Helen the Rock'n'roll Librarian (pettythief) wrote in stupid_free,
Helen the Rock'n'roll Librarian

Why didn't anyone warn me? ;____;

In vintagehair, someone posts a relatively inoffensive vintage-style photoshoot (NSFW if women in vintage underwear offends). The side-view of the longline bra does create a rather deformed-looking breast, though, but overall, good attempt. Being a forum about vintage hair, I'm sure most sensible people would agree that you'll see other vintage things pop up occasionally. Maybe a hotrod? Yes, sure. Maybe a nice frock? Definitely: bring on the nice frocks. Maybe real fur? Well... occasionally, seeing as it was just as popular in the olden days when granny was young, as pin curls and finger waves.

The stupid comes when with_redribbons (I spose the name should give it away) gets butthurt and declares "You should put a warming on the lj-cut that you are modeling dead animals. I literally lost my appetite for dinner after seeing these." Tagging a cut to warn (or warm, as cuteanarchygirl would have it) people of nudity, gore, etc. seems fairly obvious - but since when have people tagged things to say "Warning: pictures contain photo of vintage stole." What next? "Warning: pics contain photos of leather shoes"? And why no whining for the poor ol' ostrich who lost his feathers in the 3rd pic down? Or the highly offensive marabou slippers? WARN ME ABOUT FEATHERY SLIPPERS, YOU BASTIDS!

hannahsarah is first in with a winning comment garnished with a lolcat usericon. boneorchard (OMG, your username offends me!) wins at the internet for posting pics of vintage Hollywood stars wearing dead animals (no one has yet complained they weren't warned). No sign of feminists moaning about girdles yet, which is a shame.

And there's some Iraq-wank too. Bonus "no shit, Sherlock" from severalmoose: Dead animals aren't the same thing as nipples.

(I should add: I'm not into fur myself and don't think it should still be farmed/taken from the wild, but in my opinion, using vintage fur is different from using new stuff (but I wouldn't use it myself). The stupid isn't "being offended by seeing the fur" but expecting people to tag it with a warning. Like the time someone posted a pic of a fat person in a comm somewhere and someone commented "Couldn't you have put a warning on it? I just purged my dinner. Pics of fat people are my trigger!" Diddums).

Edit: Awww, look, conceptualpete joined the party.

sorry - Mr Holy-moly-trolly did join in but the mod deleted his posts. :(

Also: someone on my friendslist has said that they agree with with_redribbons and that my post in my own journal lolling over it should've had a warning on it. Time for a friends cull, y/y? Oh no, I said cull, people will be offended...

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →