🔥 | Latest

Bailey Jay, Children, and Dumb: Jesuswhat's she weign in at buck 90, 200? Renaissance women weren't forced to starve themselves into an anorexic fashion na uStry marketing version of female sexuality celticpyro: fandomsandfeminism: sofiama: cr1mson5thestranger: rosietheamazon: deadhoneybadger: Yeah that’s why they all died at 30 because they were so unhealthy but cool Pretty sure it was the plague not heart disease. Pretty sure it was the Plague, childbirth, food spoiling, maltreated infections, smallpox, pneumonia, and/or generally unsanitary living conditions (such as dumping sewage and waste in the streets) and not health conditions caused by excess body fat. Not to mention that the Renaissance standard of female beauty being plumpness and full-figured forms came from the fact that it was a status symbol. Plump, pale, full-figured women were wealthy women who didn’t have to spend their days in hard labor or raising children (or both) and stood a better chance of bearing healthy babies than commoner women did. Cultural “Oh Snap” I hate it so much when people pull out the “unhealthy” excuse for having a reason to body shame a person. “Women died young in the 1700s because they were fat” is an amazingly ignorant statement Okay that one response was dumb but first of all there’s absolutely no way the woman in that painting is 190-200 lbs unless she’s on the taller side. Yeah Renaissance women were full-figured but they weren’t obese.Secondly, it was a beauty standard because it was a sign you were rich enough to eat a lot and not have to work off the extra calories. So it wasn’t that women typically looked like that, it was an equally unrealistic standard back then as it is today because most women didn’t have the means to put on extra weight unless they were filthy rich. But hey let’s glorify beauty standards when it personally benefits you, right?Third, you’re really gonna put someone down for body-shaming when the woman painting is also body-shaming? Anorexia is a mental disorder not a body type and if you conflate the two you’re body-shaming. Using “anorexic” as a synonym for “skinny” is basically the same as using “diabetic” as a synonym for “fat.”So in conclusion, this whole post is garbage. It’s like when they try to label Marilyn Monroe and other of her contemporaries as “plus size”. Just stop. She was curvy yes, but she was absolutely not anything approaching the modern concept of “plus sized“ or obese.One of these things is not like the other
Bailey Jay, Children, and Dumb: Jesuswhat's she weign in at
 buck 90, 200?

 Renaissance women weren't
 forced to starve themselves

 into an anorexic fashion
 na uStry marketing version

 of female sexuality
celticpyro:

fandomsandfeminism:

sofiama:

cr1mson5thestranger:

rosietheamazon:

deadhoneybadger:

Yeah that’s why they all died at 30 because they were so unhealthy but cool

Pretty sure it was the plague not heart disease.

Pretty sure it was the Plague, childbirth, food spoiling, maltreated infections, smallpox, pneumonia, and/or generally unsanitary living conditions (such as dumping sewage and waste in the streets) and not health conditions caused by excess body fat.
Not to mention that the Renaissance standard of female beauty being plumpness and full-figured forms came from the fact that it was a status symbol. Plump, pale, full-figured women were wealthy women who didn’t have to spend their days in hard labor or raising children (or both) and stood a better chance of bearing healthy babies than commoner women did.

Cultural “Oh Snap” I hate it so much when people pull out the “unhealthy” excuse for having a reason to body shame a person.

“Women died young in the 1700s because they were fat” is an amazingly ignorant statement

Okay that one response was dumb but first of all there’s absolutely no way the woman in that painting is 190-200 lbs unless she’s on the taller side. Yeah Renaissance women were full-figured but they weren’t obese.Secondly, it was a beauty standard because it was a sign you were rich enough to eat a lot and not have to work off the extra calories. So it wasn’t that women typically looked like that, it was an equally unrealistic standard back then as it is today because most women didn’t have the means to put on extra weight unless they were filthy rich. But hey let’s glorify beauty standards when it personally benefits you, right?Third, you’re really gonna put someone down for body-shaming when the woman painting is also body-shaming? Anorexia is a mental disorder not a body type and if you conflate the two you’re body-shaming. Using “anorexic” as a synonym for “skinny” is basically the same as using “diabetic” as a synonym for “fat.”So in conclusion, this whole post is garbage.

