leave the kids out of it.
This is definitely not child porn, pedophile bait (Do you people need bait to find yourself attracted to the opposite sex? Fools) and it doesn’t immediately appear to be exploitation. But this whole concept is in very bad taste. When the boys are older and expressing regrets over these “fun little jokes” what then? Will you just dismiss later regrets, or worse, real emotional trauma by saying “You were ok with it at the time”? As their parent you are supposed to be acting in their best interests. If all people were held to a lifetime of accountability for choices made as a child what kinds of trouble would a lot of people be in?
Wow, how crazy is it that most people here have pedophile thoughts, when confronted with nude boys. Makes you wonder about their sexual healthiness…
Anyway, nice idea, have a nice Christmas!
If you have to bribe your kids to strip down for a photo, there should be an alarm sounding in your brain somewhere.
Hope you’re saving now for the psych bills later.
Nice rack mom!!
I have 4 children (14, 13, 10, 1) and I’m from Munich (you know this ‘Old Europe’). I lived for some month in San Francisco – happy to be back. Sorry, but a lot of these comments, affirming my overall picture of the US: uptight and hysterical.
Anyway Bob, I like your blogs and please go on!
Best wishes and a happy christmas!
P.S. the picture is pretty good, well composed and a nice piece of art!
Seconded from an Australian,
You Americans have some seriously screwed up ideals.
How about you let Bob raise his kids as he sees fit.
I’m positive that they will grow into more knowledgable, open-minded and balanced human beings than the majority of negative posters to this article.
Sheeesh you’re all crazy…
Europe… take us back we don’t want to be American anymore.
It just seems self-indulgent on the parent’s part.
Brilliant!!!
N*RK them mate…
you do your thing…
It was probably rejected because of the obscene smile on the lady.
Just remember folks, YOU were a naked kid once too. I am 34 years old, and my parents STILL use the child pics of me naked in the bathtub to occasionally screw with me. You don’t see me turning them in for child pornography!
Quit acting like NON-SEXUAL naked child pics are some kind of super-illegal thing like crack cocaine or heroin. I’ll be willing to bet that YOUR parents took naked pictures of YOU when you were young. Parents do that sort of thing. It’s called a Family Photo Album. Get over it!
Leaving aside any affront to decency, this is an affront to photography. It’s a crap picture, to be honest.
when I first started reading and you said “nude” I thought “well duh, of course they won’t publish them” but then as I got towards the bottom and saw an example of one of your cards I thought “this is positively adorable!” It’s VERY well done and extremely tasteful. I think it’s one of the best holiday photos I’ve seen so far this year! I’m very impressed! I don’t know why people are freaking out about your kids being naked. they’d show more in beach photos.. and i know my son runs around naked quite a lot (he’s 3 and clothes are sooo grown up and stupid) and i’ve taken tons of photos. last summer him and his cousin decided to go in the back hard and play in the water naked and it was just the cutest thing! I took a lot of photos of them. And a note to all of the people who worry about pedophiles on the internet: your child is in more danger going to school every day than having photos online- and the pedophiles online not only can’t hurt your kids.. but are going to look at your photos sexually regardless of what they’re wearing- this photo shows absolutely nothing. Get over it. The children are in no danger.
damn, dad has the pedo face for this and everything he looks like he’d enjoy it.
Can’t wait to see your easter pictures when you guys are shoving eggs in their asses.
I’ll wait until the poor kids suicides are on t.v to see how this works out
merry christmas
Your kid’s butt on the floor is not only unseemly, it is unsanitary. I would not want to walk on your floor…even with shoes on. This is not normal behaivor and I think you need to look deep within yourself, for your kid’s sake.
What astounds me is that the first thing these people think of is sex when they see your nude children. Now THAT is some fucked-up shit. Perhaps it is a lack of exposure to artistic nudes, a poor understanding of nudity versus sexuality, or just some creepy pedophilia undercurrents in the “moral majority”. Honestly, I’m not sure what the reason is, but I do know that what you have, right there, is a perfectly legal, non-sexual, kind of silly Christmas card.
And to the weirdos who kept talking about how the very idea that a whack-job is, well, a-whackin’ it to the photos of your kids, tell me this: When I spanked it to your comments (which I did, FURIOUSLY) did that fuck you up in any way? No? How about when I fantasized about sodomizing your name? Nope? Then how is some fucked-up freak touching his or her self while looking at that picture going to hurt his kids? Grow up, get counseling, I think you all may be latent pedophiles (and dog rapists).
Sorry, I meant you supposedly moral fucktards are SERIAL dog rapists. That is all.
when’s the last time you had your lithium levels checked?
Great Christmas card. Its not obscene in any way, just funny. Hope your conversation with Fred Smith went well.
I’m masturbating while looking at your little boy’s picture. Not really. But I’m sure someone is. Think about that when you subject your children to your annual perversion of Christmas.
See Thinkingman’s comments (above). What you do to yourself doesn’t hurt his kids.
Does anyone else find that comment ironic, given the username?
Mum used to take pictures of my brother, my cousins and I standing in a line in the lake at the cottage, our asses bare to the world. I think she did it for a few years–at least until I was 7 or 8.
Did it fuck anyone up? No. People need to stop being so f’in sensitive about nudity. “ZOMG protect the kids from pedos!” is fine and all, but teaching your children to hide their bodies because someone might look at it strikes me as sad and paranoid.
I do feel bad for the kid on the floor. His brothers got amusing poses and props…he’s just sitting there. Lame.
wtf is wrong with you people? nobody wants to look at your naked family. I really don’t see the point of this other then trying to prove a point and being annoying. congrats on finding a partner that’s just as annoying as yourself and spawning little freaks. I hope you do take this to court so a judge can laugh at you and throw this out.
honestly, and I am open-minded, NYC, democrat, liberal…yada yada yada….it’s a touch weird. Not like, over the top, “you are crazy” weird….but alas – yeah…a touch weird. my 2 cents. (but only because you asked).
The mom has nice tits.
Awesome! I moved to the Midwest 2 years ago, and continue to be surprised at the contradictions of the puritan value structure here.
Put me on your card list!
Your children will not thank you since the Internet Way back machine has archived this now and in 30 years when they run for President get the Nobel Prize and some paparazzi/tabloid editor or someone else digs this out to embarrass them, their families or their children.
I also would not take the order to print without my managers written approval on the sheet.
Your wife is hot.
Children will do things to please their parents; even if it makes them feel weird or uncomfortable. Great work, idiots; this has become a newsworthy item. Your grab for your 15 minutes of fame will result in your kids being giggled at by other kids at school. Also, as has been said before, the internet has a long memory. This is not going to go away. I would hazard a guess that this picture is floating around IRC right now and there’s a few perverts rocking back and forth over your kids.
There’s nothing wrong with nudity and especially within your own home. To make your childrens bodies public access is abuse.
Be assholes on your own time – do not force your kids to join you.
The very fact that you oh-so-carefully hid your children’s genitalia as well as your own SHOWS that you KNOW that what you are doing is offensive & wrong. If you think “Oh, the human body is beautiful & should be shared”, then you’d do it – but even you know that what you did was dumb, at best. Especially since cooking nude is just ASKING for trouble – but I digress.
Your wife has a beautiful rack.
Bob,
If these were my children I wouldn’t have published that picture here. Your children are going to have to deal with the social implications of that picture for the rest of their lives.
Popular with priests.
http://dannimoss.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/protestant-clergy-abuse-equals-or-exceeds-catholic-clergy-abuse/
Consider yourself lucky. I know several places that would have called Child Protective Services the second they saw that.
Truth is I’ll bet a dozen or more people have already called CPS over this picture, reporting Bob.
Prudes, every last one of them.
I’m also sure Bob won’t have any problem defending himself over this innocent picture.
I think you and your wife are assholes. Your older children are clearly uncomfortable in these pictures (I looked at last year’s as well) yet you keep putting them in the same awkward situation. This power play is further driven home by covering yourselves but leaving your children quite naked. And add to that the phallic symbols present in each photo, and yeah, your Christmas cards are grossly inappropriate.
I get that this is a tradition for you and wife. Keep it as a tradition for the two of you and leave the unwilling, coerced, sweet boys OUT!
Phallic symbols? I only see oven mitts… are you sure you don’t need counseling? Because it’s a sign of something serious to see phallic symbols on something innocent…
There is a point though, Bob: make sure people actually understand the humour if your sending them these cards (perhaps restrict them to close friends and family if you haven’t already) and your kids consent to it (but it sounds like negotiations have been going on with receiving sweets). If so, that’s fine. I hope you guys aren’t having terrible problems with Child Services. *hugs*
I have to say that I am not a prude but I got to say I draw the line at kids being depicted as nude…
Yes there is nothing pornographic as such in this picture but I don’t have to agree with your ethics. Why… well both you and your wife have fitted aprons which cover a large portion of their body and we can not tell if they are wearing undergarments, where as the boys are only covered by strategically placed items but are quite obviously nude. This image certainly wouldn’t cause as much controversy if you were all wearing aprons to cover your body with
You have just opened up a big can of worms by getting your 15min of fame to prove “I am right and you are all wrong!”
I think the majority of poeple would disagree with your thoughts… so why do you get so offended when you have opened up your own Pandora box by posting this on the internet? If you don’t like what people are saying why the hell did you put this out there…
Sorry buddy you’re going to have to live with your own consequences as do you’re children now!
Why is it that portraits of naked children throughout history are regarded as tasteful and sexless but now it’s sick, perverted and wrong?
No wonder Bob and his family have very carefully hidden their genitals. I expect that if they were to be completely naked in these pictures there would only be more complaints against them because our modern obsession with sex has made nudity a sexual commodity. Nudes should just be naked and not thought to be anything else unless there is something explicit in the picture. I see a family cooking Christmas dinner who happen to be naked, nothing more. What makes this picture remotely sexualized other than the automatic assumption that naked = sex? What makes Bather with a Gritton a nude but not sexual and these boys (who quite frankly are showing less) sexual? Is it only naked women who can become non-sexualized nudes? What about cherubs on the ceilings of posh fancy houses? Perhaps boys before a certain age can be non-sexual nudes? How unfair!
I read your post twice. You, your wife, and kids (maybe I’m not so convinced about them) sought attention, didn’t like what happened at Fed Ex, and sought more attention. I understand what you’re doing. More power to you. I’ll get to that in a moment.
First, your question. I would not have printed the card. This is simple from a business point of view. In a world where child porn is a significant concern and the subject of high-profile prosecutions, why should I trust you, your intentions, or your story? “Let him print it at home. I’ll sell him some card stock,” I would think to myself. QED
But mostly I don’t understand why you are being coy about being provocative. I’m not offended by the picture. You appear to be a nice enough looking family. But you are trying to provoke a reaction — from friends, from the folks here, others, I suspect. Why act surprised, offended, or hurt when you succeed at provoking a reaction, even it it is one that challenges you? Why bother fooling people into thinking that it never occurred to you that someone might be given pause by your Christmas card?
If you write Fred smith, stick up for what you really think — you have the right to print a provocative Christmas card. Of course, Fed Ex has the right to say no — that’s the price of being a provocateur.
Your lack of candor almost made me dislike the card on that basis alone. But, no, I like it. Your dumb act, not so much.
Merry Christmas. Better luck next year — with your honesty, I mean.
John
If people weren’t so uptight and taboo about stuff like this, there wouldn’t be anything sexual about it. Imagine a girl or boy back in the 1920s wearing today’s swimwear. What makes it so sexual is the thought that you shouldn’t be seeing it. Whereas if you saw naked little boys running everywhere every day no one would think anything of it.
OMG people are so lame- I don’t see what the big deal is, I hope one day your kids look back at the tradition and laugh. What a bunch of prudes we have here. So what if perverts look at the picture and wack off- seriously, they’re in their own home, so who cares? And does anyone really think the kids will mind when they’re adults, honestly. My mom has bathtub photos of me on the wall from when I was a baby, long before anyone decided it was naughty to do so. it’s not naughty, it’s art, it’s real, people really do have bodies under their clothes and to imply that this is wrong or dangerous is just plain insane. Censorship, prude-ness and secretive-ness are more dangerous than silly Christmas cards.
Yes it may be prudish but the laws that say otherwise govern the state.
I wouldn’t be sharing any of these sort of photos with other people because of this very same scenario…
https://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/07/18/photos/
To you it may semm innocent but to the law maybe not so much.
Bob is contributing to changing the law to bring it in line with common sense. At one time we had laws against cohabitation, alcohol, homosexuality, etc.
First, you had to bribe your kids with candy, to get naked for the camera. You’re sick. A girl in a bikini, or a boy with his shirt off (if he had pants/shorts on), doesn’t quite compare to having your children (looking between the ages of 6-11?) with *nothing* on except for oven mits and a santa hat. You’re sick. Put a pair of underwear, or shorts or something, and there wouldn’t be as much controversy, nor do I think Fed Ex would’ve denied you.
That shit is gross, even if you can’t see anything.
bobby:
you’re a brave man, publishing that. personally, I have no problem with it, though I liked the one with the five of you running naked into the water (from behind) better. I think you sent that one out a couple years ago.
however…. when your kids are just a little bit older, they are gonna be so pissed at you for doing this. trust me. mine are now of an age where they get ticked off when I or my wife merely mention them in an article — we’ve never done anything close to nude shots. now my 13-yo son googles himself and yells at us.
of course, I’d be surprised if your neighbors in C-town haven’t sicc’d social services on you yet. good luck with that.
also: nice strategic use of oven mitts.
dt
Next year wear burqas and see if they’ll make copies of that. 🙂
re: your holiday cards: LOL. What a great twist on the family christmas card tradition. It’d be great if you could keep this idea going for decades without going stale.
re: the twisted, perverse @ssholes posting heir obscene criticisms of what is nothing more than simple nudity and family-friendly humor: you sick people are why I have begun to believe that there should be a requirement to pass an IQ test before being permitted internet access. Or voting rights, for that matter.
I think it would be less creepy & more amusing if you were all nude, rather than just the kids.
I’m just wondering how the tradition of sending Christmas cards featuring pictures of the whole family naked “began by accident”.
I cringe looking at that card. There’s something weird, not funny or artistic about the picture.
Bob, your wife is hot. Nothing wrong with the card at all. Unfortunately when you say something on the internet you get every type of response. Myself, I’m looking forward to use my new Google phone w/ VOIP in the place I always have coverage, the WiFi in my house. I mean we got along just fine back in the time when there was no coverage except for anywhere there was a landline. It’s about expectations… How about a law passed by congress mandating public knowledge of the locations of, and coverage attributes relating to cell towers? Then we can all decide for ourselves if “you can hear me now.”
What a great Christmas card. You have a great sense of humour and you are passing it on to the kids. Well done.
I have read some of the comments from people whom must not have any fun in their lives. People can not tell the difference between sex and nudity in America. What a strange country you live in Bob.All I can say is get a life of your own and leave others like Bob and his family alone.
Your card is good wholesome fun. Thank you for sharing the card with us.
these people are sick…why would you make your kids get naked and think its a good idea to take a pic….who is taking this picture anyway???? Child Protective Services should get involved….this is sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why is this sick? Do you ever take your clothes off?
I totally agree with John above. It’s wonderful that you and your family have such a fun sense of humour, I’d love to receive a similarly light-hearted Christmas card from a friend or family member. I am utterly appalled by the complete ignorance some people have of the difference between nudity and sexuality. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having tasteful nudity displayed on a Christmas card (provided the receiver actually understands the sense of humour) and it in absolutely no way exposes your children to peadophiles. Frankly people will masturbate over pretty much anything so there’s really not any point in worrying that maybe naked pictures are going to endanger your kids, that’s just paranoid.
Please please don’t let anyone with negative comments discourage you from this eccentric family tradition. Find some way of printing your own cards if companies are too disappointingly PC to risk getting sued. Your better than that.
P.S: Come to England we’re full of eccentric families here! Though it might be colder if your naked all the time…
I think you mis-understand what most people have said.
They don’t see it as SEXUAL… for the most part people see that it lacks ethics and is inappropriate to past on the web for others to see.
The concern is those that do see it as sexual… especially when it comes to his own sons… I for one wouldn’t want my children subject to that.
I guess my concern is that you are bribing your children to have nude photos of themselves taken. If they are in a similar situation with another trusted adult who ends up being less than trustworthy because they were bribed with a treat. Will you feel badly for opening them up to potential abuse?
Personally, I don’t see the images as sexual or pornographic. They are inapropriate.
Its about 2 hrs since I read this and saw the picture but its lingering uncomfortably with me and as a result I really felt the need to leave a comment.
I really can appreciate your sense of humour & the novelty of the cards, and being a mother of two infants myself I understand how our beautiful little children enjoying their natural state can be a very heart warming and entertaining at times too. One of our responsibilities as a parent is to be the protector of our child’s modesty until such time as they are wise enough to regulate themselves. I cant help but personally feel that if a child requires bribes and enticement to partake in a family photo involving being naked, then its time to allow that child to being to assert control over their own modesty and to allow them to decline.
This image among understanding family and friends are one thing, but to post the the photo online so freely available is crossing a definate boundry into irresponsibility. Two of your boys seem fairly involved and happy in the photograph, but I’m struck by the boy in the foreground who’s expression displays some reluctance and his body pose unquestionably projects an awkward vunerability. Your own intentions surrounding the image and its context are one thing – but your young son, naked embarassed and appearing vunerable on an open website is enticing controversy.
Child abusers target children purely for their own sexual gratification, but a part of that process also entails preying on them because of their vunerability and dominating or coercing them into doing something they are not comfortable with. You’ve presented your son in just such a manner to anyone who finds your Blog.
Please for a moment try to be objective and reconsider your inclusion of the photo in the post, for the sake of your sons.
Well put.
But wrong. The child in the foreground is not uncomfortable. I look more uncomfortable in every picture I’ve been in. His kids are in great shape, have nothing to be ashamed of, and know it too.
What does this have to do with “their kids being in great shape?” I don’t think Gigi said anything about them being “out of shape”. And why on Earth would someone want to put a picture of their “naked child who is in great shape” on the internet? Or take the picture at all?
My only question would be “WHY”? What was your goal in taking Naked pictures vs. clothed ones?
Would you have done this if you had daughters. I doubt it. You bribed
your kids to get naked? Who will bribe them next?? You can’t see any private parts……..there hidden…….so this would be teasing and not art.
The image of you is the most modest. My mother said beware of the internet. There are a lot of screw balls out there.
I’m going to go with ‘cringe’ factor on this one as well. You and your wife naked with strategically placed items, fine, coercing your kids to pose, not so much. Like others have said, if they were posed where the image conveyed the idea that they were nude but one could not tell if they were clothed or not it would be less bothersome to me…
as for the people who wrote asking what’s the big deal if some perv is whacking off to nude photos of your kids cause he’s not harming anyone…seriously? The harm is that those would be my kids, and the idea of someone out there getting their sexual jollies off of semi nude or strategically nude pictures of my kids (or any kids) is wrong, kids are not sex objects. Period.
Having written that, that is the cringe factor I was having a hard time getting to…it’s not that you decided to do something funny for the holiday card by posing nude its that you’ve put your three boys out there on the internet to be the object of some perv’s sexual fantasy…I just don’t think, as a parent, this is something you should be doing.
Well I can see while Kinko’s didn’t print it… but I’m also not sure why parents would want a Christmas card like this printed? I see it as a joke being stretched too far. I don’t see what’s funny about it at all. I also see the two of you as very immature if it is merely a joke. This is maybe something I would have laughed at in 7th grade…. and that’s a strong maybe. Even at that I probably would have only laughed if everyone else was doing it. Which brings me to my next point: Are you doing this because you are desperate to be known as original? Personally, if I had children in this day and age I would never post this simply because there are horrible people out there. Now you have nude photos of your children posted online. I feel scared for you and for them, and while I hope to God that nothing happens, I feel very scared. There are too many bad people in this world.
This is sick. Child porn is what it is. puttin your children out there for any molester. Just as inviting that molester into your home. You should be ashamed of yourself. I feel sorry for your children, to be subject to your sick sense of humor. They are children, not sex object. Sick.
The problem for Kinkos (and any similar service) is that there is no specific law about what is allowed (“community values” is not precise enough), and if some judge somewhere ever did decide that this wasn’t allowed then all the Kinko’s staff involved could potentially be charged with felonies carrying mandatory years or decades in prison followed by lifetime registration as a sex offender, with all that implies. Even if the jury found them not guilty, the legal fees would still be horrendous.
So for them its a simple choice: risk having their lives ruined, or turn down your business. Not really much of a contest.
Isn’t it fascinating how all the “loving” and “right” religious individuals have the most offensive, hateful and backwards comments?
Really people, IF there is some magical afterlife you all claim to be SO pious for (*cough* Hippocrates), being hateful of creative innocence and things that are “different”, and promoting purposeful ignorance will guarantee you don’t get in the good side of the gate.
What “all knowing being” wants to hang out with a bunch of ignorant, hateful bigots? I’d smite your @ss on the spot.
The fact that you have to bribe the kids to take these pictures should tell you something. It’s disgusting, distasteful, and wrong to subject your poor boys to posing nude for a card, who are obviously TOO old for something like this.
As a second-generation member of AANR, I find the card funny, and really, you’ll see more skin at a resort. I don’t find it tasteless, and if anything, I wish I had thought of that when my kids were younger.
This is a SICK picture. Sick.
This would be entirely different if these were toddlers, but now we’re talking about one of those kids being on the verge of puberty, and looking quite unhappy about the situation. Does your family walk around the house naked? Gross.
This isn’t anything like an adult locker room, this is more in line with exploiting children.
I find this far more creepy then those calendars and posters with the babies dressed as adults.
And the people who are commenting in support of this garbage sound like they’re card carrying members of NAMBLA.
Enjoy your supporters… they’re just as mentally unstable and nihilistic as you.
This is a SICK picture. Sick.
This would be entirely different if these were toddlers, but now we’re talking about one of those kids being on the verge of puberty, and looking quite unhappy about the situation. Does your family walk around the house naked?
This isn’t anything like an adult locker room, this is more in line with exploiting children.
I find this far more creepy then those calendars and posters with the babies dressed as adults.
And the people who are commenting in support of this garbage sound like they’re card carrying members of NAMBLA.
Enjoy your supporters… they’re just as mentally unstable and nihilistic as you.
I wholly approve of this. Shame on you conservative commenters/naysayers. If you find this offensive then IT IS YOU who are seeing this in a sexual context.
Wow….probably the most creative Xmas card I’ve ever seen…..very different from everyone else’s! I find it very humorous 🙂
You really need to take this photo down. I understand that you were only trying to have fun but obviously you have NO IDEA how many sickos are the internet looking at this and have probably already stolen it from this site. I really hope your children are not paying for this for the rest of their lives.
That’s the Christmas spirit, all right…relentless self-promotion. “Lookatmelookatmelookatme! Look at what awesome trendy hipsters we are! If you’re not paying enough attention to us we’ll send you NAKED pictures of us, that’ll force you to pay attention! Me Me Me Me Me Me Me!”
Gag. Glad I’m not on your Xmas card list. You’d have wasted all that effort on finding a printer (hey genius, you can print them at home, you know that, right?) only to have me throw this pretentious, aesthetically empty bit of child exploitation right in the garbage on arrival.
Wow! Over 500 comments. Must be some kind of 13 year record! The only sad part is that Bob will be encouraged to post fewer columns about technology and more of the general interest stuff. So thanks for the great picture and Merry Christmas! Now let’s get back to the important stuff.
