by GuessTheAltAccount » Sat May 29, 2021 6:55 pm
Bombadil wrote:My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.
by Galloism » Sat May 29, 2021 6:59 pm
by GuessTheAltAccount » Sat May 29, 2021 7:03 pm
Galloism wrote:I'm really offended at the quality of the editing. Short staffed is no excuse - those edits are absolutely atroicous.
Oh, also, I don't think the photos were particularly racy - at least the ones they showed in the report. Busybody moralists on the loose again.
Bombadil wrote:My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.
by Galloism » Sat May 29, 2021 7:08 pm
GuessTheAltAccount wrote:Galloism wrote:I'm really offended at the quality of the editing. Short staffed is no excuse - those edits are absolutely atroicous.
Oh, also, I don't think the photos were particularly racy - at least the ones they showed in the report. Busybody moralists on the loose again.
It will always be subjective. Public nudity advocates would mock our laws against public nudity as much as we mock the middle east's stricter standards on modesty than our own.
But it still makes sense for a school full of horny teenagers to have stricter standards on modesty than the streets as a whole. Freedom of speech isn't absolute on school grounds any more than freedom to film a cop extends to military police handling confidential documents on an army base. I've never heard of standards as strict as that where I grew up, but where I grew up wasn't as warm as Florida, so maybe the risk of frostbite scared most girls out of showing as much skin in the first place.
by GuessTheAltAccount » Sat May 29, 2021 7:23 pm
Galloism wrote:GuessTheAltAccount wrote:It will always be subjective. Public nudity advocates would mock our laws against public nudity as much as we mock the middle east's stricter standards on modesty than our own.
But it still makes sense for a school full of horny teenagers to have stricter standards on modesty than the streets as a whole. Freedom of speech isn't absolute on school grounds any more than freedom to film a cop extends to military police handling confidential documents on an army base. I've never heard of standards as strict as that where I grew up, but where I grew up wasn't as warm as Florida, so maybe the risk of frostbite scared most girls out of showing as much skin in the first place.
While aesthetics are always to a degree subjective, there's no sane person on earth who could look at those edits and think they aren't staffed by morons. The quality is absolutely horrible, and although that's a subjective judgement, I think it's a judgement almost everyone can agree with.
Oh, you meant the morality busybody part. My bad.
Honestly, there was nothing particularly distasteful about the shots. As they pointed out, it was more distracting what they did than if they had left it alone.
Bombadil wrote:My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.
by Katganistan » Sat May 29, 2021 8:52 pm
by Forsher » Sat May 29, 2021 9:04 pm
by GuessTheAltAccount » Sat May 29, 2021 11:35 pm
Katganistan wrote:Honestly, the kids should get their yearbooks refunded. Those were horrid edits. What purpose is there in airbrushing someone's chest so they look flatchested? That's not them anymore.
Bombadil wrote:My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.
by The Free Joy State » Sun May 30, 2021 6:26 am
Katganistan wrote:Honestly, the kids should get their yearbooks refunded. Those were horrid edits. What purpose is there in airbrushing someone's chest so they look flatchested? That's not them anymore.
by Ifreann » Sun May 30, 2021 10:09 am
The Free Joy State wrote:Katganistan wrote:Honestly, the kids should get their yearbooks refunded. Those were horrid edits. What purpose is there in airbrushing someone's chest so they look flatchested? That's not them anymore.
They really should get their money back. It looks like someone with very poor tech skills decided to have a bash with MS Paint.
The quality is utterly dreadful, and the edits themselves ridiculous: unlike the originals, which no-one would have given more than the polite glance you give others' photos, everyone will stare at the ludicrously obvious edits and quite easily imagine some obscene tattoo is being hidden beneath.
by Dakini » Sun May 30, 2021 10:51 am
by Ifreann » Sun May 30, 2021 11:02 am
Dakini wrote:The person who made the edits made the girls look bad because the edits were done badly and the fact that they were edited at all is a judgement of them, of course the girls are upset.
The general policing of women's and girl's bodies is also fucking disgusting and should stop.
by Dakini » Sun May 30, 2021 11:10 am
Ifreann wrote:Dakini wrote:The person who made the edits made the girls look bad because the edits were done badly and the fact that they were edited at all is a judgement of them, of course the girls are upset.
The general policing of women's and girl's bodies is also fucking disgusting and should stop.
No, but see, an inch and a half of cleavage in a yearbook picture will cause terrible problems because something something horny teenagers something something.
by The Black Forrest » Sun May 30, 2021 11:37 am
Galloism wrote:I'm really offended at the quality of the editing. Short staffed is no excuse - those edits are absolutely atroicous.
Oh, also, I don't think the photos were particularly racy - at least the ones they showed in the report. Busybody moralists on the loose again.
by Galloism » Sun May 30, 2021 11:38 am
The Black Forrest wrote:Galloism wrote:I'm really offended at the quality of the editing. Short staffed is no excuse - those edits are absolutely atroicous.
Oh, also, I don't think the photos were particularly racy - at least the ones they showed in the report. Busybody moralists on the loose again.
You didn’t get the memo? Teenage girls aren’t supposed to have breasts.
by The Black Forrest » Sun May 30, 2021 11:53 am
by Galloism » Sun May 30, 2021 11:56 am
The Black Forrest wrote:Galloism wrote:Tbh I'm more offended at the quality of the photoshop.
Photoshop nothing. Looks like MS fucking Paint.
Oh I know. Things with curves *coughs* take a little more effort. They just slapped images on top.
It’s the double standard. The boys in speedos are not immodest. Girls with cleavage…..
by The Blaatschapen » Sun May 30, 2021 12:23 pm
Ifreann wrote:Dakini wrote:The person who made the edits made the girls look bad because the edits were done badly and the fact that they were edited at all is a judgement of them, of course the girls are upset.
The general policing of women's and girl's bodies is also fucking disgusting and should stop.
No, but see, an inch and a half of cleavage in a yearbook picture will cause terrible problems because something something horny teenagers something something.
by The Black Forrest » Sun May 30, 2021 12:24 pm
Galloism wrote:The Black Forrest wrote:
Oh I know. Things with curves *coughs* take a little more effort. They just slapped images on top.
It’s the double standard. The boys in speedos are not immodest. Girls with cleavage…..
Oh yes, that's stupid too.
But as a technician at heart, the really bad photoshop just sticks out to me real real bad. I can't hardly focus on the real issue because the photoshop is just no good very bad!
by GuessTheAltAccount » Mon May 31, 2021 6:22 am
The Free Joy State wrote:Katganistan wrote:Honestly, the kids should get their yearbooks refunded. Those were horrid edits. What purpose is there in airbrushing someone's chest so they look flatchested? That's not them anymore.
They really should get their money back. It looks like someone with very poor tech skills decided to have a bash with MS Paint.
The quality is utterly dreadful, and the edits themselves ridiculous: unlike the originals, which no-one would have given more than the polite glance you give others' photos, everyone will stare at the ludicrously obvious edits and quite easily imagine some obscene tattoo is being hidden beneath.
Bombadil wrote:My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.
by Borderlands of Rojava » Mon May 31, 2021 6:44 am
by GuessTheAltAccount » Mon May 31, 2021 6:46 am
Borderlands of Rojava wrote:People who focus this much on the breasts of teenage girls are beyond fucking sus. I'd want a full examination of their computer hard drives and last 5000 searches on Google if they're paying that much attention to the body of a kid.
I remember when I was in middle school our school decided to finally enforce its ban on girls wearing tights while also wearing a tank top (because the shirt doesn't go down far enough and cover those places). When they announced that they were reinforcing it and asked teachers to let students know, my US History teacher literally just said "We're just gonna go by the honors system here. I'm not gonna inspect each and every one of you, just don't wear tights," the thing normal people say because it's pretty weird if you're looking at a 13 year old's ass, no matter how much you claim it's "just to enforce the dress code."
Bombadil wrote:My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.
by Borderlands of Rojava » Mon May 31, 2021 6:46 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Almighty Bureaucracy, Benuty, BlazingAngel, Eahland, El Lazaro, Infected Mushroom, Kostane, Main, Olmanar, San Lumen, Shrillland, Southland, Soviet Haaregrad, Statesburg, The Lone Alliance, The Vooperian Union, Washington-Columbia
Advertisement