It’s like when they try to label Marilyn Monroe and other of her contemporaries as “plus size”. Just stop. She was curvy yes, but she was absolutely not anything approaching the modern concept of “plus sized“ or obese.One of these things is not like the other

celticpyro: fandomsandfeminism: sofiama: cr1mson5thestranger: rosietheamazon: deadhoneybadger: Yeah that’s why they all died at 30 bec...

Dumb, Food, and Fucking: Follow IHoe IHOP @IHOP flat but has a GREAT personality RETWEETS F AVORITES 385 381S 6:00 PM-18 Oct 2015 feels-by-the-foot: edgelowl102: This advertisement from IHOP’s certified Twitter account was taken down within hours of posting, and the company released an apology within two hours that read: “Earlier today we tweeted something dumb and immature that does not reflect what IHOP stands for. We’re sorry.” Referring to pancakes as flat is a perfectly normal claim. Applying personification to food is also commonplace in the social media marketing industry, as it lends a humorous personality to an otherwise boring corporate marketing campaign. The copywriter behind the post likely had innocent intentions and came up with this post using the same process he or she used for hundreds of other posts before it. However, this is a perfect example of a tasteless social media faux pas that created a severe backlash that did more harm than good to the brand’s public image.   The post itself personifies tastelessness more than anything else. By pairing a highly suggestive image with incredibly offensive copy, IHOP effectively told the world that they find misogyny humourous. The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes and business likely suffered accordingly. As far as I’m concerned, they deserved every inch of animosity they had thrown at them because of this blatant display of idiocy. And as a social media marketer myself, I’m offended that someone allowed this to be posted on an account as large as IHOP’s.   Why are feminists so weak? If you don’t like the joke, great, but some of us got a smile out of it. I’m eating at IHOP later because of this, for sure. They shouldn’t have to apologize.  “The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes”Boy howdy have you got that right. Get a fucking grip you offense-addicted diaper babies.
Dumb, Food, and Fucking: Follow
 IHoe IHOP
 @IHOP
 flat but has a GREAT personality
 RETWEETS F
 AVORITES
 385 381S
 6:00 PM-18 Oct 2015
feels-by-the-foot:

edgelowl102:

This advertisement from IHOP’s certified Twitter account was taken down within hours of posting, and the company released an apology within two hours that read:
“Earlier today we tweeted something dumb and immature that does not reflect what IHOP stands for. We’re sorry.”
Referring to pancakes as flat is a perfectly normal claim. Applying personification to food is also commonplace in the social media marketing industry, as it lends a humorous personality to an otherwise boring corporate marketing campaign. The copywriter behind the post likely had innocent intentions and came up with this post using the same process he or she used for hundreds of other posts before it. However, this is a perfect example of a tasteless social media faux pas that created a severe backlash that did more harm than good to the brand’s public image.  
The post itself personifies tastelessness more than anything else. By pairing a highly suggestive image with incredibly offensive copy, IHOP effectively told the world that they find misogyny humourous. The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes and business likely suffered accordingly. As far as I’m concerned, they deserved every inch of animosity they had thrown at them because of this blatant display of idiocy. And as a social media marketer myself, I’m offended that someone allowed this to be posted on an account as large as IHOP’s.  


Why are feminists so weak? If you don’t like the joke, great, but some of us got a smile out of it. I’m eating at IHOP later because of this, for sure. They shouldn’t have to apologize. 

“The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes”Boy howdy have you got that right. Get a fucking grip you offense-addicted diaper babies.

feels-by-the-foot: edgelowl102: This advertisement from IHOP’s certified Twitter account was taken down within hours of posting, and the c...