Since you asked, I threw up a little in my mouth. The 8-Ball says, “You will rue the day!” [besides–eewww–saggy side breasts?] I am constantly amazed at the depth of self-delusion. Next time use some thing less controversial. Like automatic weapons.You’re welcome. And merry Christmas. [Plus, look on the bright side: your friends and relatives now have no worries about what to get all of you: m*f* clothes! Everybody wins.
Let us know how you look when you have had 3 children, likely breast-fed, and is not wearing a bra. Personally, I think that she looks great.
Bob, pretty funny card. I will bet that the others have been pretty good.
Whoa! I DO have three kids–30, 21 and 20 (all breast-fed), plus a 2 year old grandson.I am 58 years old and I’ll tell ya right now, mine do not look like tennis balls in a wind sock. Plus, they be gen-u-ine!
Bob… You lucky devil… Have your wife call me if it doesn’t work out!
P.S. Don’t you dare tell the ‘missus’!
OMG, I love it! Reminds of that scene in one of the Austin Power’s movies where he’s moving about naked but something always seems to cover up his jewels.
So, are you guys and Balloon Boy’s parents having some kind of contest to see who can fuck their kids up the worst?
I hope your ‘tradition” ends before you get old enough to send out pictures of your gray, sagging .vericose veined asses. The moms tits already look like sweatsocks filled with sand.
This comment is obscene
I think people are jerks here. Mom looks awesome. But that is the crux of the problem for me. The boys are too old to be prancing around naked, or to see their mother doing the same. For healthy gender relationships and normal sexual development, the boys should be given the freaking LUXURY of not having grown up rituals imposed on them to humor your friends.
I think it is rather unfortunate that they are given permission to join their parents in this form of adult humor moment. they don’t understand it, but they do know more than they should about mommy’s MILFY hotness. Too bad. That should be a memory they never have to recall later in life.
Hmmm.
I hope that you are visiting your psychiatrists regularly.
In general, kids seeing their parents nude and neither makes a big deal of it, the child will grow BETTER adjusted.
The ones that cause real issues are the parents who take a shower and the child steps in (either for curiosity sake, or simply to ask a question, or tell on a sibling) and the parent grabs a towel and screams at the child.
Beautiful family, Beautiful picture, Merry Christmas, That is all.
Hi dude, nice blog Happy Holidays!
You asked what we thought, so I’ll tell you. I think the card is in very poor taste and I would not display this in my home. I feel sorry for the kids and frankly, I just don’t get it.
You said it! You just don’t get it…
While I think it’s a funny picture to send to family and friends I’m not sure I would have posted it on the internet for nasty creepy people to see. In the same respect, it might be better for your family to invest in a high quality printer and just do them yourselves at home.
It also keeps the same nasty creepies who might work at said Kinko’s from keeping those pics for themselves.
*shudder*
On a personal level…I laughed my ass off when I saw it and see nothing wrong with the ‘nudity’ at all. And I think most of the people who have left negative comments are just repressed and need to lighten up a bit.
If you are suggesting that some mentally ill person who is turned on by children will masturbate to the image and this should temper his actions… then never take your children to the beach or anywhere else in public where people can look at them. If someone can see you and imagine you naked, they can clearly do whatever they want with that mental image. Thinking that there’s a way to prevent this is naiive at best.
As for the photo… your son in the front looks EXTREMELY uncomfortable. I think the tradition may need to expire for his sake, poor git.
I agree, not good for the kids. Dental health is a serious matter.
Merry Christmas,
Happy New Year
I KNOW WHO CAN PRINT YOUR CARDS , THE FEDERAL PENNENTARY, OR ALSO THE STATE PENNENTARY AND i AM SURE BIG BUBBA WOULD HELP YOU STUFF THEM. YOU ARE A SICK MAN AND YOU NEED TO CHECK IN WITH YOUR LOCAL SHERRIFF’S OFFICE AS A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER
How silly is all this. Shows how screwed up we are in the good old US of A when it comes to our bodies. I swear in Europe or Asia this would be nothing more than a humorus interlude. Man what uptight twits and that is being unkind to twits.
I have to get this off my chest first. Bad spelling and all caps are NOT the way to make your point. *shudder*
Moving on, I think this is hilarious. Yes, there will come the day when the kids will probably be a bit too old for this to be cute. Seriously, I highly doubt this is going to scar them for life. I’m sure plenty of kids even grow up in nudist families and turn out just fine. I think people need to stop associating nudity with sexuality. It’s our most natural state!
I personally could never do this because I don’t have nearly as good a body as the lovely lady above, but props to you guys, you look great! Keep having fun!
Oh how I agree, reminds me of the joke of Jeff Foxworthy, You know the difference between Naked and Nekid. Naked means you got no clothes on, Nekid means you got no clothes on and are up to something!
Some of you people just need to lighten up. There’s nothing pornographic about these photos. Not to mention, what’s wrong with mom’s breasts? The woman’s had 3 kids after all. Geez…
Interesting. My 1st thought is why don’t you print them yourself? Surly you can find a worthy printer but you seem hell bent on making sure the public see your controversial xmas card. Exhibitionists? Sadly, your kids are too young to know better. I wish to be the fly on the wall when your daughter gets a bit older to hear what she has to say about being pressured into posing in the nude on future cards. FAIL
Wow – totally inappropriate. WTF are you thinking?
wow! Can’t print your own cards? Not saying much for your comprehension of technology.
My 2 cents:
I wouldn’t do this kind of thing. On the other hand, I’m sure there are things that I do that you wouldn’t dream of doing. To each his own. At least all of you are in pretty good shape. There is a reason that many of us wear clothes. Not all bodies are beautiful in the eye of the beholder.
I don’t blame Kinko’s for not printing this. Our society has become so determined to tell us what we can and cannot do. All it takes is one person to be offended and here come the lawyers to sue anyone and any company associated with the card. I don’t think they’re making judgements on taste. I think they’re being prudent because lawsuit happy people will try to make some money from being offended.
joe
Don’t make fried chicken naked . . . just sayin’!
I’m so sad for your kids. Totally unfair.
I don’t know if you’re a pervert. I don’t really think so. I think you’re just clueless. This country doesn’t need any more clueless parents.
so why are the kids naked but the mother and father wearing clothes?
Not a prude but I do find it a bit unnerving.
Having said that I cannot believe no one’s commented on the fact that you are a very handsome sexy person. Yes, your wife is hot but you are pretty hot yourself and this is not a joke. Handsome smart older men are sexy and it’s unfortunate you aren’t showing us more of you. A peak of the wang would be nice.
You, sir, need to just quit hiding behind your blog post and flat out admit you and your wife are pedophiles. I hope someone reports both of you to child services so that your poor kids can be placed in homes where they aren’t subjected to you and your wife’s sick and twisted ways, along with both you being incarcerated for the maximum prison sentence. Unbelievable. Come to think of it, “sex offenders” does suit both of you perfectly because that’s what you two are!
I hope and pray that your neighbors (if you have any) are doing everything they can to keep you two pedophiles away from them and their children. Oh, and the photographer who took this photo deserves the pedophile title as well. Keep on boasting scumbag because once the cops come after you and your wife, you’ll both wish you don’t get stuck with violent cellmates. And I’m sure bribing them with “candy” won’t get you anywhere.
he has a family tradition that he records as having started by accident of naked, tasteful pictures, and you see nudity as being something horrible, and associate naked children with sex.
just who are you trying to convince me is the pedo? him or you?
get over your sad perverse way of thinking, it’s for a bit of fun, nothing more to it.
There’s a facet of this post that strikes me, and it’s one I’ve not seen anyone else mention unless I’ve missed it somewhere in the previous 500 comments.
I like Bob’s technical reporting but on this issue he needs to knock off the fake innocence of pretending to not understand why there are people who are taken aback by his family’s practices in regards to nudity. I don’t really care what his family’s private behaviors in this area are, and I don’t even necessarily think they’re wrong, but you would have to be a real dufus not to understand why a company might not want to be involved in printing these cards. Bob’s not a dufus – he’s just being immature. He knew when he walked in (for the second time by his own admission) that he was going to be asking something of them they might well be uncomfortable with.
And does it bother anyone that a man of substantial means is picking on a low-wage Fedex Kinko’s employee (by name, no less) who just wants to put in a day’s work, get a paycheck and go home? His treatment of Tammy Johnson is exploitative to say the least. It’s rude for an upper-middle income person like him to put a low-paid service worker in this position. I can understand her reluctance to get involved in a no-win situation that’s not worth her job. I think he owes her a public apology.
Bob, you have a right to your own morality in how the family dresses in privacy, but you don’t need to shove it down Fedex’s throat, and you don’t need to be picking on minimum wage counter clerks.
Call me crazy, but I think it’s funny. It’s a wacky family tradition and I think it’s charming. I’d love to hear of the orgin and see the other cards. I’d love to have a friend with the balls (no pun intended) to do something he thinks is funny and carry it this far. There is no harm here (unless when the children grow up they resent the cards). The moronic Kinko’s worker is just that- a mindless robot. In today’s environment I suppose I can understand their fear. Dont listen to these jackasses calling you pedophiles. They’re just living repressed and in fear. Lets just hope the attention you’ve gathered this year from the card doesn’t come back and cause you trouble.
Leave out the kids and it would be funny, the kids in it makes it a little ikky! Like the side clavage, nice touch!
It’s a nice looking family with few clothes on having an innocent joke, what are you sick people thinking when you call it pedophillia. YOU are the people making it weird.
Wow – It’s little wonder that the economy’s in the shytter. Is all of Texas posting on your blog today? The once-a-year jeebus-lubbers must have been circulating the link to your site to all their sinless pure other annual jeebus-lubbing friends – for days, while seething and gasping for breath (out of jealousy, no doubt.)
This is a *beautiful* card; tasteful, artful, light-hearted — well done!
Happy holidays to you and your family,
Emily (not from Texas)
I find your comment about “jeebus lubbers” from Texas as narrow minded as the comments accusing the card of encouraging pedophilia.
I think loving Jesus and not loving this card are two different things. Hypocrites come in all shapes, sizes and are not geographically concentrated. I believe your generalization is silly.
Joe
Funny, I’m from Texas, AND I love Jesus, but I also find nothing wrong with this picture. Also, I’m a licensed Baptist minister, and a member of The Naturist Society.
You go Sanman, “nude is not lewd”.
I do not see anything that could be considered “lewd” it is tastefully done and very creative. I do have an issue with the “bribing” the boys with candy. If they are not willing to participate, then it’s time to end the tradition and start a new one.
I have very good friends, their children grew up as nudists, when the children decided they did not want to participate, the parents went on their own. Both have grown up and are productive law abiding citizens.
The boy in the front with the oven glove made me laugh.
As far as using the kinko’s employees name, not fair, the frontline employees get the crap, while the ceo’s make the rules and gets outrageously compensated for it, next time give the crap to the top guy, that’s what he/she gets paid for.
Hope you had a wonderful holiday and a great 2010 to all
Where’s Betty Bowers when you REALLY need her?!
Why, she’s right here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw
Too bad people don’t read Titus these days:
“To the pure all things are pure”
Growing up in Utah behind the “Zion Curtain” this is just so true.
Here’s what I think: I think it was a cheap way to advertise for your blog. Any attention is good, I guess???
Personally, if it were just mom & dad, I might get a good laugh out of it. With naked kiddos, though…I just get creeped out. Just think about this: there is a very good chance you are sending these cards to at least one pedophile, statistically speaking. Do you really want to encourage that pervert to think about your children in that way? Eek!
One more thing…I actually posted photos of my kiddos out in the yard naked (playing in the pool). Only their bums were showing. I started noticing TONS and I mean TONS of hits from all over the world. The perverts had found my kids. I took the post down. This taught me that ven though I don’t look at nudity in children in a negative or sexual way, plenty of people do. I would just avoid that kind of attention for your kids if I were you.
The only sad part about this is that you keep going back to Kinkos.
