Snowflakes Racing Gear

Dakotabigone

Getting irate over a shop display. These parents need sex education and need to know that starfishng is not acceptable.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/it-borders-on-soft-porn-parents-call-for-removal-of-provocative-lingerie-display-in-dublin-shopping-centre-37789353.html

lbc2019

Durr Durr Durr Durr!

Petition to ban the word snowflakes except in actual snow

orourkeda1977

Maybe these "disgusted" yummy mummies are the ones who should be investing on them auld sexy knickers.

They need a good ride the most

JupiterKid

It’s the promotion of sexy lingerie. Nothing pornographic about it. These irate “concerned parents” need to get a grip. There are adverts like this in magazines every day.

It’s like we are going backwards 40 years...

whisky_galore

It's like a new brand of Puritanism in the UK and Irl.

French, German or Italian ads and shop displays would blow their little minds altogether.

Birneybau

whisky_galore wrote: »

It's like a new brand of Puritanism in the UK and Irl.

French, German or Italian ads and shop displays would blow their little minds altogether.

Too much ankle on display for my liking these days *clutches pearls, faints*

pleas advice

Whats this got to do with racing? (or gear?)

hatrickpatrick

There'll always be people who are opposed to the ongoing de-sacredisation of sex, but they're massively outnumbered. I don't think there's much worry that the shops will cave to this.

murpho999

Mr Durr should look at his parenting skills if he teaches his children that a woman dressed in underwear is disgusting.

Even if she were naked it would not be disgusting.

Why are parents encouraging their children to find the human body disgusting?

If they were saying it was sexist or demeaning I would see they may have a point but disgusting or almost pornographic?

This immature prudishness should not win out here and House of Fraser should stand their ground. Nothing wrong with the ad.

Dakotabigone

Mr Durr isn’t seeing much more than miss palm.

Im surprised the Ann Summers in COrk hasn't got a complaint ..

One eyed Jack

Priscilla Strong Savanna wrote: »

Im surprised the Ann Summers in COrk hasn't got a complaint ..

I’m genuinely surprised the man’s complaint in this particular case was even entertained! It was definitely a slow news day that this made the papers

Gimme A Pound

"Maybe pervs like it" - ah here. So if the man who said that finds an attractive woman in lingerie sexy, he is also therefore a perv?

"They wouldn't have it on the television" - eh, yes "they" would.

"It's almost like what you'd see on page three" - that's a big "almost" (or two).

Women's lib? That woman chose to model lingerie and gets paid well for it.

The poor ten-year-old boy probably hid his face because it was too much excitement. Being 10, and naturally starting to notice attractive women.

Fr_Dougal

Irish Guitarist

The British brand are hosting a pop-up shop in the department store ahead of Valentine’s Day.

It made me pop up anyway.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

bluewolf wrote: »

Petition to ban the word snowflakes except in actual snow

Petition denied. They're snowflakes, Ted!

orourkeda1977

bluewolf wrote: »

Petition to ban the word snowflakes except in actual snow

I agree to a degree. However, we should replace the word snowflake with a rather virulent expletive.

Muckka

orourkeda1977 wrote: »

I agree to a degree. However, we should replace the word snowflake with a rather virulent expletive.

Yes like a shower of drips instead....

BeerWolf

Those adults probably pronounce it as "ling-er-ee". The prudes...!

Muckka

bluewolf wrote: »

Petition to ban the word snowflakes except in actual snow

Maybe ban the snowflakes, starting with the usual flake's who go running to the mods when they get offended.

I'm telling you one thing, your work would be cut in half.

There's a usually pattern here of the eternally offended posters.

tabby aspreme

pleas advice wrote: »

Whats this got to do with racing? (or gear?)

The OP probably meant, riding gear

freshpopcorn

People are becoming very prude when it comes to sex lately I've noticed. They can be very liberal but when it comes to a man/woman modeling or engaging in a legal sexual activity they can be horrified.

eviltimeban

Hello boys.

