People of WalMart

[SzczerbiakManiac]

People of WalMart (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/): A Photo Set

[3894]

Mickey Rourke and the ramen is etched on my brain.

[Snowflake]

OMG, yes, when I lived in Warrenton, the happy smiley face place was the only game in town and it was frightening. Now I wish I'd brought my camera. Plenty of mullets in Amissville and beyond.

[Stan4dSteph]

I was just talking about this the other day! Now there's a place for me to share. The velcro shoes and easy-waist pants just imply that you've given up on life...

[katiesue]

When I go to WalMart - and I try to avoid it as much as possible - I always wonder, where are these people the rest of the time? I live in the area, I shop different stores, markets. I never see these kinds of people anywhere else. Where do they live, where are they when not shopping at WalMart?

[Gemini Cricket]

This almost makes me want to go there just to see who's wearing what.
Almost.
:D

[Snowflake]

When I go to WalMart - and I try to avoid it as much as possible - I always wonder, where are these people the rest of the time? I live in the area, I shop different stores, markets. I never see these kinds of people anywhere else. Where do they live, where are they when not shopping at WalMart?

This is really something to ponder.

[Betty]

What's up with the guy in the shirt that's just around his neck. It has no sides. He didn't even bother to tie it on the bottom corners. Does that actually pass for a shirt in the no shoes/shirt no service thing?

[Cadaverous Pallor]

You can buy almost anything there...and they never go to art shows or nice restaurants....so you probably have no reason to see them elsewhere.

As it is, can I wash my eyes and brain out with soap? Ow.

[SacTown Chronic]

At first I thought the guy was all business, but when he turned around, I realized he came to PARTY!

[€uroMeinke]

Can I see this without creating a blog?

[Morrigoon]

What's up with the guy in the shirt that's just around his neck. It has no sides. He didn't even bother to tie it on the bottom corners. Does that actually pass for a shirt in the no shoes/shirt no service thing?

Clearly, you've never watched wrestling.

[Strangler Lewis]

Sadly, Shawn Michaels did come to mind. I wonder who's copied whom.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

I had one of those universe-provided moments last night where I typed a very long response, and the computer crashed just as I was about to post it.

This morning, I'll just do the short version. Some of the pictures, and some of the responses here, rub me the wrong way.

We are all very lucky people to have the combined elements of education, talent, support and luck. We can afford to pay for all of the necessary things with money left over for art exhibits and nice restaurants and wardrobes.

That is simply not the case for everyone. Ever been to a city that has completely fallen apart? I grew up an hour out of Flint, which collapsed when GM closed all its factories. There are no grocery stores left in the city of Detroit. Things are really bad for people right now.

And while the ridiculous pictures are funny, the ones that just feature photo subjects in poverty just aren't funny to me.

Do you know why you don't see them in art galleries? Because they didn't win the genetic/luck lotto you did. Do you know why they're wearing cheaply-made easy-waist pants? Because they can't afford anything else.

[Scrooge McSam]

{{{{{LSPE}}}}}

[Alex]

I can't see the photos from work (I assume they're hosted on Flickr) so hadn't commented. But my gut reaction from the comments is along the lines of LSPE.

I'm not fond of the "take pictures of people and make fun of them on the internet" genre of Web site.

ETA: I hadn't scrolled all the way down to see that they're calling these people "Wal-Creatures." That's way too dismissive for my funny bone. Especially since I now see that there is one photo way at the bottom loading for me ("Who Wears Short Short") and other than the fact that they're not among the world's prettiest people I see nothing wrong with them.

[BarTopDancer]

Well said LSPE.

It's been 'funny' to make fun of 'trashy' for years (think about how long Kevin and Bean made fun of the "909"). A lot of times the trashy that is being made fun of is poverty.

The areas a lot of those pictures were taken in are very depressed areas. We're damn lucky that this recession and CA being broke hasn't effected us more than it has. Cause it could, and can.

[3894]

Ever been to a city that has completely fallen apart? I grew up an hour out of Flint, which collapsed when GM closed all its factories. There are no grocery stores left in the city of Detroit. Things are really bad for people right now.

And while the ridiculous pictures are funny, the ones that just feature photo subjects in poverty just aren't funny to me.

Do you know why you don't see them in art galleries? Because they didn't win the genetic/luck lotto you did. Do you know why they're wearing cheaply-made easy-waist pants? Because they can't afford anything else.

I agree 50%. As you all know, I live in rural Wisconsin. Most of the jobs here are minimum wage. For the better jobs, we had paper mills but only two of those are left now. There's also two big insurance companies but only the executives make good money and one of them has been quietly letting an average of 100 people go each month since November. Dairy farming is a good way to go bankrupt. There's a branch of the University of Wisconsin and several hospitals. Almost all of the good-paying jobs are held by outsiders. This is not a place where a young person has any future.

I see people just like in the photos every day. At the grocery store. At the gas station. They are the families of my children's friends and the girls in my Brownie troop a decade ago. They are the people my husband worked with before he retired.

You can get nice-looking clothes at WalMart, KMart, GoodWill, the consignment shops, and the rummage sales. If you need extra-nice clothing for a job interview, there's a charity here that will hook you up for nothing. There isn't much you can do to cover the general hard living - alcohol and substance abuse, long hours of physical labor, lack of medical and dental care. I wish everyone would try to look their best.

Most poor people keep themselves neat and clean. The people in those photos look like they've just given up.

As for the elastic waists and velcro shoes, check me out. My Eileen Fisher skirt has an elastic waist and my Ecco sandals have velcro. That's called getting older.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Most poor people keep themselves neat and clean. The people in those photos look like they've just given up.

I'm trying not to bring my personal background into the discussion, but I'm not succeeding.

Several of my relatives on my mother's side of the family are in extreme poverty. One of my uncles wore sweat pants to my wedding. Sweat pants that we had bought for him. I'm sure people could take pictures of him if he could afford Wal-Mart. But me, all I can see is a sixty-five-year struggle, an abusive father, a school system that didn't understand dyslexia, years and years in fields and factories, digging ditches. Thank god for Medicare, which replaced his two knees which were destroyed by all of that physical labor, so that he can go back to more physical labor so they can eat. There aren't any shelters in rural Michigan. There isn't enough charity when everyone in a city needs charity.

[3894]

Thank god for Medicare, which replaced his two knees which were destroyed by all of that physical labor, so that he can go back to more physical labor so they can eat.

Amen, LSPoorEeyorick.

There aren't any shelters in rural Michigan. There isn't enough charity when everyone in a city needs charity.

Here we have St. Vincent and Salvation Army. Each of them have limits on how long you can stay, though. It's rough in Michigan and I'd sure hate to rely on a garage sale in Flint having much useable.

The churches here will help out, as they can. If anyone here is ever in that kind of trouble and doesn't know where to turn, stop by a church. They'll get you a meal, find you a temporary place to sleep, get your kid some Huggies.

I feel guilty about talking about this stuff on this board. It's not swanky.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Agreed that most of these people are sad products of sad families, sad education, and sad circumstances. Sorry if I offended anyone.

When I look at those I mostly think "there but for the grace of God go I", which is why it's rather painful to look at. I'm probably more guilty than many of being embarrassed by my somewhat poor roots and somewhat uncouth upbringing. I can't take all the credit for the changes in my life but I know that it was only because I wanted to step up that I actually did. I have relatives who have never done well and I have to say that I think they could if they actually tried. (Just like LSPE I want to keep my personal life out of it but it ends up being integral to the conversation anyway.)

Overriding sentiment is this - we don't know these people and their circumstances so I should probably just shut up now.

[Alex]

See, for me it isn't just the making fun of them for being different that I find bothersome but rather the assumption that they must either be very unhappy the way they are and unable/unwilling to change or too stupid/inbred to be aware they should be unhappy that I find bothersome.

It doesn't matter at all why these people look the way they do. Yes, with more money they might buy nicer clothes but it very well might be a more expensive baseball cap with a more expensive timber wolf t-shirt to go with their work boots and old jeans. They might actually like scruffy mustaches and mullets. The core is still pointing at someone and laughing at them for not conforming to the way we think they should. I know extremely wealthy people who use their money to buy only the finest in sports jerseys as their daily sartorial selection. I'd never do that (and yes, I'm not a saint, I've made fun of it) but I don't make broad socioeconomic assumptions about people who do.

It grates on me similarly to when people assume saying "axe" instead of "ask" is a sign of ignorance.

And that's pretty rude (especially when they're put on display on the internet while those laughing at them get to be anonymous) regardless of the socioeconomic reasons they look different. Seems little different to me than if I were to start posting pictures of the Indians in my neighborhood and making snide comments about those wacky saris and all the jewelry the men wear.


(All of this said, again, with the caveat that I haven't actually seen any -- but one -- of the pictures posted to the WalMart web site. This is more a response to this thread and the genre of Web site in general.)

[JWBear]

Poverty does not always mean the person must dress poorly or have poor hygiene. My father grew up on a farm during the depression in conditions of poverty that would be inconceivable to those Walmart shoppers. His parents had 8 children, half of whom died in childhood. He never lived in a house with electricity or plumbing until he and my mother married. My grandparents continued to live without electricity and plumbing until 1950, when my father built them a new house "in town". Looking at old family pictures you see my father and his siblings in clean mended clothes. My Grandmother was always in nice crisp dresses; and I am quite sure she would be horrified to see any of her family going out in public dressed slovenly.

Likewise, I've seen people with tons of money who dress like some of the people in those pictures.

Poverty and the lack of care in your appearance are two separate things.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

See, for me it isn't just the making fun of them for being different that I find bothersome but rather the assumption that they must either be very unhappy the way they are and unable/unwilling to change or too stupid/inbred to be aware they should be unhappy that I find bothersome.

This is a fair point, Alex. I didn't mean to imply with my personal anecdote that my uncle's struggle is the case for all people, or that it's not OK to wear a John Deere cap unironically. In general, I agree with you - that genre of website makes my skin crawl.

[Andrew]

Apparently I must spread some Mojo around before giving it to JWBear again.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Poverty does not always mean the person must dress poorly or have poor hygiene. ...He never lived in a house with electricity or plumbing until he and my mother married.... Poverty and the lack of care in your appearance are two separate things.

Similarly, my mother grew up in a house without bathrooms, and she didn't have one until she left home. She got two dresses a year growing up, and her mother always kept them neat and clean.

But times are different now than they were in 1950. The mass-manufacturing of clothing and food has left many of us without the skills they had in the depression. Are you able to grow your own food? Are you able to sew your own clothing? Could you go completely off the grid? If you could, that's awesome, and I kind of envy you.

I'm not saying the dude with the completely ripped shirt falls in this category - yeah, obviously that's some sort of statement. There are some obviously ridiculous photos. But I'm not seeing a lot of poor hygiene in those pictures. I'm seeing some slovenly dress, but what's the problem here?

[SzczerbiakManiac]

I believe that either everything is okay to make fun of or nothing is. I also believe that it's possible to make fun of and/or tease someone and not do it maliciously. I love my family and I make fun of them every time we get together. We all laugh because they all know I'm not doing it to be mean--I do it because it's funny.

This world is chock full of crazy shït. Relax. Enjoy it. Laugh when you can. It's called making fun of, not making serious of, for a reason.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

I love humor, SM. I really do. I'm not trying to be a killjoy.

But I think my problem here is privilege. The comments in this thread seemed laden with socioeconomic privilege. I'm not going to try to apply the terms of racism to classism, but it seems to me that when someone who has lots of options makes fun of someone who doesn't, that's lame.

[3894]

But I think my problem here is privilege. The comments in this thread seemed laden with socioeconomic privilege. I'm not going to try to apply the terms of racism to classism, but it seems to me that when someone who has lots of options makes fun of someone who doesn't, that's lame.

The very best thing about this board is that you can say this without getting flamed.

[innerSpaceman]

Apparently, I (also) must spread some mojo around before I moj. JayDub again. But he made my point with a family story I don't happen to have (or, well, know about).



Alex has a good point, too. But humor is always an exception with me. I make fun of oddly-dressed or appearing people at Disneyland, for instance, but I don't extrapolate to assume anything about their lives. It may be lowbrow humor, but it's humor. I live by the Roger Rabbit philosophy. So sue me.

[BarTopDancer]

I feel guilty about talking about this stuff on this board. It's not swanky.

Don't. It's important that we think outside of our little ethnocentric bubble.

We truly are a very lucky group. Despite job loss, recession, cut hours, blah blah, bad economy we haven't had anyone lose their home, be threatened with homelessness or have to make significant changes to their lifestyle.

We need to remember that not everyone is as fortunate as us.

[Strangler Lewis]

I guess we need to nail down what exactly we're doing here.

1) I don't think the fun makers are making of poverty. To an extent, however, making fun of destiny. No one here would have trouble making fun of Paris Hilton, the Kardashian girls, the spoiled girls on Sweet 16, etc., even though it could be said just as easily about them as about the Wal-Mart folks that it would have been hard for them to have been otherwise.

2) Are our jaws dropping because behavior crosses some broadly defined line into grotesquerie and extremism? Yes. We do that all the time here with photos of one sort or another. As a practical matter, whether it's in our social relationships or our legal ones, there is only so much room for case specific understanding before bright lines get drawn, and we say, "I'm sorry, that's f*cked up."

[3894]

I wanted to show the photos to the hubbo but they've gone missing.

[katiesue]

I'll throw on a wrinkled pair of sweats and a old t-shirt to go to the store etc. And I fully expect other shoppers to have a what the hell thought bubble over their heads, like in cartoons, if they glance my way. And that doesn't bother me. I figure I do the same when I see some of them. Like ISM I don't go beyond that into thinking what their economic background is - I just think wow - that is some getup.

And my Dad was the king of getups. Hats with inappropriate slogans. Striped suspenders with opposite striped shirts. Generally a visable butt crack. Socks in random neon colors. He'd do it on purpose to embarass us.

[Stan4dSteph]

Sorry, I'll shut up now. I'll stick to making fun of celebrities who dress poorly.

[Alex]

Alex has a good point, too. But humor is always an exception with me. I make fun of oddly-dressed or appearing people at Disneyland, for instance, but I don't extrapolate to assume anything about their lives. It may be lowbrow humor, but it's humor. I live by the Roger Rabbit philosophy. So sue me.

I do too. Like I said, I'm no saint.

But, to me, there is a leap between elbowing your friend while walking down the street and saying "doesn't sheek look quite the skank?" or "isn't that the stupidest haircut you've ever seen" and much hilarity ensuing and creating a web site where you post the pictures for the world to ridicule based on your criteria.

A more concrete example. Back in high school a group of friends and I were hanging out in a park and this woman walked by. No bra and the saggiest boobs I've ever seen. I swear, she was kicking them when she walked. Much hilarity ensued throughout the rest of the day within the circle of us. Sure, on one level that was mean and I feel kind of bad about it, but not too bad. She may have been perfectly happy with her appearance, she may have been mentally deficient, she may have been too poor to afford a good bra, she may have just been mugged and her bra stolen. The reason by which she'd come to that state where irrelevant.

If we'd taken a picture of her and posted it on the internet and started a web site called "World's Saggiest Boobs" then I think a line would have been crossed. And sites where teh people being mocked are unknowing participants (you go to a Don Rickles performance and he makes fun of your toupee - funny. You're walking down the street and Don Rickles runs up and starts making fun of your toupee - not funny to me).

My version of what JWBear said (and I agree with him) is that "white trash is a state of mind not a household income." I've known white trash (and they're not necessarily white either) all up and down the economic scale. I carry some of it with me still and economically I'm probably in the top 5% for the country. Growing up the old lady next door was living only a single social security check and you'd think she was the Queen of England for how regal and proper and clean everything about her was.

[Not Afraid]

I'm sorry, but rich or poor, you have no excuse for dressing like some of the people in these photos. It has nothing to do with economic standards and everything to do with taste. But, I think the photos and the location where they are taken have an awfully lot to say about the fu<ked up consumerism in this society where MORE is the goal and MORE for CHEAP is the mantra.

I can't feel sorry for people - empathy for their situation, yes, but most are not "victims", they voluntarily went there.

[Strangler Lewis]

From NA's post, we have the obvious lesson that your appearance affects how people view you.

However, I wouldn't just clean these people up. I'd take the gold off the black kids in the inner city, and I'd put everyone at the gay parade and the Folsom Street Fair in dockers and polo shirts.

[Alex]

It has nothing to do with economic standards and everything to do with taste.

And having different taste is sufficient reason for having your picture anonymously posted to the internet for the general amusement of others? If you saw these people in real life would you go up to them and tell them how tasteless you find their existence? If not, why would you on the internet (slobby poor people do get online when they're not on the run from g-men after their moonshine).

It seems odd from this group of people to hear the idea that taste is an absolute. And by many standards the membership of this board is heavily involved in its own form of ****ed up consumerism and quest for more, more, more (the overflowing Disneyana).

[Strangler Lewis]

Different circumstances, to be sure, but I believe one of the founders of this board had his picture anonymously posted to the internet for the general amusement of others and was proud of it.

[JWBear]

Similarly, my mother grew up in a house without bathrooms, and she didn't have one until she left home. She got two dresses a year growing up, and her mother always kept them neat and clean.

But times are different now than they were in 1950. The mass-manufacturing of clothing and food has left many of us without the skills they had in the depression. Are you able to grow your own food? Are you able to sew your own clothing? Could you go completely off the grid? If you could, that's awesome, and I kind of envy you.

I'm not saying the dude with the completely ripped shirt falls in this category - yeah, obviously that's some sort of statement. There are some obviously ridiculous photos. But I'm not seeing a lot of poor hygiene in those pictures. I'm seeing some slovenly dress, but what's the problem here?

No, I can not make my own clothes from scratch... But I can (and do) repair the ones I have.

My whole point was to say that you can not assume someone is poor just because they dress badly - or that all poor people necessarily dress that way.

[3894]

From NA's post, we have the obvious lesson that your appearance affects how people view you.


See Goffman's classic in Sociology, The Presentation of the Self.

People dress to impress and/or express. All the world's a stage and we are both actor and audience, subject and object.

[Gemini Cricket]

A couple of things:

1. Isn't saying "aw, look at those poor people" as much of a judgment as saying "omg, look at what those people are wearing"?

2. Everything can be analyzed until all of the humor is sucked out of it. And if we try to find meaning, hidden depth in every single thing then the life can be sucked out of us too.

3. I think it's okay to laugh at someone else as long as that laugh doesn't turn into harsh, solidified, unmoved judgment and heartlessness.

4. I have learned that when my happy mood changes because of someone else's point of view that it has more to do with me and my insecurities than the other person.

5. Would I laugh at the People of Castro Street where different gay men and women were highlighted based upon stereotypes? Well, it would depend upon if it was funny or not. This is why South Park gets kudos from me time and time again, their shït is funny.

[Strangler Lewis]

South Park episodes, for all their apparent outrageousness, are typically briefs for moderation and common sense and against extremism and self-indulgence.

[Alex]

Is the site gone for anybody else?

[Snowflake]

Is the site gone for anybody else?

I just looked, yes, it's gone.

[Gemini Cricket]

South Park episodes, for all their apparent outrageousness, are typically briefs for moderation and common sense and against extremism and self-indulgence.
Yes. And they're funny, too. Also, there are episodes and aspects of their shows that don't mean anything at all and are put there to challenge people who are looking for hidden depth and meaning.

[wolfy999]

Can't find it either

[Strangler Lewis]

I'm going to guess that Wal-Mart trolls around for unauthorized uses of its name and found the site.

Either that, or all Wal-Mart shoppers and their images were raptured.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Hmm, I wonder if the Big W sent him a Cease & Desist...?

[innerSpaceman]

I have no desire to check and see, but an earlier poster implied it was, alas, gone for all the world.


Good. Because I agree with Alex, putting something like that on the internet for all to ridicule crosses a line. But it's a line that's no more absolute than "good taste."

Sure, i make snap judgments about bad taste, but I know in my own head it's merely my own (self-treasured) opinion, and that taste is in the eyes and mind of each beholder and beholdee.


In that vein, I got more of a laugh out of the man with the wild pattern shorts and matching shirt than any of the slovenly folks. There was nothing wrong with his appearance except the brash display of bad taste ... and an extra tickle for me because of my thankfully bygone (for the most part) penchant for wearing loud patterned clothes.


That laugh was also more pleasant for not being connected in any way with mockery of people in dire straights .... just people in dire need of a mother that don't dress them funny.

[Gemini Cricket]

The site seems to be gone but I was just invited by a non-LoT person to add "People of Walmart" as a friend on Facebook. I'm assuming this page will have all the pics... I denied the request. I don't know who the person who created the page is.
:)

[Not Afraid]

Different circumstances, to be sure, but I believe one of the founders of this board had his picture anonymously posted to the internet for the general amusement of others and was proud of it.

And others on this board were highly amused by the comments made of said photos. (Did you see your wife is included in a couple photos?) Where's the outrage? I want to see some outrage, damnit. He was a VICTIM of college and the manufacturers of spandex.

[Not Afraid]

And having different taste is sufficient reason for having your picture anonymously posted to the internet for the general amusement of others? If you saw these people in real life would you go up to them and tell them how tasteless you find their existence? If not, why would you on the internet (slobby poor people do get online when they're not on the run from g-men after their moonshine).

It seems odd from this group of people to hear the idea that taste is an absolute. And by many standards the membership of this board is heavily involved in its own form of ****ed up consumerism and quest for more, more, more (the overflowing Disneyana).

Taste is not absolute, which is why some don't find those pictures funny. I didn't find them particularly funny, just icky.

And, no, I would not go up to these people and say "you dress funny". I doubt anyone would. That's why people love the internet. It is somehow "acceptable" to made those kind of comments anonymously. Glamor Do's and Don'ts has been doing this in print for YEARS. I'm not saying it ir right or wrong or amusing or not. It just is a somewhat "normal" part of our culture - as is immense consumerism.

[Strangler Lewis]

In fairness to the ongoing debate, I never said the comparison was apt. Euro's picture showed up in a context that was probably a tribute and, at worst, was gentle mocking. If it showed up in a "People Too Stupid To Live" context, we would probably all feel differently.

[Not Afraid]

Did you SEE some of those comments?

[Gemini Cricket]

I think that's my favorite picture of Chris.
:)

[Strangler Lewis]

In fairness to the ongoing debate, I never said the comparison was apt. Euro's picture showed up in a context that was probably a tribute and, at worst, was gentle mocking. If it showed up in a "People Too Stupid To Live" context, we would probably all feel differently.

Did you SEE some of those comments?

I did not read the comments. Neanderthal comments to anything are inevitable on the internet. However, if the poster was posting the picture to prompt them, I feel differently about the posting.

[Not Afraid]

The entire collection of photos in this person's flickr stream is for the purpose of making fun of oddities.

[SacTown Chronic]

My dad horrified me a couple years ago by walking into Home Depot barefoot while I was with him. I wish I would have thought to take a picture and post it on the internet.

mydadisacrazyoldfvck.com

[innerSpaceman]

It seemed my dad LIVED to embarrass me. And not on purpose. Such hijinks would not have embarrassed me. Now, of course, I'm embarrassed to have been embarrassed by such tame dad things.


I used to love embarrassing my own kid once in a while. Good for the soul. :D

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Agreed that "white trash" exists at all tax brackets.As a practical matter, whether it's in our social relationships or our legal ones, there is only so much room for case specific understanding before bright lines get drawn, and we say, "I'm sorry, that's f*cked up."Complete agreement on this one. Everyone has a line.

I'll throw on a wrinkled pair of sweats and a old t-shirt to go to the store etc. And I fully expect other shoppers to have a what the hell thought bubble over their heads, like in cartoons, if they glance my way. And that doesn't bother me. I can dig this, though it got me thinking.

Now that everyone is carrying a camera in their pocket, and everyone has access to the internet, we're all basically on camera, all the time. And yet we dress and act much less "proper" in public than we ever have. Perhaps, over time, this will actually affect how people act in public? Maybe one day we'll be back to wearing high heels and makeup and double breasted suits and hats everywhere we go, like it's 1945? Ok, maybe not. But it does make me think twice about how I leave the house.

But, to me, there is a leap between elbowing your friend while walking down the street and saying "doesn't sheek look quite the skank?" or "isn't that the stupidest haircut you've ever seen" and much hilarity ensuing and creating a web site where you post the pictures for the world to ridicule based on your criteria.I have to say that I don't see much difference here at all. We actually do have a few photos of the freaks we've seen around, shots we secretly took of people (yes, at Disneyland), and there have been many instances when we were annoyed we couldn't get the shot (we aren't craven enough to walk up and stick a camera in someone's face). I believe there was at least one instance where we got a shot of a strange looking person (dinner after the shorts, one year, I believe) and posted it for the board to see.

Seriously - you're in the public arena, you may get photographed, you may get made fun of. Everyone in the world needs to grow a thicker skin, because this is for real, and it is not going away. You never know, you may be the next Star Wars Kid or David After Dentist. Be prepared.

A friend of mine just posted some back-in-the-day photos of me and my friends to Facebook and I wouldn't be surprised if they resurfaced with snide comments much as €'s photos have. I can't wait! :D

[Alex]

I have to say that I don't see much difference here at all.

I see such a huge difference that it is amazing to me that anybody else wouldn't see it. So I guess we'll just have to disagree.

Seriously - you're in the public arena, you may get photographed, you may get made fun of.

Yes, that's true. But just because rudeness is inevitable I don't see the need to gleefully participate.

"If you don't like people making fun of you publicly, don't be ugly in public," seems to shift the burden of politesse in a direction I'd rather not see it go.

Plus, as has been discussed a lot of the commentary sparked by these pictures was not simply "don't these people deviate fro the accepted norm of physical and sartorial appearance in an amusing way, ha ha" but also went on to make judgmental assumptions about those people's underlying character and value. Big difference between "ha ha, we sure dressed funny in high school" and "ha ha, you're a skank\uneducated\inbred\mentally ill\not worthy of human respect\morally deficient because you wear those clothes."

[flippyshark]

I value my privacy, so I'm very not keen on the "new openness" that technology has brought us. I've recently had to ask camera-happy co-workers not to post candid pictures they have taken of me in the workplace. Next thing I knew, said pictures were on Facebook and garnering unwelcome comments. I'm officially unhappy with these people, given that my reasons were very personal, and my requests were made in good faith. "Because we can" is a frightening place to put the ethical bar. And it sucked being told I was spoiling other people's fun by even mentioning how unhappy it made me.

Yes, now and forevermore, going out in public opens us all up to observation, documentation and potential media ridicule. I might suggest that it's all in good fun if the subject has given consent. (I would happily put high school and community theater pics of myself up for public scrutiny.) But having people record me in vulnerable moments and post with my specific non-consent is deplorable behavior among friends, and ought to be cause for reflection among those who would post pictures of strangers with the intent to deride.

Just posting this makes me sound a lot less fun than I really am - but it's heartfelt.

[flippyshark]

On quite another hand, I would kind of enjoy it if we got back to elegant day to day fashion. (And this coming from an inveterate lazy dresser.) Specifically, dresses and hats. I'd love to have a gentlemanly hat to respectfully tip to others, and though I strive to be 21st century, I admit that dresses add an alluring femininity that drives me wild. I also like jackets, but I live in Florida, so, no thanks to that.

[Strangler Lewis]

You have a very eclectic wardrobe.

I'm all for more dressing up. The one thing I do scratch my head over is how men used to wear a coat and tie to the ballpark. Maybe they were all taking long work breaks at afternoon games, but I find those old photos strange.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

"If you don't like people making fun of you publicly, don't be ugly in public," seems to shift the burden of politesse in a direction I'd rather not see it go.I think this is where the disagreement lies. To my mind it has always been this way. It's the same to me whether you are at Disneyland, snickered at by a few thousand people in one day or whether you're posted on a blog, snickered at by a few thousand people. Yes, it could go viral and hit the million mark, but dare I say that is still rare enough. I don't see much difference there.

Regarding making judgmental assumptions about underlying character and value - again, this happens anyway. If people will write it down, people will think it while walking around.

I think what's happened is that those people who would never think such things, or at least try to suppress the urge to think such things, are surprised at what's written about these people. I guess I'm outing myself as someone who does think "what the hell are they wearing". The idea that you can think that and not make assumptions about that person seems silly to me. I dressed like a freak myself at times, and I was fully aware of the reaction people might have, which is part of the reason for doing it, of course.

As I mentioned earlier I didn't have much choice in wardrobe as a kid and I'm sure that people looked at me and said "her mom has no idea how to dress her. The clothes don't fit and they don't match, and they're obviously old. These people are poor. Does she have any idea what she looks like?" They would have been right - Poor, lack of dressing sense, and no clue what I looked like. It was only later looking at photos that I realized what my entire childhood had looked like to the outside world.

Just posting this makes me sound a lot less fun than I really am - but it's heartfelt.I don't think you're any less fun - you're just not on board with this new openness. I find myself stuck in the middle, to be honest. I started out with a public Twitter feed, but had to go private. I wanted to keep Facebook open but again, ended up private. Thing is, it depresses me. I want to be a part of the open party. I want my tweets to land on the main page, I want my input to be read by others. I want my photos of famous places referenced by others. I want to be a part of the global conversation. Every time I hear about some new crowdsourced capability of the internet I am bummed that I really can't be a part of it.

But I really can't be, because I work for the city. There's a topic for my next story - the growing schism between those that are open and those that can't be.

On quite another hand, I would kind of enjoy it if we got back to elegant day to day fashion. (And this coming from an inveterate lazy dresser.) Specifically, dresses and hats. I'd love to have a gentlemanly hat to respectfully tip to others, and though I strive to be 21st century, I admit that dresses add an alluring femininity that drives me wild. I also like jackets, but I live in Florida, so, no thanks to that.Dude, you really want women in dresses, but you're not wearing a suit? Pssh. Suits make men look awesome but I know they're hot and heavy, so I'd never require it. Just seeing everyone in nice outfits of any kind that fit and flatter would be a welcome change.

[Strangler Lewis]

I wouldn't mind dressing up for school recitals like the Cleavers did. I'm not sure I could get down with wearing a coat and tie to the ballpark, though.

As for where the ethical bar is set, "because we can" is about the lowest it can go. It's about the level of the constitutional bar where the unacceptable alternative is putting people in jail for their bad behavior. Further, as I think I've said before, the more we embrace the new openness and lack of privacy, the easier it is for courts to approve of all manner of government invasions into our privacy.

As to the new openness, I'm old fashioned. I don't particularly care what "the world" has to say, but I do want my contributions embraced by established institutions such as movie studios and publishing houses. I'm also old enough to remember when folks with cameras at nude beaches were considered, what's the word, assholes, not honored citizens of the global village.

[Prudence]

I draw the line at the impact it has on the individual being mocked. It's one thing to think that someone is ridiculous for whatever reason. It's another to make them aware of how ridiculous you think they are. For me, posting photos on the internet of people you judge to be sub-human for their physical appearance is too close to making them aware of your opinion. Or is the assumption that they're so sub-human they don't have internet access, so they won't be joining in the frivolity?

[Alex]

I think this is where the disagreement lies. To my mind it has always been this way. It's the same to me whether you are at Disneyland, snickered at by a few thousand people in one day or whether you're posted on a blog, snickered at by a few thousand people. Yes, it could go viral and hit the million mark, but dare I say that is still rare enough. I don't see much difference there.

Stand up on a table at Plaza Inn and gather an audience of strangers and start insulting people walking by in the distance. Sure they'll probably be entirely oblivious to what you're doing but you're not doing anything to avoid them hearing of it. That's ok, right?

Like I said, the line in the sand I see is so bright and obvious to me that I can't fathom that you don't see it and I can't figure out how to explain it. And to me it looks like you're saying "it's going to happen anyway so you might as well play along" which I can't agree with.

Regarding making judgmental assumptions about underlying character and value - again, this happens anyway. If people will write it down, people will think it while walking around.True. I guess I'm just not in the camp that just because it happens in private means it is appropriate for happening in public. And that every though that enters my head is something I'd want the person I'm thinking it of to possibly hear.

The idea that you can think that and not make assumptions about that person seems silly to me.Of course it is. It is natural. And sharing all of those thoughts in public is, in my view, extremely rude. Both can be true at the same time.

[€uroMeinke]

I never saw the website, but have appeared in something similar - or so I gather.

The way we dress is one of the most basic forms of communication we engage in, we use it to convey so much about ourselves - our affiliations to various tribal sub-cultures, sports team affiliations, our wealth, our availability, or unavailability. Sometimes they carry statements like "I don't buy into this consumerist culture," or "check out my legs."

So in that respect, commenting on appearances is just furthering the conversation - and everything being subjective, no matter how you look and dress, someone will mock you for it, because they look and dress differently themselves.

Now I didn't see the website so if it was more about mocking peoples hairlips and hunchbacks, then that's a bit mean-spirited to me.

[€uroMeinke]

Stand up on a table at Plaza Inn and gather an audience of strangers and start insulting people walking by in the distance. Sure they'll probably be entirely oblivious to what you're doing but you're not doing anything to avoid them hearing of it. That's ok, right?

One of the best street performers I ever saw was outside a cafe in Berlin. This man would walk behind people passing by and do mine-like caricatures of that person. It was awesome. Sometimes the "mockee" would figure out what was going on and the interaction was all the better.

[Alex]

Yes, I've seen those. And I don't like them either. But if the mockee is a willing participant then I don't care. It is in the same general area of reason as to why I don't care for Candid Camera or Borat style humor (even when I can't help but be amused I feel bad about it). Making fools of unwitting people for the enjoyment of others just always seems mean to me, not just if it is hairlips and hunchbacks.

In SF we have the bush man down at Fisherman's Wharf. Who hides behind a shrub then jumps out at tourists to scare them. For some reason this is considered high humor. One day, when he gets beat up I'll be tempted to applaud the person who did it.

[Not Afraid]

Regarding making judgmental assumptions about underlying character and value - again, this happens anyway. If people will write it down, people will think it while walking around.

I think what's happened is that those people who would never think such things, or at least try to suppress the urge to think such things, are surprised at what's written about these people. I guess I'm outing myself as someone who does think "what the hell are they wearing". The idea that you can think that and not make assumptions about that person seems silly to me. I dressed like a freak myself at times, and I was fully aware of the reaction people might have, which is part of the reason for doing it, of course.



I think that, whether it is stated out loud or not, EVERYONE makes assumptions about a person based on the way they are dressed. Clothing is a choice and it tell you a lot about a person - maybe as much as the way a person holds his body, makes eye contact, has facial expressions, etc.

We, as a culture, spend a LOT of time focused on what people are wearing and how they come across. Why should we feel any different about what Joe is Peoria is wearing at Walmart than what Angelia Jolie was wearing to the grocery store?

Although I had no desire to see the movie "Borat", from what I understand there was a lot of mocking going on in that film - mocking disguised as comedy. The Fugly website mocks people on a daily basis and we "all" laugh. Why is the Walmart site any different?

An AWFUL lot of assumptions were made about the Walmart people, especially their economic status. How do we know these people are poor? Maybe they are wealthy misers who just dress badly, any maybe they dressed badly on that one particular day and got caught. But, that's what clothing does for a person - good or bad, it is a way to make an impression on others.

[3894]

An AWFUL lot of assumptions were made about the Walmart people, especially their economic status. How do we know these people are poor?
Maybe they are wealthy misers who just dress badly, any maybe they dressed badly on that one particular day and got caught. But, that's what clothing does for a person - good or bad, it is a way to make an impression on others.

So I've been thinking about this and the context. If the site had been called People of Safeway or People of Home Depot or People of Michael's Crafts Store, would I have had the same impression? Yes.

[€uroMeinke]

People of the Red Carpet, People of Disneyland, People of the Art Walk, People of the Airport, People of the Metro, People of the Nursery, People of Coachella, etc.

All would make for potentially amusing photo-collections - some of which I've probably already contributed to - on both sides of the camera

[3894]

People of the Red Carpet, People of Disneyland, People of the Art Walk, People of the Airport, People of the Metro, People of the Nursery, People of Coachella, etc.

All would make for potentially amusing photo-collections - some of which I've probably already contributed to - on both sides of the camera

I love you, EuroMeinke, sir.

[Strangler Lewis]

People of the Jewish Ghetto, People of the Negro ghetto, etc.

As an aside, I think Candid Camera was far more gentle than Borat. It simply put people into unusual, but fairly benign situations. I doubt anyone was ever called ugly on Candid Camera.

[BarTopDancer]

So I've been thinking about this and the context. If the site had been called People of Safeway or People of Home Depot or People of Michael's Crafts Store, would I have had the same impression? Yes.

If the photos were taken in Wal-Marts that were not located in such depressed areas I probably would have had a different reaction. Laughing at oddly dressed people (like most of us have done at DL) who have the means to do differently is one thing. Laughing at those who don't is kicking them while they're down.

There's a group on FB about making fun of people who wear Crocs. Event he title is mocking - saying Croc wearers look like a dumbass.

[€uroMeinke]

People of the Jewish Ghetto, People of the Negro ghetto, etc.

Both of which might make for interesting photo collections and I have no doubt the conversation inspired in the comments might be rather interesting. But then, I'm looking at this not so much for a "humor" perspective as a "communication" perspective, and as Brad pointed out earlier - that kind of analysis kills the funny pretty quickly.

But certainly both communities mentioned above have pieces of apparel or styles used to identify them or show solidarity with that community. But Yarmulke and Sagging aren't all that funny in themselves.

[Strangler Lewis]

I was thinking more of collections that I've seen compiled by the Nazis and others to paint their subjects as sub-human or, as I said earlier, too stupid to live. I think you can throw the Irish in there, too, as fit subjects of similar studies. I think the Wal-Mart collection that started this is fairly close to that camp.

[€uroMeinke]

There's a group on FB about making fun of people who wear Crocs. Event he title is mocking - saying Croc wearers look like a dumbass.

I think by now most people who wear crocs know they are ugly and accept that fact, and are just fine that people think they choose comfort over style - that in-itself is a statement.

[Not Afraid]

If the photos were taken in Wal-Marts that were not located in such depressed areas I probably would have had a different reaction. Laughing at oddly dressed people (like most of us have done at DL) who have the means to do differently is one thing. Laughing at those who don't is kicking them while they're down.



I didn't pay attention to the areas these photos were taken in until after one of my Pug friends said one was from her local Walmart. She is not financially depressed at all, in fact she is a fairly well-off farmer.

Again, we're making blanket assumptions about people based on incomplete information. But, we do that with just about everything we do. In general, contempt prior to investigation is not terribly uncommon.

[€uroMeinke]

I was thinking more of collections that I've seen compiled by the Nazis and others to paint their subjects as sub-human or, as I said earlier, too stupid to live. I think you can throw the Irish in there, too, as fit subjects of similar studies. I think the Wal-Mart collection that started this is fairly close to that camp.

Yeah never did get to see the original website, so don't really know the tone or intent, so to the extent photos of people going to WalMart were portrayed as a class of subhumans that should be removed from society, I would find the website offensive and certainly not funny.

[€uroMeinke]

I also find it interesting that what we are reacting to seems to be our own concept of what it means to "shop at walmart"

Only the poor do it
White trash
store of last resort


I know there's a positive list as we, people who appreciate good value, convenience, broad selection, etc. But it seems Walmart has an issue with it's brand recognition

[alphabassettgrrl]

Poverty and the lack of care in your appearance are two separate things.

I agree. Sloppiness is one thing that I personally find unattractive in any income bracket. I get that sometimes you don't feel like dealing with looking decent, but people are going to judge you by what you look like, so keep that in mind.

I don't feel guilty about mocking the celebrities who go on the red carpets in bad outfits.

I think the photos and the location where they are taken have an awfully lot to say about the fu<ked up consumerism in this society where MORE is the goal and MORE for CHEAP is the mantra.

The rampant consumerism and the persistant drive for more, More, MORE!!!!!!!!!!!! drives me crazy sometimes. You've got to know when to call it quits, and the constant increase is not natural nor sustainable.

"Because we can" is a frightening place to put the ethical bar. And it sucked being told I was spoiling other people's fun by even mentioning how unhappy it made me.

"Because I can" is my father-in-law's main ethic. He doesn't understand that some thing you can do might be things you shouldn't do. I disagree that you're spoiling people's fun by asking them not to post pictures of you. I think it's rude of them to post them when you asked them not to.


Dude, you really want women in dresses, but you're not wearing a suit? Pssh. Suits make men look awesome but I know they're hot and heavy, so I'd never require it. Just seeing everyone in nice outfits of any kind that fit and flatter would be a welcome change.

I'm not wearing dresses but I'll agree with you that upping the wardrobe would certainly be a nice trend. I'm a girl who wears jeans nearly all the time, but I'm trying to make sure they're decent and fit me.

I'd stayed out of this thread because I was a little nervous about what I'd find. I'll mock people on a very small scale, sometimes, though I feel a little dirty about it. I don't like large-scale mocking unless it's celebrities. They've sort of volunteered to be in the public eye.

[Not Afraid]

I don't like large-scale mocking unless it's celebrities. They've sort of volunteered to be in the public eye.

Although, with modern society's penchant for capturing and making public all sorts of random photos, aren't we all being "volunteered" to be in the public eye? Is it OK to mock celebrities on the red carpet but not OK to mock them when they are in Home Depot?

[Prudence]

We place so much emphasis on a person's appearance being the sine que non for value. If a person is ugly, fat, dresses funny, has a physical deformity, whathaveyou they are judged to be less valuable humans.

I'd grant some leeway on the "dressing funny", as some people intentionally dress to stand out. I'm pretty sure that Euro knew that his attire was not the norm, and that it not being the norm was the point. I'm pretty sure that sideless shirt guy intentionally turned an article of clothing into a set of torso mudflaps. I'm pretty sure that people who dye their hair blue want me to notice that their hair is, indeed, blue.

But people who wear sweatpants to grocery shop? Or who haven't the foggiest clue how to dress fashionably? I might not be able to stop the internal snicker - that's human. But I don't have to snap a photo and post it publicly with the caption "world's lamest people". If a photo of me in a costume-like get-up makes the rounds - hey, I did it to be noticed. When photos of me going about my usual life get posted for public ridicule because I've been judged insufficiently attractive to be in public, that's pretty harsh. There are plenty of other ways I can make myself feel good that don't involve making other people feel bad.

And they don't all involve curing cancer.

[Alex]

The Fugly website mocks people on a daily basis and we "all" laugh. Why is the Walmart site any different?

Well, for one, those are generally people who are putting themselves out there to be judged on their physical looks and trying to be fashion leaders. They are willing participants in what is happening even if they aren't pleased by the "reviews." When they do the same thing to a candid photo of Celeb X caught at 6am in line at Starbucks getting a coffee while walking the dog then I no longer think it is appropriate to put it on public display and mock them for it. (Though I've also never found the Fugly site all that funny per se, just a spot to go to see some of the more interesting fashion attempts from our pop culture elite, I very rarely read the accompany commentary except to figure out who the person is.)

Look, I agree completely that how we dress says a lot, intentionally or not; accurately or not. I'm just not clear on how it is not the act of an asshole to take an anonymous photo of a person, put it on the internet completely out of context and say "hey, isn't this person hilarious?!" And then to not be secondary assholery to join in pointing and laughing.

That's different than a "conversation" about how people perceive different looks or how a group of people came to dress a certain way. That's an interesting conversation, but I agree that isn't particularly funny.

If you had a picture of me, would you contribute to a "Ha Ha Look at the Ugly Fat People" site? Regarldess if it is true that I am humorously obese? Or that it is largely a product of choices that I am? Even if, when I'm not around and my name comes up that is the topic of conversation?

I'm assuming not. And if not, why would do it to a stranger? And if you went to such a site and unexpectedly found a picture of me there would you still find it so funny as you had the previous picture? Again, I would assume not. So why is it funny with a stranger? And if I found the site and complained about it to you all would you express sympathy and (at least manufactured) outrage at my humiliation or tell me to stop be a humorless party pooper?

so to the extent photos of people going to WalMart were portrayed as a class of subhumans that should be removed from society

They did refer to the people in the pictures as Walcreatures. At least when asking you to submit your pictures of Walcreatures. No calls for removing from society, just a hint that perhaps these people weren't worthy for inclusion.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Although, with modern society's penchant for capturing and making public all sorts of random photos, aren't we all being "volunteered" to be in the public eye? Is it OK to mock celebrities on the red carpet but not OK to mock them when they are in Home Depot?

I disagree that being in public means that it's ok to post pictures on the 'net. I don't like the intrusiveness of modern tech sometimes.

Celebrities- yes: ok to mock on the red carpet; not ok to mock in Home Depot. Mostly not ok to mock while going about their normal lives. They've got to know people are watching and will recognize them and I often wonder why they do go out looking so awful.

[Not Afraid]

. They've got to know people are watching and will recognize them and I often wonder why they do go out looking so awful.

Probably for the same reason we all go out looking awful on occasion.

[€uroMeinke]

Look, I agree completely that how we dress says a lot, intentionally or not; accurately or not. I'm just not clear on how it is not the act of an asshole to take an anonymous photo of a person, put it on the internet completely out of context and say "hey, isn't this person hilarious?!" And then to not be secondary assholery to join in pointing and laughing.

I think I mostly agree with you here, though confess I've at least done some of that in the context of Disneyland and Coachella. I believe according to miss Manners anything done to embarrass or humiliate someone would be rude. Then again it still might be funny and wandering through the public market place makes you fair game to be photographed. Of course, also fair game to call the photographer an asshole - just don't assault him/her.

[lashbear]

There's a group on FB about making fun of people who wear Crocs. Event he title is mocking - saying Croc wearers look like a dumbass.
I think by now most people who wear crocs know they are ugly and accept that fact, and are just fine that people think they choose comfort over style - that in-itself is a statement.
Now see, here's a group I firmly belong in. I happen to adore my Disney Crocs I bought back during the 2007 trip: the same ones I'm wearing today. I wear them for a lot of reasons: they don't make my [diabetic] feet ache after a long days walking, when I'm camping I can wade right through rivers in them and they'll dry quickly, when my feet swell (as they do a lot recently) the crocs are more confortable to wear than lace-up shoes. Lots of reasons.

I don't care if people make fun of me in private for wearing them. I'll never hear what they say or email their friends, and it's OK. Start up a group that I may stumble across and find my picture there, and no, I won't accept the fact that I've been selected to be publicly humiliated. I will be sad and very angry that people judge and ridicule me publicly for my choice of footware, particularly in an open forum where there is the chance I might see my public ridiculing for myself. Bonus points for that, I guess, especially if I acknowledge on that forum that I am upset about it.

So, should I just stop wearing crocs and wear "nomal" shoes to avoid the right and just punishment for my crime, which is being ridiculed in public? I guess so. The decreased circulation and possibility of losing my feet later in life is acceptable, because, after all, at least I'll "Fit the norm" for now.

...I wonder if they'll mock me for only having one foot?



But people who wear sweatpants to grocery shop? Or who haven't the foggiest clue how to dress fashionably? I might not be able to stop the internal snicker - that's human. But I don't have to snap a photo and post it publicly with the caption "world's lamest people". If a photo of me in a costume-like get-up makes the rounds - hey, I did it to be noticed. When photos of me going about my usual life get posted for public ridicule because I've been judged insufficiently attractive to be in public, that's pretty harsh. There are plenty of other ways I can make myself feel good that don't involve making other people feel bad.

VPM !! :snap: :snap: :snap:

[Not Afraid]

Now see, here's a group I firmly belong in. I happen to adore my Disney Crocs I bought back during the 2007 trip: the same ones I'm wearing today. I wear them for a lot of reasons: they don't make my [diabetic] feet ache after a long days walking, when I'm camping I can wade right through rivers in them and they'll dry quickly, when my feet swell (as they do a lot recently) the crocs are more confortable to wear than lace-up shoes. Lots of reasons.



And, when you pee in gutters along the side of the road and your pee runs downhill where you happen to be standing, the crocs dry quickly too! :evil:

[€uroMeinke]

N
So, should I just stop wearing crocs and wear "nomal" shoes to avoid the right and just punishment for my crime, which is being ridiculed in public? I guess so. The decreased circulation and possibility of losing my feet later in life is acceptable, because, after all, at least I'll "Fit the norm" for now.

Only to the extent you desire not to be potentially mocked for your choice of footware. I think we can drive ourselves crazy trying to dress and appear in such a way that no one ever will make fun of us. In the end, you have to wear what you like wearing, like what it says about you, and not bother yourself about the thoughts or comments of others, because someone somewhere will find something wrong about it.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Clothing is all about context. If you wear pajamas to my library, I WILL think you look like an idiot, like a mess, like you have no clue how our society works. I don't care if they are your "going out pajamas". I WILL judge you. I would say sorry, but I'm not sorry about it, so I won't. I have seen countless people in pajamas, at all hours of the day.

It has nothing to do with making myself feel good. To me it's the same as showing up to the supermarket in a tuxedo or to family dinner in scuba gear. Appropriate outfit FAIL.

Regarding "what if they're your friend", well it's not like all of us would wear what all the others wear. We all have our own sense of appropriate dress, of taste. There is quite the range among us. That said - this isn't a big worry in this group. We all have our foibles but we dress just fine...for the most part. :evil:

[CoasterMatt]

What if I wear scuba gear to the supermarket, and start yelling "HELLO THERE!" to the lobsters in the tank? THAT's why I stick with the pajamas now. :D

[3894]

What if I wear scuba gear to the supermarket, and start yelling "HELLO THERE!" to the lobsters in the tank? THAT's why I stick with the pajamas now. :D

Ha! Only Chanel sunglasses could possibly save this. People like me will be looking only at the sunglasses and wondering if you paid retail.

Word to the wise: show up in pjs at the hotel breakfast room and you're fair game, baby.

Lashbear, take up knitting and knit yourself some socks. Srsly. The first time you put on handmade socks made to measure, you'll curl up in a fetal position and start to purr.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

If you had a picture of me, would you contribute to a "Ha Ha Look at the Ugly Fat People" site?

Just for your reference, Alex, I've seen you note here and elsewhere that you belong in the "ugly" category, but I think you're rather handsome.

[CoasterMatt]

I'm a repeat offender in the "You're All Ugly!" threads at Rage3D.com

[Alex]

Just for your reference, Alex, I've seen you note here and elsewhere that you belong in the "ugly" category, but I think you're rather handsome.

Thank you for thinking so. I'm certainly not saying I'm unattractive (and ugly is me being hyperbolic) to everybody, but I have no problem with the fact that on a normative scale at the societal level I'm below average. I don't think I'm scaring children and spawning myths about the half-beast half-man down in apartment 111.

This isn't Lake Wobegon and half of the people are going to be below median.

[lashbear]

I'm certainly not saying I'm unattractive (and ugly is me being hyperbolic) to everybody, but I have no problem with the fact that on a normative scale at the societal level I'm below average.
Aahhh, but that depends on what scale you're using, doesn't it? Various parts of society all have sliding scales. For example, in the Bear Community scale, you would be rated as above average, (as would JWB and SCC of course... and €uro, and GD when bearded, and Kevy (when bearded) and Capn Jack, and........ boy, the list goes on in this place. Maybe bears just aren't fussy ;) <-------BIG wink there, guys. You're all cute.



Oh, and apologies to anyone else who's cute that I've left out - yes, you!. You know I think you're cute too.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

When you put it that way, I am totally ugly....to the Bear Community. No WAY they'd sleep with a dog like me. :)

[lashbear]

(Actually, I think you're cute too....) :blush:

[Cadaverous Pallor]

(Actually, I think you're cute too....) :blush: And so are you, you big sweet bear. :blush:

I love when a mean-spirited thread turns gushy.

[alphabassettgrrl]

CP- would it make you feel better if they lesbian community would think you're hot? :)

[lashbear]

Gratuitous Lesbian Joke...


Did you hear about when K D Lang when missing?

...they found her face down in Ricki Lake.

[BarTopDancer]

What if I wear scuba gear to the supermarket, and start yelling "HELLO THERE!" to the lobsters in the tank?

I would expect nothing less from you.

[Gemini Cricket]

The site just got a write-up at CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/09/03/walmart.people/index.html?iref=mpstoryview).

And apparently, the site's back up, too.

[Betty]

I think their servers might be overloaded again.

[Betty]

OH My! Older man with boobies! actual implants?!?
http://peopleofwalmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/53.jpg







http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/54.jpg

[Betty]

http://peopleofwalmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/20.jpg

THese are not examples of poor people - these are examples of people with poor taste.

[Alex]

Boobie grandpa appears to be a photoshopped photo of James Randi.

[BarTopDancer]

And this thread has just become NSFW.

Can the photos at least be spolierized?

Yes Alex, I am aware the links come through the servers, but I'm more concerned about people seeing the photos.

[Betty]

And this thread has just become NSFW.

Can the photos at least be spolierized?

Yes Alex, I am aware the links come through the servers, but I'm more concerned about people seeing the photos.

Sorry about that.

[Gemini Cricket]

And they do pose an interesting question. How does the lady with the long long fingernails wipe herself?

[Alex]

With more of a scooping motion.

[Betty]

Bidet?

[Morrigoon]

I'm still confused as to why Alex thinks he isn't good looking?

[Morrigoon]

...I wonder if they'll mock me for only having one foot?


Apparently not:


"If you have a mental handicap -- that's not funny. If you have lost a leg and you're on a crutch or in a wheelchair, some people may laugh at that, but we don't find it funny."

[Alex]

Yes, apparently having bad style is no longer funny if you're visibly handicapped or retarded.

Now, being less obviously retarded with unfashionable taste is hilarious.

And, because am sufficiently self aware and not bothered by the fact of it. Like I said I don't claim to be unattractive to everybody, just of less than average attractiveness if the overall societal standard could be measured. It's not like being of less than average attracitveness condemns one to a life of solitude and unhappiness. And I compensate with the etherial attractiveness that comes with intelligence, a sense of humor, and healthy self confidence. But those come across so much when being looked at from across a train station.

That said, I have a perfect nose and beautiful eyes.

[Betty]

I'm pretty sure the gal in the furry shirt and leg warmers was looking for the attention.

[Strangler Lewis]

Assuming the photo of the old man is real, it illustrates the problems with the site. Here, he is mocked. Take him out of WalMart, and he probably rates his own sub-category and float at the gay parade.

[SacTown Chronic]

You can see things at Wal-Mart that would get you in trouble viewing them at work? What a country!


...I wonder if they'll mock me for only having one foot?I surely would, Eileen. I surely would.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Assuming it's a legitimate photo, that is FÜCKED UP! :mad:
Shameful!
http://peopleofwalmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/83.jpg (http://peopleofwalmart.com/?p=931)

[flippyshark]

Definite shenanigans on that one.

[JWBear]

Assuming it's a legitimate photo, that is FÜCKED UP! :mad:
Shameful!
http://peopleofwalmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/83.jpg (http://peopleofwalmart.com/?p=931)

Is that Sarah Palin?

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Is that Sarah Palin?"I can see Negros from my house!" ;)

[Not Afraid]

I thought, at first, it was ****ed up that extended sizes were $2 more.

[JWBear]

I thought, at first, it was ****ed up that extended sizes were $2 more.

Trust me... That's pretty typical wherever you go.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Is it bad that I liked a couple of those? The Batman VW bug, the forest-painted VW. The Tony the Tiger person shopping.

And the goats. I liked the goats.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

I thought, at first, it was ****ed up that extended sizes were $2 more.Trust me... That's pretty typical wherever you go.Yeah, that's universal.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Here are some things from that site I think are pretty cool:
Hearse with a sense of humor (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=3700)
Fun bike shorts (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=2251) NSFW
Shorts I would wear (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=3709) most likely NSFW

But here's one that's not cool: parenting fail (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=2931)

[alphabassettgrrl]

The bike shorts are funnier with a girl wearing them.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Totally! I love her moxie.

[Gemini Cricket]

I think more people should use the word "moxie". I like it.

[Kevy Baby]

I think more people should use the word "moxie". I like it.Most don't have the cajones to do it.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Penn Jillette uses it a LOT!

[SzczerbiakManiac]

People of Walmart Lego Addition
http://media.peopleofwalmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/lego.jpg (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=33652)

[Strangler Lewis]

I think more people should use the word "moxie". I like it.

One of our dogs is named Moxie.