Ok, this picture is just funny and weird, but weird makes the world go around in my opinion. I am most concerned about the negative-breast comments. Sadly, our society doesn’t know how to appreciate a beautiful, natural breast. And that folks, is a real shame.
Another Mrs. C. says “He knows where all the bad girls live.”
I don’t personally see anything wrong with using it as a Christmas card (I wouldn’t have done it, but it’s just not my personality, if it IS someone else’s then so be it…) BUT, I would have stoppped short of putting it on the blog.
When you mail them out, you have at least a modicum of control over who has access to the card (sure, people can show their friends, but not to the extent the blog can) but on the Internet, you don’t know what kind of freakshow if peeking in to save a picture of your wife, or worse, children to their…uh…harddrive? and….um…refer to it? later on. That’s the only creepiness that I can see. And sure, it’s the perverts fault for looking, but at the same time, it’s the parent’s job to make sure the pervert doen’t have access to their kids on the internet.
Those people who are so upset about a bit of harmless fun are really screwed up, I bet if the kids all were posing with sub machine guns not nearly so many people would have been upset. I agree with the comments about not putting the picture on the internet as there are a lot of troubled people out there.
Under the first amendment you have a right to do whatever you want. I think most people in America are uptight about nothing. You’re not doing anything wrong, and while I wouldn’t do it with my own kids, I can appreciate the creativity that went into taking the photo. I think the card is pretty funny.
Oh – and your wife is pretty hot as well. lol.
I think the photo is adorable. Anyone who looks at it and sees perversion is a pervert him or herself. There is nothing but innocence inthe photo.
I also think anyone that sees perversion is a pervert themselves, but also believe that it is the parent’s job to protect their children from being accessible to these perverts. Putting this on the internet, like other’s about have said, is just giving these creeps full access to the kids. Family, friends, those close to you that “get it”, OK. The Internet was too far.
It grosses me out. I don’t want pictures of people naked kids. Parents have actually been arrested for things like this, if they had them developed someplace that thought it was unappropriate. I would wonder what goes on at their house of the kids run around without clothes.
I don’t care for the card, but I don’t think there’s anything disgusting about it. Nor do I think its going to permanently scar the children.
Americans tend to sexualize nudity, whereas in Europe its not that big of a deal. Public breastfeeding is an excellent example of one way Americans like to sexualize nudity and make it seem “dirty”. Families in Europe and parts of Asia also go to public bath houses together. Imagine doing that here! We couldn’t – Our minds are preconditioned to sexualize it.
It’s interesting how stigmas lead to fetishes, isn’t it?
We Americans excel at creating “perverts”.
And somehow this brings to mind balloon boy’s dad Richard Heene. Exploitation at it’s finest.
I don’t see indecency; However, bribing one’s own children to pose naked for a family Christmas card is disturbing. Not to mention the fact that every gay pedophile with access to a computer can get their rocks off. I wouldn’t subject my child to this, and one can only imagine the shame at school.
Not to mention a psychoanalyst could have a field day with the effect of the mother’s apparent sensuality on the boys.
I love NanciELizabeth’s “automatic weapons” comment. Brings to mind the classic American cliché where PG nudity is a hanging offense yet guns are completely acceptable.
PS: the wife’s boobs look great.
i love your courage to put up with the criticism for such a photo, i don’t see anything wrong with it at all, and i fail to see why anyone would.
nudity won’t scar your kids, seriously if you didn’t come from a culture where nudity was associated with sex then you’d realise everyone has a body under their clothes, being able to see it or let others see it is as natural as you can get, to believe that causes some sort of harm is a crazy idea.
pedos might see your kids photos, yeah, but honestly other than the increase in traffic to your site there is going to be no changes on how it affects your, or your kids lives, unless you are crazy enough to want to feel affected by the actions of them, in which case you deserve everything you get for being retarded.
oh, and merry xmas to everyone reading.
Bob, I think this is great. I’ve got to read this to see if there is any explanation of how you got the shot and got three kids to stand still while everything managed to be covered. I’d love to see prior years shots. I think it’s inventive and funny. Wondering how many more years you’ll be able to get the boys to do it though!
Oh, and I think the nudity is fine, I mean it’s not sexualized nudity. The pedophile comments are out of line, and NO one looks uncomfortable in the shot and it is in no way sensual or sexual (but you knew that, because you’re normal, though a bit quirky, which I like). That being said, mom looks hot. Tell her to ignore the negative boob comments… she’s adorably cute, and with all due respect, I dig the attributes. Three kids and she looks great… you’re a lucky man!
Dear Cringely Family,
Please ignore all those sick comments which have been posted here. I swear you wouldn’t have any problems with a kind of this photo here in Germany. My impression about the prudish US with its dishonest moral have been confirmed. It’s nice to see there is a family in the US which is doing their own thing contrary to the bright masses which has a free spirit and feeling ok to be naked. There is nothing about to shame. Please continue to make nude X-mas photos and have fun to be naked.
Greetings from Germany
Now that’s a lovely Christmas card! In Israel, where I live, we have a TV satire called Great Country which is about to start its 7’th season. Their promo for the new season, under the title ‘Bringing the Color Back’ has all the actors in a faux-nude (https://www.mako.co.il/entertainment-tv-media/tv/Article-e13aa42bfb29521006.htm). Just like Bob says, getting this kind of thing done right (or ‘faux’) is difficult for a single photo; doing it for a promo airing at prime time is ever more of a challenge. Unsurprisingly, the same mixture of comments can be found there too (in Hebrew, sorry).
I think the family card is great. And, having read a few of the comments, I think that a lot of people project their own anxieties onto a situation that just does not call for it. Life, in this day and age, needs to be approached with a very healthy sense of humor in order to survive, and it seems to me that this family is being well equipped. Those that raise moral objections to the card really need to have a good reality check.
GREAT PHOTO. Looks like a very happy family to me haveing some great Christmas fun.
Great picture! Great family sense of humor! Every American family should aspire to look so good to be able to do a nude holiday card each year. Our health care costs would go way down. Isn’t our negative attitude towards nudity because so many of us would be so appalling we’d break the camera?!
I don’t see this as obscene in any way.
I don’t see it as an attempt at humor.
I see it as a beautiful picture of a family who is not hung up by the screwed up attitude of the anti-nakedness brainwashed society that makes obscene and distasteful comments about the beautiful woman’s partly naked body and sees the taking of such a picture as an attack on the upbringing of some terrific kids.
The screwed up and obscene people and their similar comments are what is wrong here.
The picture is wonderful, refreshing and beautiful.
I hope the family has the best Christmas time ever and many more to come.
I know that with their healthy attitude to their bodies they will enjoy the summer as none of the negative commentators will ever do.
Well Stated!
If seeing other people naked is damaging, then 100.000+ of adults visiting nudist beaches with their parents as kids would be seriously damaged. You know what’s damaging? Acting prudish, teaching children that their body is obscene/nasty and giving them the experience that all nudity is solemnly associated with sexual activity. There is nothing wrong with a open and shameless view on nudity. Unfortunately, this tendency is growing in Europe as well, even here in The Netherlands of all places (which used to have a quite liberal view on nudity).
Sorry for my english (not my natural language). About the picture…hilarious, nice picture (unfortunately not completely sharp at the back) and keep up the tradition as long as your kids want to participate in it. Else…maybe a little suggestion…you as parents semi-naked shivering in the cold snow and the kids fully packed to stay warm! 🙂
I love this card! And I would love it even if it showed the parts it very carefully doesn’t show.
Look: We all have one of two basic designs. Even young children have some idea of how the other sex looks. So what’s the big deal about showing or not showing certain body parts? Do we really think that simple, social nudity is some kind of sex act? Do some of the commenters here think that, despite all evidence to the contrary–and there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary–seeing one’s father, mother, or sibling in the nude is going to traumatize a child?
If so, then America really is sick. And the cure just might be a generous dose of simple, social, non-erotic nudity exactly like this.
Thank you, Bob, for sharing this with us! I hope your Christmas was very merry and blessed.
I think that is some fantastic side boob.
After three kids, I wish my boobs looked that good.
I mean..if I were a woman..
I *am* a woman, and after three kids, I wish my breasts looked that good, too!
Seriously, though – this isn’t obscene. This isn’t disgusting. This is cute. I wish I could get all three of my kids – and my husband – to smile in the same picture.
FedEx/Kinko’s is stupid, and I’m glad your Christmas cards got printed out.
i like nude kids
u should give the web video or picture naked kids
spoken like a true pedophile…
That is too cute. I cannot fathom what FedEx/Kinkos’ issue is, but then again, there have been parents arrested for getting photos of their toddlers in the tub developed or printed.
I think it’s a hilarious tradition, kudos to you guys for having the chutzpah to go back to the same kinkos!
If the adults want to pose and send out cards like this I have no problem. But I really don’t think having children nude in the card is a good idea. There are alot of pedofiles out there and the kids are posed kinda creepy. I also think it’s against the law to pose children naked online. I could be wrong.
I agree, the parents have little semi-outfits on that are sort of cute and if the woman wants to show off one of the girlfriends that’s her choice. The kids, on the other hand, look like they’re being exploited and it’s disturbingly creepy. What kind of parent would want to post a picture like this online so that any weirdo can see it? As well as their friends at school. I can’t think of one sensible reason to publish a picture like this.
I think if we all thought like Patricia, we would never ever go outside our homes and be exposed to other people, just because there might be some “weirdo” that might see us. Think about it! If someone has any improper thoughts about this beautiful and happy family, they are the ones that should rethink their lives. I’m sure that these boys are not in any way less protected or loved or happy just because their picture can be seen by other people. The evil is in the eye of the beholder. I’m sure they are very happy boys and being raised by a very protective and loving family, which know enough not to make the boys feel ashamed of their own bodies. If more people thought and acted this way, the world would be a much better place. There’s nothing sexual or evil or to be ashamed of in this beautiful Christmas family scene.
Not creepy at all LD. I think they are totally cute an quite hilarious. The facial looks are priceless. I love this photo and thinks its actually both fun and beautiful.
I certainly don’t think of myself as a *prude* in any way, but I have to say that personally I don’t like the photo idea. And it’s really because of the kids. Even if you hadn’t said they are now being bribed to participate, it still makes me uneasy. From a psychological standpoint, the kids may feel in some way “forced” to participate, even if it’s just by means of encouragement.
I can understand why your local Kinko’s objected, though they may have different reasons than I would have.
Not at all obscene, but still very troubling when you think of the lengths Bob had to go to in order to capture such an image. How is the whole family naked together not damaging in some way to the boys’ fragile little minds?
Think about it.
Just one more ludicrous post that has me one step closer to not reading Cringely anymore. Keep it up.
How does nudity damage any mind? And how many little boys have fragile minds?
I would think the answers are intuitively obvious, but your post suggests that you can’t grasp the concepts involved so I’ll provide them: It doesn’t and damned few, probably none.
Van
[…] I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won't Print Our … […]
A little creepy for me.
I am far from a prude. But I honestly think that this concept is ridiculous. What exactly does Christmas have to do with half naked adults and fully naked grade-school children? I don’t get it. I’m happy that I am not on your mailing list.
Ugh. Cringe is right.
Sorry…but that’s a little creepy for me. Naked pictures of babies…sure. But that oldest kid is pushing puberty! Yuck…
I didn’t see obscenity, so long as all of the participants are on board. These boys look old enough to be in school. How do they feel about their classmates seeing them not naked? Or mom’s side boob? All I am saying is that I thought it was cute until I saw the look on the boy who is sitting on the floor’s face. YMMV
Incredibly incredibly creepy. They photo place did you a favor – your friends would see you in a new light, and not an attractive one.
Your son could not look more unhappy. You get off on this, but your kids obviously do not.
It’s time to stop this tradition of humiliating your children.
The kids look fine. More comfotable than I do in any picture I’ve ever taken.
This could not be any creepier. I pity your children who are clearly very uncomfortable and, as you said, needed to be bribed. Bribing children to get naked is something pedophiles and “strange uncles” do. Years of therapy will not begin to scratch the surface of what you are doing to your sons. Hide these pictures from your sons’ future girlfriends or expect a lot of sudden break-ups and heartaches for “that kid with the disturbing relationship with his parents”.
Kids and parents being naked in the same room is not wrong. You are the disturbed one for thinking it is.
What a beautiful family. I am envious of your humor, closeness, and open nature. Only in America can we turn something beautiful (like the nude form) into something dirty and shameful. Happy New Year Cringelys. xooox love Krissy (Dixie Pixie)
This picture is the least creepy thing about this dude. Bob Cringley doesn’t even exist. Wow. Fascinating story once you do a little research. It’s the interwebs! I know a lot more about this man than just what his kids look like naked.
Definitely obscene. But not because of the nudity, which is non-existent in the photo and even if there were nudity here it would not make a difference. Nudity is great, it is the only thing we bring into the world and take from it when we go. It is something that should be faced and accepted, it is beautiful. Misguided anti-nudists are the reason that some moms feel ashamed to nurse in public.
It is obscene because of the obvious Hollywood style psycho-sexual implications which saturate this image. A variation on the manifestation of people unqualified to be parents yet charged with the privilege of guiding young minds to make proper choices up to the age of majority.
This is a replication of the form of exploitation found in the much publisized newstory of the “balloon boy incident”, in which his “parents”, cared much more for fulling their personal fantasy then properly rearing their children. They were and should have been arrested and given jail terms, likewise I think these guardians deserve much the same.
It is the ongoing nonsense like this that has caused the perceived need in our society for things like DHS custody of childeren, who never-the-less would be better off, IMHO, with derelict parents like these, than in the hands of the bureaucracy.
Good grief. Your post is rife with illogic at best, and rife with subtle lunacy.
First you imply that you have no problem with nudity…in fact you rather endorse it, and then you sexual deprivation implied within the confines of the picture. Where? They are just nude…that is all. By your first paragraph, one would think that you would have no problem with the image.
I think any sexual inuendos that one such as yourself may beget from this image must then come strictly from yourself,
And then your post further meanders into the field of utter nonsense.
Take a qualude or something.
Thanks for your reply to my post, I will attempt a rebuttal to your objections.
“Your post is rife with illogic at best”
I would ask you to be specific, this is a broad statement that begs detail.
“and rife with subtle lunacy.”
I will take this as a compliment, as the dictionary on my mac defines lunacy with this example – ” it has been suggested that originality demands a degree of lunacy.”
“First you imply that you have no problem with nudity”
true
” and then you sexual deprivation implied within the confines of the picture. Where? ”
I am not sure what you intend to write here. I can only hazard a guess that you mean… what do I find to be depraved about this image.”
The entire setting the lighting, grins, implied nudity, placement of the boys oven mitt, are either subliminal or otherwise non-natural, and certainly not of the pensive quality required for artistic or naturist nude. In plain language, therefore the purpose and direction of this image is a message of deviancy. As a previous poster wrote “I pity your children who are clearly very uncomfortable and, as you said, needed to be bribed. Bribing children to get naked is something pedophiles and “strange uncles” do. Years of therapy will not begin to scratch the surface of what you are doing to your sons”.
“They are just nude…that is all”.
On the contrary they are not nude, because all the parts that would be considered nude are covered by clothing or camera angles. As I said, nudity has little to do with the obscenity of this image.
“By your first paragraph, one would think that you would have no problem with the image.”
And… So…. what? I think that I have adequately continued on to expound upon my position in the post.
“I think any sexual inuendos that one such as yourself may beget from this image must then come strictly from yourself”
These are posts of people’s opinions, this is mine, again I must write. And… So…. what?
“And then your post further meanders into the field of utter nonsense.”
Again a broad and non-specific statement that is difficult to respond to. I think my writing is quite succinct, If you actually digest it.
“Take a qualude or something.”
I am not the least bit agitated, or experiencing Insomnia, probably no benefit for me.
As an artist, I think it is tastefully done and kind of cute.
Still, I don’t think I’d display it with my other Christmas cards.
Kinko’s is wack-and someone needs to come up with an alternate solution. they are open 24 hours in some areas and really have good solutions for those of us who are starting our own businesses-waiting on funds to get computers-phones-etc. The pic is cute-the family is fun-Kinko’s is out dated. I went into Kinko’s with my poodle in arm at 2:00 in the morning as I was working to get fliers printed to rent one of my properties. The employee-who was damn near asleep behind the wheel refused to serve me saying that he was allergic to the dog (poodles dont shed-and he should kill himself because people have dog hairs on them all of the time)-that there was food in the store ( wrapped candy) and by golly he just wasnt going to print the pics. I called to complain…they have no signs-it was 2am and no one was in the store-they have NO Food-they did not care and I wont go there to save my life
I don’t see anything anyone other than a nudity-obsessed prude could object to.
I doubt if even my niece’s fundamentalist missionary inlaws would complain. . .
Great photo. Tastefull and humorous. Keep doing it as long as you can, you all will not be so good looking in a few years, as you naturally age gravity takes its toll.
Who knew that Cringely was such a kinster?
And am I the only one that finds it amusing that Kinko’s won’t print anything kinky?
Great card and glad to hear you got it printed and out in time. I can’t help but notice that your cookie tray is strangely lacking cookies.
Very odd and creepy card! Everyone is different and this surely qualifies as different. I feel bad for the child in the foreground, he doesn’t look happy.
Nice kitchen.
Honestly, I find it a little disturbing to see small children naked and displayed for the world to see. Not that you have any lewd intentions, but it’s not a far step from here to child porn. You coerced the boys to do this, they didn’t do it because they wanted to. If you and your wife want to make a naughty card to hand out to friends, that’s up to you but using your sons in this way is really not right. On the other hand, there is nothing showing so they had no reason not to print. But they are a private business and are not required to have you as a client. I think you need to read your own post, though. If your sons didn’t want to do it, why did you make them? and why are adults wanting to see near-nude pictures of the kids? or is it that they really want to see near-naked pics of you and your wife?
I could not have said it better myself. The bottom line is that the kids did not choose to participate. They were coerced. This, in and of itself, is getting dangerously close to abusive behavior.
However, now that these parents have succeeded in spreading this image all over the internet, they have stepped up to a whole new level of poor judgment. Congratulations on your new career as soft-core child pornographers, Mr. and Mrs. Cringely. I’m sure that every pedophile that views this charming family photo finds it delightful. But don’t be surprised when the local Children and Family Services worker knocks on your door. He or she will probably be accompanied by police officers who have a warrant for your arrest. Hoped you baked enough cookies for everyone.
A photo of a naked person showing nothing, and doing nothing sexual is not porn. Your mind is filthy. I recommend bleach.
I love the photo. The only cringe-worthy part for me is the idea of baking naked. I would just worry about burns, but I can’t even cook without socks on because of my splatter-phobia!
Nice card!
[…] His 2009 card is a bit more “out there.” Take a look (bottom of page). It seems he has trouble getting FedEx-Kinkos to print it. […]
Its totally inappropriate. Because there are clearly no cookies on those on those cookie sheets. Had you actually been backing cookies, the bawdy card would have been almost Rockwellian, and would have been printed no problem. Shame on you all!!
(I like cookies)
Oops, “baking cookies”. “Backing” looks like what one of your sons is doing to the floor.
i found the card to be cute, and i know my family and i would have gotten a kick out of it if we had received a similar one. Though i am slightly curious about how it began by accident.
Very brave to assert your naturist beliefs, which, by the way, I totally agree with, in your technology column. As is obvious from the comments, you were never going to get an easy ride.
Fairly obviously, there is nothing fundamentally evil about the sight of bare bodies. I have read that the original impetus to cover up was not related to a sexual or religious belief per se, but to the establishment of larger hierarchies. It’s always been about control. And I know from a little skinny dipping out in the fresh air that a little naturism can bring a great sense of freedom, as though you are no longer hiding.
I do hope that fellow commenters can bring themselves to understand that any negative feelings they have are entirely the fault of their own upbringing and environment. Blaming Bob for making them feel uncomfortable is no more logical than blaming women for being raped because they weren’t covered from head to toe and being chaperoned.
I hope a social worker sees this picture and knocks on your door. The boys do not want to participate. It’s weird, and … well, cringe-worthy. By posting it online, you are no better than the Balloon Kid’s parents. This looks to me like you are looking for attention. I am sure your traffic surges in December.
You should really think about what psychological consequences these pictures have on your sons. One day a friend from their school will see it, and start teasing them about it. This tradition should not have started (or at least should have excluded the boys), and it definitely should end before one of your sons figures out how to add some poison to your coffee… like I said, you never know what this coersion does to their minds.
I don’t find it obscene. Weird, but not obscene. Looks like the kids are at a good age to make this the last nude Christmas card, though….
Not obscene. Don’t make kids do what they don’t want to do. Puberty is tough enough without parents bribing you to do things that might not feel comfortable doing for whatever PERSONAl reason. Dad is a bit of a control freak I imagine. Let’s take a look at their Xmas card in 20 years…dad will be floppy and mom will be droppy and the kids will be long gone.
To be honest I fully agree with Your view.
I think it’s a BEAUTIFUL card!
But in this day and age it isn’t much of a problem, Just print it yourselves!
Has any even THOUGHT about the possibilty that this might be a nudist family?…and that they only send it out to their nudist friends?? I think, perhaps, that may be it.
There is nothing wrong about this picture….the fact that this is even a big discussion with over 600 posts is emblematic of the warped, victorian attitudes towards the body that America and Canada have, In Europe, this pic wouldn’t even be given a second thought.
There is nothing dirty about the body…this is not some sleezy porn-fest…as a matter of fact, those that partake in porn are probably the self-same prudes who believe the human body is dirty.
This is just a pic of a family with different attitudes about family nudity, is all.
Just figurin’…
[…] We are fans of the Annual Cringely Family Christmas Cards! https://www.cringely.com/2009/12/fedex-kinkos-wont-print-our-christmas-card/ var a2a_config = a2a_config || {}; a2a_config.linkname="How The GUNvernment Internet Industrial […]
You guys are fucked up. You think you’re not, but you’re doing things wrong. One day you’re going to have a bad nervous breakdown and realize how foolish you’ve been and hopefully you can rise out of the consequences and your children are not hurt. That’s if you can’t live with all the lies you tell yourself. Most likely you’re good at living in fantasy land. You do this for a number of superficial reasons, or to promote some idealistic agenda that is built on fantasy, but it’s not good to teach children things that aren’t true. You deprive them of brain cycles that would be otherwise used to understand real things rather than untangle yarn balls of lies.
Being OK with public nudity doesn’t serve society for some very real rational reasons that have to do with how your brain works accesses and stores memories. This is ancient wisdom you can count on. Once you realize things like this and maybe truthfully educate yourselves you’ll always be a bunch of sheep. Yes sheep, you think you’re showing your individualism, and you think that your “friends” look at your cards with some kind of respect for you, but you’re wrong. Wake up, grow up. You have a family, be real and honest with it. There’s no shame in understanding life’s quirks and just being a regular joe the best people are joes too.
I wonder if they go to Midnight Mass in their outfits. Yes, nudity is really the heart of Christmas. I think the picture as used as a Christmas card makes the baby Jesus cry.
I think it’s a little weird sending pics of your whole family, kids included, to others as a XMAS card, but I’m all about that sideshot of the wife’s left nuzzler. Looks like a nice one.
you can do the whole thing online and they ship the cards to you. They printed my christmas card that way, the image was of a rat in a have a heart trap
this is soooo weird
Informative Blog! see Mine at Habbo Retros Habbo Retros With Pets
Great job on the blog, it looks outstanding. I am going to save it and will make sure to visit often
cheap VPS
In my honest opnion that even though it was plain to see a evaluated article I have decided that there were still points to be improved upon. I would like to hear your thoughts..and that of your other readers and whether or not they also think the same. Cheers
I really enjoyed reading your blog, and it looks great. If you get a chance you should visit my site as well. I hope you have a great day!
Thanks for taking the time to write that, I found it very educational. If you get a chance you should visit my site as well. I hope you have a great day!
First off, you’re a sick fuck who should be arrested for making children look at your wrinkly old sack.
Secondly, you’re lying. Fedex Kinko’s does not allow visible tattooes or piercings on any of its employees. If you’ve lied about that bit, I have to wonder what else you are lying about.
Perv.
Um, I have a nuddie pic of my 14 month old but after a certain point with all the posing and such Isn’t this called child pornography?
Wanted to say that it’s nice to know that someone else also mentioned this as had trouble finding the same info elsewhere. This was the first place that told me the answer. Thanks…
hey guys… thx, but why the hell does this underwear seem to be red??
This is a nice blog i must say, usually i don¡¯t post comments on others¡¯ blogs but would like to say that this post really forced me to do so!
The mobile equivelent to this site is http://iphone.pornhub4u.com, They too have thousands of free, full length videos that stream perfectly to your iphone or palm pre
You mentioned about sharing ideas which is what bloggers should pay attention to and this is good so there will be online newspaper which we don’t have to spend money on buying it anymore just go online.
Hello Some good valid content on here. Nice work.
Just found this site in Google this week. Been following it for a few days now. Great blog. Bookmarked! 🙂 I will be back!
It sounds like you’re creating problems yourself by trying to solve this issue instead of looking at why their is a problem in the first place.
lol, i think its pretty funny
Interesting…
Just wanted to give you a shout from the valley of the sun, great information. Much appreciated.
What’s the difference between a car and a golf ball? Tiger can drive a ball 400 yards.
Great blog about Topics, Very useful knowledge about caring your blog. I have been searching for such stuff for so long and now finally my search has finished here..!! thanks for sharing the link to your twitter page. I’ll be sure to follow.
There is obviously a lot to know about this. I think you made some good points. Keep working ,great job!
iv been looking for this info everywhere ty
Superb article, I discovered your website through Google. I bookmarked your site for furture infomation, many thanks.
When I stumble upon a good post I do some things:1.Forward it to the relevant contacts.2.save it in some of the common bookmarking sites.3.Be sure to visit the same post where I first read the article.After reading this article I’m really concidering going ahead and doing all 3!
I am having a lot of trouble trying to load this page. I visited it many times before and never got anything like this, but now when I try to load the site it just idles 4 for some time and then just stops. I have tried both with www & without. Do you know what could be the reason? Please ask your host support… I hope to be able to come back soon.
hey Admin , i w/ ur article. i am coming again to your blog my friend. Do u have new post or good news ? Admin of https://www.gmurak.com/
Interesting…
I’m a student studying photography and I think this is absolutely brilliant!! I’ve been trying to come up with a project idea and I think something like this would be perfect. Do you have your other photos posted anywhere?
By the way… I completely agree with you 100%. The photo is tastefully done and it should be considered art. I think our society is too uptight and thinks that anything involving the body is pornography, when that is the farthest thing from the truth. I believe people need to open their minds more, stop being so uptight, and appreciate works of art.
please contact me I have a few sites I’d like it loaded on.
I truly enjoy your web site but make sure you check the spelling on many of your content pieces. Some of them are filled with spelling errors and I think it’s very bothersome to tell the truth but I probably will come back again.
lawyers in Baltimore
kavonaarocc Watch Football zeoboraOkin Watch NFL Live Online Free makkoryhazman kangWenbking kavonbaonccon
I am moved beyond tears at the sheer brilliancy of this blog. Thank you.
Isn’t the very first commenter speaking the truth or what??
Nice blog. I’ve been wanting to start my own sometime but never got around to it.
aidwzlwkfwotfdmhsr, fendi sunglasses, VxHAZAqqGrntJMgCVxeu. tmjfcahjdlhlfarnfz, the sak, kXsKDPJwMfhBTyCcLosP.
Very informative and trustworthy blog. Please keep updating with great posts like this one. I have booked marked your site and am about to email it to a few friends of mine that I know would enjoy reading…
Greetings, I enjoy your blog. This is a nice site and I wanted to post a note to let you know, good job! Thanks
!! This information is really good and I will say will always be helpful if we try it risk free… So if you can back it up !! That will really help us all. And this might bring some good repute to you. The diet of human beings prior to the arrival of agriculture, technology and civilization is known as the Paleolithic Diet .. This Stone Age diet, in short, consisted of mainly lean red meat and vegetables. In this type of diet animal meat is consumed in large quantities and 45 to 65% of the energy needed by the body is derived from it. Over and over again, life expectancy studies related to diet, including by the World Health Organization (WHO), have concluded that Americans and Europeans would do better to eat more like third world peoples as the options provided by their additional wealth have most often lead to poor nutritional choices. This is the same basis for the USDA based their popular food pyramid in 1993 .. Researchers at Harvard have only suggested perhaps tweaking the food pyramid by replacing some dairy products and read meat with more fruits, vegetables, and fish while also emphasizing the importance of improving the ratio of “good” to “bad” cholesterol!! Plus, exercise not only makes weight loss much easier, but also lowers blood glucose levels, decreases blood pressure, improved circulation, and increases one’s metabolism. Good regular sleep patterns are also just as important. Diets based on USDA recommendations include DASH, American Diabetic Assoc, Weight Watchers, and Jenny Craig.. When children understand how important “real food” is and where the natural ingredients of our food come from, they will increase the general population’s appreciation for preserving our natural environment and limiting toxins and polluting processes in our world. We may even trend back to the time when people stepped outside their homes to interact with family and neighbors in home and community gardens and block-party barbeques… Does anybody even remember how nice those days were?
Weird photo, but interesting article nonetheless!
amazing stuff thanx
great thanks man…
christmas time is coming again and i would be sending christmas cards to many of my friends.-~
thanks great =)
good thanks o/
Maybe you should edit the blog subject title I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology to something more catching for your webpage you make. I enjoyed the blog post withal.
yeah I agree & I couldn’t have said it better. keep it up
Zune and iPod: Most people compare the Zune to the Touch, but after seeing how slim and surprisingly small and light it is, I consider it to be a rather unique hybrid that combines qualities of both the Touch and the Nano. It’s very colorful and lovely OLED screen is slightly smaller than the touch screen, but the player itself feels quite a bit smaller and lighter. It weighs about 2/3 as much, and is noticeably smaller in width and height, while being just a hair thicker.
Hope you have better luck this year. As I said before, I am a photographer, a naturist, and that is one of the most tastefully done, well executed photos I have seen.
This is my first time I have visited this site. I found a lot of interesting information in your blog. From the tons of comments on your posts, I guess I am not the only one! keep up the impressive work.
Please, can you PM me and tell me few more thinks about this, I am really fan of your blog…gets solved properly asap.
good (article|information) thanks
My husband just had a problem at the FedEx Kinko’s in Tallahassee. Where he asked for a refund on some copies that the manager did wrong. Called and spoke to that manager and he told my husband to come down and he would take care of it. By the time my husband got there the manager was gone (15 mins later) and the lady behind the counter refused to refund the money. My husband asked for her to call the manager on the phone and she told him no. Then she told him that she was calling the police. The police show up and threaten to take my husband to jail and began calling him vulgar names. My husband called the police dept to file a complaint and they called him names too. Its madness… We have boycotted FedEx Kinko’s everywhere!
hi webmaster, your them know how best to get the rank from google. one is to increase the link popularity, how to improve link popularity? one of the ways of the many ways is to multiply the link partners with other sites.
Terrific function! This is the type of information that ought to be shared close to the web. Shame on the search engines for not positioning this post higher!
I think this picture is beyond cute.
I would be proud to send this if it was my family.
Unwound also love to read how that accident that started this tradition unfolded. LOL
I hope you continue this tradition for genorations to come.
Your Brother in Christ,
Naked_Christian
Nice information presented in the post, thanks for sharing such a great post.
Hi there, I’m searching via the web searching for some info and arrived through your weblog. I’m impressed by the details that you have with this site. It shows how well you comprehend this topic. Book marked this site, should come back again for future. You, my buddy, ROCK!!!
I would like to regards for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same most effective work from you in the future as well. I loved your style I will subscribe for your feed please keep posting!
This piece is very heartwarming. It assisted in the things I believe about most in my daily life. Inspiration has always been the best thing that keeps us going.
Another Title…
I saw this really great post today….
I love your website design, did you create this yourself or pay someone else to design it?
Hey there, I searched for this weblog on Bing and just wanted to say thanks for the superb learn. I would have to agree with it, thank you again!
awesome post. I’m definitely looking forward to reading more articles
I like keeping up with these updates! It absolutely brings something special the morning.
I like this site and saw it on Yahoo search. I think your thoughts on I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology are right on. Thanks for writing about this and looking forward to reading more on your site.
When I click your RSS feed it puts up a page of unformatted html, is the issue on my end?
I like this site and saw it on Yahoo search. I think your thoughts on I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology are right on.
Every time I stumble upon a really great article I do one of three thing:1.Forward it to my close contacts.2.Bookmark it in some of the favorite bookmarking websites.3.Be sure to come back to the same site where I came accross the article.After reading this article I’m seriously concidering doing all 3!
Much respect for thissite Keep writing.
keep up this good work. Excellent post
Wonderful, good saying and very vivid expression, i truly like your opinion about that.I gotta say very good and quite persuasive.
I’ve found rather a lot in your website and I stay up for additional updates and can be back. Maybe it is a bit offf topic but in any case, I’ve been browsing about your blog and it seems actually neat. impassioned about your writing. I am creating a brand new blog and hard-pressed to make it appear great, and provide excellent articles.
just reminds me something,btw some more photos would be great!thanks
LoL. That would be a awesome to send to all your family. You would definately get a reaction next time at the family gathering. But, I believe they probably denied you, because of the children. Very clever though.
Hello!I am reading your posts for countless days now. I’ve to say that it will be very hassle-free to read . It truly is previously extra in my favorite record and i will make sure that i will comply with it when potential . Thanks for that inputs . Furthermore, i honestly like your theme and the way in which you may have organised your website . Is it practical to tell me the identify of one’s theme ? Cheers
I concur together with your views right here and I honestly enjoy your blog! i’ve bookmarked it to make confident that I can appear back again and understand additional from the future.
I totally agree with you about the summer photos showing soooo much more!!! Great job and well done. Not to mention fun and hiliarious. I’m just shocked the kids went for it!!! That makes it even better!!
Are those granite countertops ?
Weird… I just found your website by searching for ‘financial spreadbetting’ on Google. But I can’t see any posts on that on here?
Cool article it is without doubt. I have been awaiting for this information.
By far the most pertinent and current information I found on this subject. Positively glad that I navigated to your web page by mistake. I’ll be subscribing to your webiste so that I can acquire the up to the minute news. Appreciate all the information here.
nice great Great Post. Really it will help lot of people. Thanks for the post.
i hate snow, can i do something to get rid of yellow snow?
[…] so there is nothing with which to embarrass myself here. More sobering still, after last year’s holiday firestorm over our naked card Mrs. Cringely won’t let me post this year’s card. We have become so dull.We […]
I see a belt buckle. Sorry, you aren’t naked. Photo disallowed.
What do I think? I think there’s a reason I live near S.F. and no where near S.C…
(The people are nice enough — until you get this sort of thing. For Pete’s sake!)
This is a very good post and I see it very interesting. I hope fro some of post like this one in the future.
boys you can only go so long until they begin to realize they are, well, naked. That leads in our family not so much to protestations of modesty as to demands for bribes. The price of this
than you man super blog
süpersiniz.than you113
sorgulama, hesaplama841
This design is spectacular! You obviously know how to keep a reader entertained. Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved to start my own blog (well, almost…HaHa!) Excellent job. I really loved what you had to say, and more than that, how you presented it. Too cool!
Throughout the grand pattern of things you’ll get an A+ with regard to effort. Exactly where you misplaced me ended up being in the details. As it is said, the devil is in the details… And it could not be much more accurate at this point. Having said that, let me tell you precisely what did work. Your authoring is extremely engaging and that is most likely the reason why I am taking an effort in order to comment. I do not make it a regular habit of doing that. Second, despite the fact that I can see a leaps in logic you make, I am not really sure of exactly how you seem to connect the points which inturn make the actual final result. For right now I shall yield to your position however hope in the foreseeable future you actually link the facts much better.
Crazy pic!! I liked the way it is photographed.
Nice snap indeed.
I am a mother of 2 a girl 3 and a boy 7 and I would never do this it is child porn in my opinion. NO reason this couldn’t have been done with clothes on. IT IS UNREAL THAT THE PARENTS HERE ARE NOT DRESSED IN FROUNT OF THERE CHILDREN! Wow what message does this send to our children. NO MODISTY!!!!
Wow, naturists must be very sick individuals to you… Clothes are meant to protect humans from the weather and keep them warm. They were never meant to hide the “private” parts, it’s just a side effect. Also, I’m not a naturist, I’m just saying 😉
The message it sends, is that non-sexual nudity is normal and those kids will grow up with out all the hang ups your kids will have. Thats the message.
-Danee
Jenna, I love how you just admitted publicly that you are a pervert and don’t even know it.
When I look at their photos I see adorable innocence. When you look at it, all you can see is sex. If I can look at naked children and see innocence, and you can’t look at naked children without seeing sex, tell me, seriously, who’s the pervert here?
I couldn’t have said this any better.
Department of Defense to accept the newspaper interview, McCain said,
Exactly as I wanted somethingI´ve tried Piwik and it worked good!Great Work — thanks.
tr
I’m sorry, but the fact that these kids have to be BRIBED is what’s wrong with it, and makes me very uncomfortable. So, teaching your children that it’s okay when adults photograph you naked, as long as they give you candy…wow, great lesson!
@Alexis: Read it carefully: “hat leads in our family not so much to protestations of modesty as to demands for bribes.” These kids don’t have to be bribed, they are demanding a bribe. There’s a difference.
For the record, I think this is hilarious. Not the usual humdrum stuff you expect at Christmas. But how did this start “by accident”? There’s a story I’d like to hear.
You might want to use a spam filter, btw.
Alex, see my response to Jenna above.
It is colorful and funny Christmas card, but a nice family.
The picture never shows the private partss… and this picture never shows something worst, I can say that this picture makes me laugh and is funny 🙂
but we do it. With three little boys you can only go so long until they begin to realize they are?
economy this year may grow by 3%, higher than forecast in October was revised sharply to 2 Especially high-President, has been fear Thousands of Shiite protesters
from
Good stuff you have here, I was going to mention this to a good friend of mine
The U. S. Supreme Court allowed years ago that obscenity standards could vary based on “local values,” but such values have to be uniformly applied. If a Fedex Kinkos in Charleston will print a picture of a girl in a bikini or a boy with his shirt off, then they should print my Christmas cards.
I couldn’t have really asked for a much better blog. You are always there to give excellent suggestions, going straight away to the point for easy understanding of your target audience. You’re undoubtedly a terrific specialist in this field. Many thanks for always being there for folks like me.
You guys are sick and twisted. Why would you ever photography your kids naked. Regardless of wether or not anything is shown.
Have you never seen baby pictures?? Are you saying a picture of a baby in a bathtub or a kid running around in it’s underwear is obscene? The problem with the world today is everyone has to twist and distort everything into perversion. Humans were all born naked, it’s natural. And these pictures are tasteful and funny.
Then his thinking way, “well, rinse meat or dumplings? Otherwise we today can try the new open between Korean food Wander in the stylus’s emotion,
The picture is just great. They all look happy and excited and the most important is you cannot see anything inappropriate. Very nice!
Thank you for everything
THANK YOU THAN YOU
Nice snap indeed.
I agree with those that have said this is sick. To be taking pictures of your children naked and them seeing you naked is disgusting and you’re setting them up for some serious therapy bills in the future. Way to go. Then to post it on the internet for EVERYONE to see? Think of all the Sex Registrants and people who look at child pornography who will be seeing these pictures! This is a HORRIBLE position for you to put your children in. You should be ashamed. Teach yourself and your children some self respect, showing yourself nude in public is not acceptable. I’m shocked that you haven’t been reported to CPS for this picture!
CP? Do you see CP here, you are a sick man, look for a therapy and body / self acceptance.
Marc By Marc JacobsMarc By Marc JacobsMarc By Marc JacobsMarc By Marc Jacobs
Marc By Marc Jacobs
Marc By Marc JacobsMarc By Marc Jacobs
car gps system is popular purchases, and little wonder –their features of Car GPS systems are growing while their prices drop. Nearly 860,000 units were sold over the 12 months to June 2011, an increase of 2% over the previous year – yet retailer revenue from those sales declined by 15%. So Australians are buying more units at car gps system cheaper prices. And, while GPS-capable smartphones such as the iPhone are making some inroads in the GPS market, gps system seems most drivers still prefer the full functionality of a dedicated car GPS unit. Features such as lane guidance, car gps system announcement of school zones and text to speech are standard in most models car gps system.https://www.gps-systems-australia.com/
We known that beats dr dre pro sale Online become more and more popular. We are a professional retailer of selling all kinds of beats dr dre studio headphones.
reputation management…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology[…]…
beats dr dre…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology[…]…
Just don’t burn yourself on the oven!
portable gps units…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology[…]…
Havent seen any new family Christmas cards on here since this one in 2009… have y’all continued on in the tradition?
I see nothing wrong with a personal christmas card, its not being used for advertising, and I think its rather sweet that the kids would still participate. To those of you who think this is encouraging young children to accept sweets to get naked for adults, GET A LIFE, they are the kids’ parents! Perhaps these parents are right in teaching the children that a naked body is to be admired, and that their body image is more important to them than a pack of ill humoured people.
( and i wouldnt suggest frying bacon in that outfit, Mrs Cringely…. ouch!)
I agree with Jack Black. I think this card is in bad taste. It’s one thing for your kids to see you naked, I think that this is natural. But for you to take pictures of this and send them out to your family and friends is disgusting! Not to mention putting it on the internet which is now there forever! Do you really want perverts looking at pictures of your kids?
This is innapropriate, expecially the age ranges of the children. And that the parents are involved. There is a line; and this is coming from a woman who took showers with her mother until she was 15 years old. It is just innapropriate in general and expecially for a Christmas card. I am sure the little boys and girls at school enjoyed it and Grandma-this is sarcastic.
I don’t like it. I would not be happy if I received one – even if I were a good friend. I would be embarrassed for the children. Do one with just the parents and hey, they are consenting adults. But with the whole family. Sure, his ‘junk’ is concealed, but he is still obviously naked. I’m all for being open with our bodies, but then taking photos of your openness and mailing it out – seems a bit perverted to me.
[…] Johnny Lee reminded me of something I’d mentally blocked: tech writer Robert Cringely’s nude family Christmas card and his battle with FedEx Kinko’s to get it printed. […]
Paul Okami, Ph.D. “Childhood Exposure to Parental Nudity, Parent–Child Co-Sleeping and ‘Primal Scenes:’ A Review of Clinical Opinion and Empirical Evidence.” Journal of Sex Research 32.1 (February 1995): pgs. 51-64 concluded that children who grow up nude have fewer problem than children of textilist parents.
The Kinko’s clerks are just trying to protect their jobs. You might think it’s clever, but if the next person in the door thinks it’s porn, then they’re fired – at Xmastime, no less. Until we can be more tolerant of humor, clerks have got to protect themselves. Lighten up a little folks.
Kudos!
It’s a strange culture we live in where people are so over-conservative and nude-phobic.
I’m guessing they have never been outside of the US (i.e. the rest of the world). I routinely go to big spa resorts in Germany, naked with my also naked inlaws. I think one of the main reasons people here are so hung up on ‘being naked is bad’, aside from religion, is that people objectify the body here so much and can only thus see the nude as an object of sexual desire.
Are the figures painted in renaissance paintings (young or middle age or old) sexual? Is “Venus” sexual? Is the ceiling of the Sistine chapel sexual?
Often, what makes things (be they photographs, paintings, etc) “sexual” is not that they are inherently so, but that the people looking at them look at them with sexual thoughts. The problem then is in the person, not in the subject.
Are we offended by a nude newborn baby? No, it’s natural… the way we are born. At what age, then, does this innocent child become “sexual” when naked? The answer is, when the people looking at him/her look at him/her sexually. Again, the problem is in the viewer, not in the subject.
And as to religion – I myself am a church leader in a christian church – there is no place in the bible that says “nudity is bad”. What it talks about is not ‘lusting after people’ with sexual thoughts.
If you cannot control your thoughts, then maybe you shouldn’t look at family photos like this. And you should probably get a broader world view outside of the US as well.
The nude human form is not in and of itself sexual – it’s perverse thinking that makes it so.
As an aside – for the last 10 years my wife and I have sent out our well received christmas cards, featuring our nude selves from behind (in different areas of the world). The ideas has been to give our friends something other than the other 98% of atypical christmas cards that they get, and to inspire people to not take life so seriously.
We have an 8 month old now, and while it does take more sensitivity in how children are photographed/presented when nude, it’s a challenge we look forward to.
“…At what age, then, does this innocent child become “sexual” when naked? The answer is, when the people looking at him/her look at him/her sexually. Again, the problem is in the viewer, not in the subject.”
That sums it up right there. To all those people who think this is child porn – YOU have the problem. YOU are the one who equates nudity with sexuality. This really is an American hang up, but not one my family, or my children, have.
Kudos!
Tonight I want to talk to you on a subject of deep concern to all adidas predator x and to many people in all parts of the world, the war in Vietnam. https://www.soccers-cleats.com/ PZZ
headset for the ps3…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology[…]…
A beautiful Xmas picture!
(Only a person with sick imagination would see pornography here (i.e. depiction of a sexual act).
I see warmth and joy and a true Christmas spirit here! Lucky of you guys! Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year to you guys!
Paris, France
I agree with you Prometeus, only a twisted mind could see wrong where is none. How can someone see the human body as something wrong or bad per se?
It saddens me to see so many people finding offense in something as basic as nudity. Disgust at the human form is a learned perspective. Children must be taught to be ashamed of their bodies, and to find offense at viewing other people nude. As other people have said, if you view such images as having sexual content, you should look at yourself, and ask why you see this.
How can I get on your Christmas card list? I think these photos are adorable.
Children are natural nudists. They are taught body shame. Nudism is about de-stressing, relaxing, and returning to innocence. It’s about body acceptance, not judging yourself and others except for who you are, what you say, and how you act rather than what you look like, own or wear.
South Carolina community standards allowed my nudist club to have a booth when Mayfest was held each year through which over 150,000 people visited.
One year, Kinkos did enlarge the front page of a naturist/nudist park guide that had the backs of people on it for us to paste on a carton for our Halloween costumes.