Dakotabigone

People haven’t time to be riding, working day and night to pay mortgages, babysitters, crèches and eating out.

Beta Ray Bill

whisky_galore wrote: »

It's like a new brand of Puritanism in the UK and Irl.

French, German or Italian ads and shop displays would blow their little minds altogether.

On advertisements in Italy you're allowed to show up to half a nipple on a tit!!!!!!!

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Yeah what are they on about? Heard this on the radio this morning, when I clicked the article and saw the image my reaction was to assume the ad in question must be further down the article but nope, that completely unremarkable ad is the one causing the furore.

I think it's important to equip kids to notice and question the constant sexualized and objectifying images of women in advertising but a) it's an ad for lingerie, not like gratuitous stuff we've all seen used to market cars, crisps, perfume b) both of those kids' reactions are fcuking weird, though with the context of their dad's comments you can see the source.

Also it's actually reasonably rare to have a thread where not one single word of the title has anything to do with the content, so let's all take a moment to appreciate OP.

Doc07

Dakotabigone wrote: »

People haven’t time to be riding, working day and night to pay mortgages, babysitters, crèches and eating out.

Thanks for providing my lunchtime laugh today.
That would be a great slogan for a novelty t-shirt.
It’s like culchie-tabloid hybrid summary of a David McWilliams article.

SoundsRight

It is quite racy, but in a healthy way. It's a slender, beautiful young lady doing what young ladies do best. I'm grateful they haven't gone down the Boots direction and used older, heavier models. She is actually wearing more clothes than the likes of Rihanna, Beyonce, Cardi B etc.

Gimme A Pound

Muckka wrote: »

Maybe ban the snowflakes, starting with the usual flake's who go running to the mods when they get offended.

I'm telling you one thing, your work would be cut in half.

There's a usually pattern here of the eternally offended posters.

Yeah but there are "snowflakes" from all angles. Often people complaining about snowflakes become snowflakes themselves they get so worked up.

Plus it's a phrase that, like a lot of phrases, gets used stupidly now - to the point of "anyone who just disagrees with me is a snowflake."

LETHAL LADY

My only issue is they've nothing similar on display anywhere for the ladies.

Muckka

Alexzander Crashing Zipper wrote: »

Yeah but there are "snowflakes" from all angles. Often people complaining about snowflakes become snowflakes themselves they get so worked up.

Plus it's a phrase that, like a lot of phrases, gets used stupidly now - to the point of "anyone who just disagrees with me is a snowflake."

I know what you mean, but I suppose it's easy to sieve out the real snowflakes.

It's the people who are offended by silly things which the average person has a "**** it" attitude about.

I don't really care who disagrees with me, I can take it on the chin and accept some people don't like me or my opinions.

Never once have I been triggered to complain anybody here on board's or look at their post's and feel outraged.

There was a wan here who tried her best to get me infracted or even banned, and I got a few private messages saying leave her off, she's notorious for getting triggered and rising people, then she'd get offended by someone deflecting it back at her.
Some old Gaelic name she had.

She's what I'd consider a snowflake..

animaal

Jamie Old-fashioned Aftershave wrote: »

Also it's actually reasonably rare to have a thread where not one single word of the title has anything to do with the content, so let's all take a moment to appreciate OP.

I think it must be V1 of an automatic title generator.

I'm looking forward to reading OP's next thread, "Trump Gelatinous Aardvark". Presumably about the Nurses' strike.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

grahambo wrote: »

On advertisements in Italy you're allowed to show up to half a nipple on a tit!!!!!!!

How is that policed? Three-quarters and you get fined?

valoren

Seeing a lot of "it's like" in that article equating a LINGERIE advert for a LINGERIE shop to something it is not.

One says "it like Page 3".
One says "it's like Pornography".

It's neither of those things.

It is to repeat, a LINGERIE advert for a LINGERIE shop.
It would be a mistake for the center to prohibit these advertisements at the behest of these idiots.

