LOL!....so, what y'all are saying, is, chipped black nail polish does not constitute a "look"?
In my defense, my nails are very short and neat, and my cuticles are in good shape. And we haven't reached terminal chipping velocity yet. It's still only a minor eyesore. But, since the majority of you responded with a horrified "no, fix it now!", I went and looked for the nail polish remover, and I CANNOT find it. I think that says something.
Janet and QM: I with you in that part of the reason I rarely paint my fingernails is that it starts to look ragged so quickly.
Marley -- do I reinforce with polish every couple of days? HAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!....uh, that would be no.
lynn, I'm not offended at all. You appreciate nice hands. I simply don't care about hands -- mine or anyone else's. But once in a while I'll get the urge to look like a member of a 70s punk band, and I'll paint them black or navy blue. It's not an attempt to make my hands look nice -- that's not the point. It's not like I have lovely long nails and paint them a delicate shade of pink. Black, even when first applied, does not make one's hands look prettier!
Aida, I could have written what you said! I don't like chips on toes either, but fingernails get a pass. I think, if my overall look were neat and tidy, chipped nails would be a no-go -- but I usually go for a bit arty or rock n' roll or what have you. Chipped nails somehow don't seem so out of place in that case.
Is chipped nail polish up there with dragged-through-a-bush-backwards hair? Because sometimes I like that look. Does it make a difference that I actually expend energy making my (clean, healthy) hair look wildly unkempt, whereas the disgraceful nails are just a byproduct of my natural laziness?