There are a number of studies, some by Marilyn Story – a well-known sociologist- done that agree that children growing up in a nudist environment have fewer body image issues as well as a lower teen pregnancy rate. The divorce rate among nudist families is lower in comparison with the general population.
arilyn Story, in the Journal of Psychology, Vol. 118, first Half,
Sept. 1984 “Comparisons of Body Self-Concept between Social Nudists & Nonnudists”
Marilyn Story, in Jour. of Social Psychology, 1979, 108, 49-56 “Factors
Associated w/More Positive Body Self-Concepts in Preschool children”
Robin Lewis & Louis Janda, in The Relationship Between Adult Sexual
Adjustment & Childhood Experiences Regarding Exposure to Nudity,
Sleeping in the Parental Bed, &Parental Attitudes Toward Sexuality, Arch. of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 17, No.4, 1988
Marilyn Story in “A Comparison of Social Nudists & Non-nudists on
Experience w/Various Sexual Outlets” Journ. of Sex Research, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp
197-211, May 1987
Mary S. Calderone, M.D., in “The Family Book About Sexuality,” states:
” … with very young children accustomed from the beginning to nudity in
themselves and their parents, a great deal is taken for granted, and it
doesn’t seem to be much of an issue to them. What nudity does is make it
easy for children to become absolutely certain about just how men and
women are made. This knowledge is of great importance in assuring the child of his or her own correct gender. The differences in body states and sizes – and in body organs – can then be taken for granted and will provide an accurate image of how they themselves, or the opposite sex, will look when grown up. Children whose parents feel at ease in such natural events as stepping out of the shower, toweling, and walking back to their room to dress are fortunate.”
A suggested book is GROWING UP WITHOUT SHAME by Dennis Craig Smith,
ISBN 1-55599-001-0
Funny, wholesome, tasteful picture, no problem at all with it! Great job, guys. Good for your family. Your kids look happy enough, and they’ll definitely thank their parents for the kind of upbringing they’ve got.
A note regarding bribing: have you ever tried to take a quality photograph of three mischievous boys fully dressed? If you wanted them to pose quietly, you’d have to bribe them, clothes or not. So what’s the difference? They were not “bribed” to strip. They were “bribed” to pose. Costume is irrelevant.
To Ethan’s question “Why would you ever photography your kids naked.” – Let me ask you this, why parents photograph their kids at all? My understanding is that parents take pictures of their kids because they love them and want to save happy memories to cherish them for years to come. What difference does it make how the kids are dressed? Do you love your child better if he or she wears more clothes? Do you love your child when he’s fully clothed, tolerate him with his shirt off, and hate him when he’s naked? If you do, then you would really not understand why parents may photograph their kids naked as well as clothed.
Jenna said, “this it is child porn in my opinion”. Thankfully the US Supreme Court has a different opinion about what child porn is, so I’ll stick to that opinion rather than Jenna’s.
Maria said, “sure, his ‘junk’ is concealed, but he is still obviously naked.” That’s straight from Freud: Maria must suffer from severe phobia of male body parts if she uses words like “junk” to describe them. That’s typical of childhood rape victims, or victims of a certain kind of upbringing. The children shown in the picture will NOT have the same deep psychological problems that Maria demonstrates here. They are taught to love their bodies, not hate them or be ashamed of them.
Maria, you may not believe it but if I were to look at your picture it would be obvious to me that you were naked under the clothes that conceal your body. Isn’t everyone naked under their clothes? What difference does it make what exactly conceals the body parts you hate so much, pants or kitchen utensils? If you can’t see it, you can’t see it. Don’t let your imagination run wild, or else you might realize that people are naked – though they conceal their bodies to various degrees – everywhere you go.
The framing is perfect and the practical light in the oven is a really good touch. Great photography.
Hi,
Geart picture.
Whats in the oven?
Lucas
printers rags…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » FedEx Kinkos Won’t Print Our Christmas Card – Cringely on technology[…]…
The way I see it, most of it is ok, but the real problem is the kid on the floor. The fact that he is using his own body to cover his genitalia, and that you can see the crease of his pelvis leading just up to his cock and the rounding of his bare buttox, causes for too much sexual suggestion. Mind you, I am not thinking sexual thoughts, but rather, this is a common pose intended for sexual purposes.
Quick test run. Lay you wife out on the floor nude with one hand covering her vagina and the other laid out over her nipples, and then take the other with her fully clad in an apron with nothing on underneath and honestly ask yourself in which one does she look more naked and more intentionally posed for sexual suggestion.
I think an honest mistake, but that the crucial line between this being humorous and pornographic is thin and by breaking the pattern of using foreign inanimate objects to cover the genitalia crosses the line, especially when juxtaposed with everyone else in the photo who has NOT crossed the line.
Do you see my point?
You definitely understand what you are referring to. Man, this weblog is truly fantastic! I cannot wait to browse more of what you have got to talk about
The post is written in very a good manner and it entails many useful
information for me. I am happy to find your distinguished way of
writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and
implement the concept.
Love the info here.
honestly, probably the idea came from someone who likes childrens dicks
you are not as attractive as you may think and you know what, you just like to watch their dicks, go ahead and do some blow job what a cute small lolly pops with heads on top and hands and legs attached to. Mother , you are a pedophile,
just honestly not to be rude. there are real women and just women. You have something there but your face is just a rubbish.
Kinkos rejected the photo? Kinkos? The Kinkos so well known for allowing people to photocopy their bare hinies? Well they can try, but Kinkos kinky rep will never go away.
https://www.twopeasinabucket.com/mb.asp?cmd=display&forum_id=15&thread_id=3207297
I think the photo is a bit too much, especially for a Christmas card. Does everyone need to see that side boob of your wife? And your boys are too old to be doing this, they look very uncomfortable.
Why not do the traditional photo with clothes on?
[…] The US family who couldn’t get their card printed in 2009: […]
I think you shouldn’t expose your children like this, especially on the internet!
They can be bullied over this, and pedophiles love this picture as well.
My “response” is oh, my dear God Almighty…and you have the nerve, the NERVE to defend your actions. Are you defending the fact that there are, that there have been and there will be FOREVER freaks and peds and every filthy thing else that trolls the internet looking at your naked children? It seems to me that the man doth protest too much, way too much for it to be just about the cards now. Does displaying “your” family in this way “do it” for you, dad?
Interesting, too, how the littlest and most “vulnerable” children are placed in the foreground as if on display.
It’s in the eye of the beholder, be they innocent or predatory. The trouble is is that every time the children are viewed in a sexual way they have been victimized. And that is something you can’t control once it’s done.
I cannot for the life of me see what the controversy is all about. At no point is anyone genitals showing. Here in Ontario it is legal for a woman to be topless so your wife could drop the top and the photo still be processed and printed. I can see that some may have an issue with the children’s nudity and the fact that you and your wife are nude with them, but There is no overt nudity here. I applaud your sense of humor.
The problem here is the Norh American obsession that nudity = sex. Give up sending this out to any who aren’t naturalists and the problem will be solved. You can print it yourself and save the cash
I just saw this today, and decided I had to comment.
I see two things going on here, you took a wonderful family photo, which is different than most, and is actually inventive and unique. I agree that it is your first amendment right to have this photo taken and printed. That is your choice.
Also I see a business who does not want to print this photo. This business has the option of turning down any customer they chose for darn near any reason. The persons working or business may also be afraid of lawsuits or criminal charges for child porn, since that has been a hot topic recently.That is their choice.
The logical solution is to find a printer who does not have a problem accepting your business, and make that business known to others who are nudists so that they too may also support the nudist friendly business.
I find it too bad that people equate nudity, (including normal erections, or hard nipples, etc…) with sex. It shows that people have the wrong mindset and are probably uncomfortable with their own body, or thought patterns.
Keep on being fun, and doing what you choose, don’t let others get you down.
Fullar
I really like your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you design this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you? Plz answer back as I’m looking to create my own blog and would like to find out where u got this from. appreciate itRoofing Repair of Irving, 1117 Brandon Ct., Irving, TX 75060-4948 – (972) 200-4770
This is not about your Christmas card, but I could see no other way to send you a message about your DVD Triumph of the Nerds.
1. Windows did not really work until Windows 5.
2. OS/2 worked fine on non-IBM hardware.
3. Microsoft forced dealers like me to buy a copy of Windows for every copy of OS/2 we sold or Unix we installed even if the customer did not want it. Gates had no business ethics. You greatly whitewashed him and made him out to be a cute little Justin Bieber (or Peter Noone for the older readers).
This is about Steve Jobs and your DVD Triumph of the Nerds.
I was at the Lisa launch. Apple got everyone plastered because it simply was not ready. It could not do anything without crashing.
I was the first Canadian Mac Developer. The Mac was released long before it was ready. The manuals for anything of importance just said “to come”. Very little of the OS worked as advertised. You had to talk to other developers to figure out work-arounds. We had to do most of the development on the Lisa then download into the Mac.
So this notion of Jobs as perfectionist is nonsense.
Cute cards.
Just a thought, not all cute things shoucl be made available to every person on earth (ie. internet). I might send something like that to Aunt marge or my BF. what about Earl who sits schlumped in a chair in front of a computer wainking himself?
I know some techies that can get aerial photos of you at your address with the information that you posted here.
Just came across your Christmas image and website. You should move to Australia, mate. Get away from all the uptight prudes who overreact to everything. Although having said that, you’ve probably only got about a decade before Australia becomes the same. Maybe you should try Europe – they’re a hell of a lot more relaxed about stuff like this, and probably have less perverts per capita as well…
Cheers.
I just saw this via someone posting it on their FB page and felt it necessary to comment.
It goes like this: “I” was raised in a nudist colony in Northern California. It was a housing development that was like any other but had a guard gate at one end and a ten foot wall around it. There were no fences between all 81 of our homes and no locks for the front doors either. all 81 families would go from one place to another without any problems. We had around 250 children there of varied ages. My parents never had any problems with us or any of the other kids in the colony. We had MANY family photos taken year round even during the holidays even none of us there did Christmas. We celebrated something even older called YULE but still had photos that we sent out as “Yule Cards” without any problems. Of course we did not have “fed-x/Kinko’s do the pics. I would not have them do the pics even if i were old enough to have the pics developed or printed there. My parents as well as other parents in the colony had a PHOTO SHOP do them. Ok, granted that was in the era when you had to have your film developed or do it yourself, but damn.
The problem AS I SEE IT is that politics and modern religion have perverted nudism into something that allot of people BELIEVE is wrong, sick, perverted, and of course a sin. Of course, this concept is wrong, but when the masses believe it and make laws to make it so then there is a problem.
As i said, I was born naked AS WERE WE ALL [except some here in N. Utah who claim proudly that they were born with their clothes on, if u can believe that], I have been a nudist all my life and see nothing wrong with it. I even have a shirt that I wear outside that says “Nudism is NOT about sex, so DEAL WITH IT” to get people to at least talk about nudism or at lest to THINK about it. The surprising part is the comments about my shirt are 98% positive with most comments being “Well, DUH!”
As for you Robert Cringely: I would be finding someplace well in advance of the holiday season that WILL do the pics without any undo problem and quit doing any business with them at all. I believe by having this dialog that you have boycotted Fedx/Kinko’s. Keep on pressuring the head of the company to make a uniform company wide policy on what is considered obscene and what is not.
Paul Lortz: PROUD LIFELONG NUDIST
I think this is hilarious! I personally work for kinkos in IL and I see nothing wrong with your card. The people that must of worked there are either uncomfortable or squares. They need to lighten up a little bit it seems.
No shirt, no shoes, no service – Merry Christmas.
Well Mr. Cringely,
I just wanted to let you know that your “Problematic Photo Printing Plight” has made the radio! I found out about your Kinko’s problem while listening to a radio station that broadcasts in Northern Alabama. Truthfully I think that if it is cute, but covered, it’s ok.
There is more skin exposed on the beaches of Miami than in your Christmas cards.
Not really only does these flooring mats safeguard your carpet from mud and outside dirt, however you won’t have to be concerned about meals stains, drink spills or filth from equipment. Ones automobile does seem an entire good deal far better with the flooring mats, even though safeguarding that it at the particular identical time period. Their variety of defense which will work best concerning any truck that was becoming applied for large responsibility perform would be the thick rubber ground mats. These kinds of rubber mats resist stains truly smartly, and are not challenging in order to obvious; they may be rinsed with water hose as prolonged like you obvious them while spills include new. Following hosing them down and letting them air dry or drying them with a towel you’re all set to set them once again in your truck.
Generally I don’t read post on blogs, though I wish to state that this write-up very pressured me to check out at then do so! Any composing design has been surprised me. Thanks, very nice post.