If you go to a shopping center with a lingerie shop then you are quite likely to see advertisements for lingerie.
Now that they know there are such adverts perhaps they'd like to **** off to another shopping center which doesn't have such stores.

ohnonotgmail

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

How is that policed? Three-quarters and you get fined?

More importantly, are the people who police it looking for new recruits?

DaeryssaOne

I have no idea what this thread has to do with either racing gear or starfish? It's not what I expected from the thread title anyway!

whisky_galore

grahambo wrote: »

On advertisements in Italy you're allowed to show up to half a nipple on a tit!!!!!!!

If small children see a whole nipple, they can go blind. FACT.

Outlaw Pete

Last week I went into House of Fraser and asked had they any Fraser and they looked at me like I had two heads.

Turns out they don't even stock the stuff. They should be closed for that alone.

Muckka

DaeryssaOne wrote: »

I have no idea what this thread has to do with either racing gear or starfish? It's not what I expected from the thread title anyway!

A lot of it stem's from the chocky starfish

Or the ostrich eye

SEPT 23 1989

Durr doth protest too much, methinks

ArrBee

grahambo wrote: »

On advertisements in Italy you're allowed to show up to half a nipple on a tit!!!!!!!

Is that half a nip per tit or in total?
And if it's half per, then can it be combined to one full nip between 2 tits?

I need answers!

sligojoek

The top half or the bottom half?

kenmc

Now they're talking about protesting if it's not removed ffs. Sounds like the perfect opportunity to head along and show the kids what people from the olden days look like.

Potential-Monke

kenmc wrote: »

Now they're talking about protesting if it's not removed ffs. Sounds like the perfect opportunity to head along and show the kids what people from the olden days look like.

Where? Please let me know it's on Facebook. I'll actually reply to this crap myself. Sweet baby Jesus is it still 1974 in Catholic Ireland or what? Christ, you can't even make out a nip or mound, even her bellybutton is covered up with (what appears to be a completely pointless addition of) a corset. She's more clothed than most lingerie models. You'd see more at the beach.

And soft porn... Hah! He probably never even saw a naked woman before the one he impregnated.

kenmc

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Where? Please let me know it's on Facebook. I'll actually reply to this crap myself. Sweet baby Jesus is it still 1974 in Catholic Ireland or what? Christ, you can't even make out a nip or mound, even her bellybutton is covered up with (what appears to be a completely pointless addition of) a corset. She's more clothed than most lingerie models. You'd see more at the beach.

And soft porn...

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/parents-to-protest-if-provocative-lingerie-display-isnt-removed-37793630.html

Half of me wondering if this is an advertising stunt, drawing publicity to something no-one knew was there.

Hah! He probably never even saw a naked woman before the one he impregnated.

And there's no proof he's seen one yet either

jaykay74

People think this is about whether you agree with one side or the other. Its more to do with a media organisation generating clicks to get ad revenue.

Motivator

Dakotabigone wrote: »

Getting irate over a shop display. These parents need sex education and need to know that starfishng is not acceptable.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/it-borders-on-soft-porn-parents-call-for-removal-of-provocative-lingerie-display-in-dublin-shopping-centre-37789353.html

Obviously his 10 year old son is a puff. What normal 10 year old boy covers his eyes when he sees an enlarged image of a sexy woman in a bra and nickers? The bender.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

There'll always be people who are opposed to the ongoing de-sacredisation of sex, but they're massively outnumbered. I don't think there's much worry that the shops will cave to this.

EXACTLY! There always have been and always will be Mary Whitehouse types in society. Next.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Motivator wrote: »

Obviously his 10 year old son is a puff. What normal 10 year old boy covers his eyes when he sees an enlarged image of a sexy woman in a bra and nickers? The bender.

Someone's meant some new slang and can't wait to show it off, I see!

weldoninhio

Motivator wrote: »

Obviously his 10 year old son is a puff. What normal 10 year old boy covers his eyes when he sees an enlarged image of a sexy woman in a bra and nickers? The bender.

Hahahahaha. Post of the day!!