Quote:
Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski
Wow, the IQ on this forum must have dropped over the weekend. The uniforms worn by those girls(obviously made up to look like byrds), are really not that far removed from catholic school girl uniforms(which may have been the inspiration for the Byrd look). That's just a theory though, my entire knowledge of fashion pretty much revolves around Dickies and either black t-shirt with pocket or white t-shirt with pocket. Or when I really want to mix things up- Brown Cargo pants with white pocket t-shirt! Footgear is always jumpboots. But I digress.
My salient point is simply that if you find the cover of Resistance erotic, you are a pedophile.
|
Apparently you have'nt had time to go over the "Breaking News: N/A uses kiddie porn now" thread. If you did, you'd know the
real question being debated here is not whether it's considered
erotic, but whether or not it's
improper and perhaps somewhat
indecent for such a pic of pre-teen girls to "grace" the cover of a magazine without any eyebrows being raised. I agree - if you find that pic erotic, you're a pervert, plain and simple. Personally, I feel whoever gave the go-ahead for the use of this photo could've used a bit more tact and discrimination in his choice.