NYC has Ugly People, Too
July 23, 2007 4:37 PM   Subscribe

I'm tired of looking at attractive, fashionable people.. Behold: Ugly Outfits New York.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero (97 comments total) 5 users marked this as a favorite
 
No you didn't!!!
posted by ericb at 4:43 PM on July 23, 2007


OMG people who aren't young, spoiled, looks-obsessed, and rich! Anathema! Anathema! How dare they exist! Burn them!
posted by watsondog at 4:45 PM on July 23, 2007


That speedo pic is terrifying.
posted by rottytooth at 4:51 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


Shallow Blogs on the Internets
posted by DU at 4:52 PM on July 23, 2007


The "ugly" pictures reveal a lot about the person who took the photos.
posted by Rich Smorgasbord at 4:52 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


I usually enjoy the Sartorialist, but shit like this makes me want to erase it from my memory.
posted by mullacc at 4:54 PM on July 23, 2007


You know how people say "X wins the internets"? This blog just lost.
posted by signal at 4:56 PM on July 23, 2007


I'm pretty sure the way that guy takes pictures would make anybody ugly.
posted by Citizen Premier at 4:56 PM on July 23, 2007


Okay, this is me.

Well, it's not really, but I don't see why it oughtn't. This dude rocks and gets laid tons more than some rhinoplastied designer-imposter blog ape. And has better weed.
posted by hermitosis at 4:59 PM on July 23, 2007 [5 favorites]


I don't trust well-dressed people. No offense if you are one, it's just a policy of mine. It's served me pretty well so far. I'll take my place on the ugly list with pride.
posted by gurple at 5:00 PM on July 23, 2007


Okay, now I want a seersucker suit.
posted by rottytooth at 5:02 PM on July 23, 2007


Taste is so subjective. This is on the sartorialist page, but I bet if the "ugly" blogger saw him, it would have wound up on that page too.
posted by hermitosis at 5:03 PM on July 23, 2007


Somehow I think that the folks in the ugly blog would be much more likely to be interesting than the annoying obsessed people in the Sartorialist.
posted by octothorpe at 5:04 PM on July 23, 2007


they're really not horrendous enough at all (altho that thong is a definite Don't)

Most of the appalling outfits i've seen this season are neo-80s (and the women wearing them don't look that young at all) Hint: shiny florescent leggings were never ever really in style, and still aren't. The rest are people squeezed into things way way way too small for them--halter and open-backed things especially, and overhangs of flesh in the wrong places. The floaty frilly tops and dresses this summer also look really weird on tons of people.
posted by amberglow at 5:05 PM on July 23, 2007


It would have been funnier if the photographer had pretended he was blogging about them on a "best dressed" site and then got them to answer questions about their inspiration and whatnot. Aaah, much more cruel than sneaking photos behind their back.

the word cruel looks insanely wrong right now.
posted by liquorice at 5:05 PM on July 23, 2007


It's like a twisted version of FRUiTS.
posted by Xere at 5:09 PM on July 23, 2007


Afroblanco?
posted by Meatbomb at 5:10 PM on July 23, 2007


two for one sale going on here.

(you won't like either.)
posted by 3.2.3 at 5:14 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


Sigh. This makes me miss New York! Brave and sometimes failed fashion choices are what makes that place great. Walking down the street and people-watching there is better than any TV show.

This blogger can suck it. If everyone was tasteful we'd die of boredom.

Plus, some of these are obviously tourists. You can't blame New York for that.
posted by emjaybee at 5:14 PM on July 23, 2007


All the photos are from the back! You can't tell shit about those outfits! LOL BRA SHOWING? Is that the best you can do? Rainbow Sherbet is awesome; those red boots could be awesome (CAN'T TELL CAN'T SEE OUTFIT); and also, plz show pics of what YOU wear kthx.

It'd be one thing if it was all real fashion failures: people who are trying really hard and failing. But a lot of these people are just being who they are. It's one-third LOL LOWERCLASSES, one-third LOLCRAZIES, and one-third LOLHIPSTERSWHOCAN'TQUITEPULLITOFFBUTACTUALLYGETPRETYCLOSE.
posted by wemayfreeze at 5:14 PM on July 23, 2007 [4 favorites]


Pretty mean-spirited, if you ask me. Although the old guy's balls made me think the words "old tusker."
posted by KokuRyu at 5:23 PM on July 23, 2007


Every single one of the people in these photos is better in every conceivable way than any of the people who took the pictures. That's just an undeniable fact. And they all love garlic. And well dressed people hate garlic. And that's that.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:24 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]




leisurewear has destroyed the airport experience far more than security theatre. I love old 1940s pictures when everybody's in a suit.

Of course, it was their only suit and was lined with newsprint, but eh, better that than 20 stones in tracksuit bottoms.
posted by bonaldi at 5:29 PM on July 23, 2007


i love FRUiTS!
posted by snofoam at 5:32 PM on July 23, 2007


oh, and I think the ugly people blog is stupid. and i'm indifferent to the sartorialist. there, now you know.
posted by snofoam at 5:33 PM on July 23, 2007


Walking down the street and people-watching there is better than any TV show.

You must be watching some dreadful television.
posted by justgary at 5:36 PM on July 23, 2007


That speedo pic is terrifying

It'th not a th'peedo it'th a thong!
posted by ericb at 5:47 PM on July 23, 2007


I haven't made it in there yet. Amateurs.
posted by jonmc at 5:48 PM on July 23, 2007


It makes me feel uncomfortable knowing that the purpose of some of these sights is to feel superior to the people they are mocking. It's like that gofugyourself site but aimed at non celebrities, which makes it even more cruel somehow.
posted by cazoo at 5:48 PM on July 23, 2007


I really like a lot of the outfits on this site. They're fun, and the people who wear them are probably a lot of fun too.

After eliminating those, I would eliminate everyone who made it to the site because of body problems--because that's really not ugly outfits, is it? So, for instance, take out the sweaty guy, the woman with waffle-butt, and of course Gentleman Thong. And you're left with maybe a quarter of the remainder being actual ugly outfits. Enough to blog about? Questionable.
posted by darksasami at 5:55 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


That speedo pic is terrifying

You have obviously never been to Fire Island.
posted by probablysteve at 6:11 PM on July 23, 2007


It makes me feel uncomfortable knowing that the purpose of some of these sights is to feel superior to the people they are mocking.

Dude, anybody who judges people by their clothes has already lost the superiority game.
posted by jonmc at 6:18 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


This blog is stupid, and they made a mistake with the "Rainbow Sherbert" entry, too. That guy's fashion-sense is spot on, as the outfit has a remarkable cohesiveness for being so loud. Props to him. For someone who seems to care about fashion, at least he's still willing to be a little individualistic about it (though sometimes it seems like individualism goes against everything fashion stands for).
posted by invitapriore at 6:20 PM on July 23, 2007


If you want LA badness, head over to Malingering's photostream on Flickr. She also has a blog.
posted by redteam at 6:21 PM on July 23, 2007


I found the arrangements on the ugly blog to be a lot more interesting than those on the sartorialist, personally. In fact, I envy people like the amazing Rainbow Sherbet for whatever quality it is that allows them to wake up in the morning and decide they are fine wearing such an outfit.

However, I take less time each morning dressing than I do brushing my teeth, so take it for what you will...
posted by rollbiz at 6:25 PM on July 23, 2007


also, this clown on Sartorialist looks way stupider than anybody on the 'ugly' site.
posted by jonmc at 6:27 PM on July 23, 2007 [2 favorites]


Wow, that Malingering person has... an amazing lack of insight, doesn't she? Top to bottom, her blog is about how terrible (TERRIBLE!) people are for wearing things to baseball games she disapproves of, what a whore Alyssa Milano is, and this GEM, accompanied by a picture of flowers someone sent her:

Just when you think you’re about to come apart at the seams, someone revives your faith in humanity. I’d been feeling rather unappreciated and depressed, not to mention struggling with some personal issues of late, so when I came home from work to find these, I was very moved.

Delightful.
posted by thehmsbeagle at 6:28 PM on July 23, 2007


TPS, you've just given me another reason to never venture outdoors. Ever.
posted by brina at 6:49 PM on July 23, 2007


I don't really get the difference between the two pages (besides the speedo picture). One has pictures of people dressed in ugly clothes taken from the front, and the other has pictures of people dressed in ugly clothes taken from the back.
posted by Bugbread at 6:51 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


If it was written better, more in the style of go fug yourself, that ugly blog could actually be very entertaining.
posted by miss lynnster at 6:56 PM on July 23, 2007


Of course, the glory of gofugyourself is that it spotlights people who have built their entire career on looking good in public, have armies of beauticians and consultants and surgeons, skads of money, and still fail at it. A LOT.

Whereas, average schmoes with limited incomes failing at fashion is hardly newsworthy.

My secret conspiracy theory about gofugyourself is that savvy agents dress their c and b-list clients as hideously as possible in hopes that they'll get mentioned there. All publicity is good publicity.
posted by emjaybee at 7:05 PM on July 23, 2007


I second the notion that it's ruined by the fact that all the pics are so obviously taken surreptitiously (from people's backs, blurry as all hell.)
posted by alidarbac at 7:10 PM on July 23, 2007


Personally... I don't see the moral problem with anonymous peoplewatching of ugly outfits. Glamour Magazine was on top of the "don't spotting" trend decades before the internet, and Lord knows I've worn my share of mockable outfits. Especially in the 1980s. Oh my Lord... I still am living down the asymmetrical hair and moon boots. Someone really did need to tell me how stupid I looked.
posted by miss lynnster at 7:14 PM on July 23, 2007


Ugly? I don't think so.
posted by tellurian at 7:22 PM on July 23, 2007


Man, I love this outfit, though.
posted by piratebowling at 7:25 PM on July 23, 2007


So... expensive, ugly clothes good; inexpensive, ugly clothes bad?
posted by Eideteker at 7:28 PM on July 23, 2007


You know that a thing's pretty broken when it makes you pine for the literate, urbane civility of Vice Magazine.
posted by palmcorder_yajna at 7:41 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


The beauty queen/hooker thing made me sad. That's what I get for reading the archives.
posted by Eideteker at 7:41 PM on July 23, 2007


The thing I find interesting about both the Ugly Outfits site, as well as The Sartolialist, is the idea that we are now all on a catwalk. It used to be just famous people who were judged by the masses for their outfits. Thanks to the power of the internet, now the rest of us can walk around thinking, gee, hope I look good so I end up on the Good Fashion website instead of the Bad Fashion website.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:54 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


It doesn't do much for the argument of "how shallow" by following it up with "but if you really want to see ugly...". (paraphrasing of course).

Likewise the distinction between poking fun at the celebrity who fails to live up to the fashion standard and the poor person who wears cheap clothes is still acquiescing to their notion that the clothes the 'poor' (I believe that none of the pictures in the ugly blog are of truly poor people) often end up with are somehow worse than the fashion of the stars. A distinction which isn't real until the poverty gets to the point that the clothing is unsanitary or unsuited for the elements.
posted by kigpig at 8:07 PM on July 23, 2007


HURFDURF yada yada yada...
posted by HyperBlue at 8:10 PM on July 23, 2007


The thing I find interesting about both the Ugly Outfits site, as well as The Sartolialist, is the idea that we are now all on a catwalk. It used to be just famous people who were judged by the masses for their outfits. Thanks to the power of the internet, now the rest of us can walk around thinking, gee, hope I look good so I end up on the Good Fashion website instead of the Bad Fashion website.

A wise man once said: 'what other people think of you becomes less important when you realize how rarely they do.'
posted by jonmc at 8:12 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


I would much rather spend time with any of the people on this blog, than any of the people on the Sartorialist -- most of whom I'd really like to smack upside the head. Do they really have nothing better to do with their time in the morning -- not to mention their money -- than to obsess over clothing?

This is why I always liked Maine. You can wear Bean boots, jeans, and a parka for about six months out of the year and nobody will ever raise an eyebrow. (In fact, the boots are good for more than that, when you add on fall and mud season.)

Further evidence of my theory that people just get all strange when you pack too many of them together in a tight space.
posted by Kadin2048 at 8:14 PM on July 23, 2007


Further evidence of my theory that people just get all strange when you pack too many of them together in a tight space.

Nah, many of us New Yorkers enjoy the city precisely because we can look as weird as we want. The fashionistas are merely a mouthy minority.
posted by jonmc at 8:19 PM on July 23, 2007


The people featured on the sartorialist are the sorts who would have rooftop parties like in the (awful) movie Indepence Day. They'd be the first ones disintegrated by invading aliens.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:49 PM on July 23, 2007


the idea that we are now all on a catwalk.

Of course we are--and women most especially in Manhattan. Our sidewalks are catwalks and always have been--in all neighborhoods and for all. (and i don't think i know one woman who isn't constantly looking other women up and down to see what they're wearing)
posted by amberglow at 8:52 PM on July 23, 2007


Well, duh, I have to judge other women on the street; the right to judge is part of the Welcome to NYC package. But the idea that hicks out in the sticks are judging, too, well, that's just shocking!

/kidding
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 9:01 PM on July 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


: >
posted by amberglow at 9:27 PM on July 23, 2007


It'th not a th'peedo it'th a thong!

Sibilance is not that same as a lisp. But thanks for reminding me of how a homophobic frat guy writes.

If I were an old gay guy (older than I am now, I mean) in decent shape with a BIG DICK, I'd show it off too. Fuck the rest of the world.
posted by ethnomethodologist at 10:17 PM on July 23, 2007


I'm surprised by the amount of vitriol directed at The Sartorialist (and his subjects). What I love about his photos is how effortless most of the people's fashion appears to be (that Fabrizio picture is an exception). They seem to be mostly just stylish people, not people following trends blindly. I guess a lot of it is in the photos themselves, but . . . I just don't get the anger! Jealousy, people, that's what you should be feeling!! They're stylish! And hot! And bonable (though sometimes too skinny)! Why don't you feel what I feel!
posted by wemayfreeze at 12:06 AM on July 24, 2007


Okay, now I want a seersucker suit.

I've wanted a seersucker suit for ages. We don't really have them in the UK, so I've been looking on the net for a place where I could buy a classic blue and white job, but I've yet to find somewhere.

Perhaps I should ask metafilter.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:17 AM on July 24, 2007


That speedo pic is terrifying.

It pays to advertise.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:19 AM on July 24, 2007


It doesn't do much for the argument of "how shallow" by following it up with "but if you really want to see ugly...".

I'm also not quite following the comments that seem to be saying that "judging people with bad fashion sense by their clothes isn't cool, but also I think everyone on the Sartorialist is probably a dick."
I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with dressing well. I know some terrible people who are involved in the fashion industry, but I also know a lot of people who try to claim some moral superiority from purposefully dressing as unfashionably as they can, and I don't really see much difference between them.
posted by thatswherebatslive at 12:42 AM on July 24, 2007


Personally... I don't see the moral problem with anonymous peoplewatching of ugly outfits.

I'm not troubled by people who discreetly gossip about fashion faux pas. The problem with this site is that it's not anonymous. If I work with this lady, or if I'm one of her neighbors, I'm going to know who she is. And she's going to know that I know. She'll be hurt. (She might not be, but it's a pretty normal reaction to feel hurt when you're being mocked and publicly humiliated.)

The makers of this site, unless they're idiots, KNOW that they're causing pain. Knowingly causing pain -- when it's avoidable -- is immoral.

And what's the deal with this idea that not-showing-someone's-face is the same as anonymous? Does it come from people reading too many Superman comics? Without those glasses, no one would EVER know he was Clark Kent!
posted by grumblebee at 4:26 AM on July 24, 2007


Do you feel that way about the "fat people montages" on the nightly news?
posted by ghastlyfop at 5:27 AM on July 24, 2007


Funny you brought that up! I always thing that. They're doing a report on "The Obesity Epidemic in America," and they show some woman's gut. I think, somewhere out there, someone is saying, "Oh my God, that's Amy!"
posted by grumblebee at 5:37 AM on July 24, 2007


Do you feel that way about the "fat people montages" on the nightly news?

My ambition is to one day make it into one about 'drunkenness' or 'insanity.'
posted by jonmc at 5:44 AM on July 24, 2007


This surely is punishable by honey & fire ant treatment. (NSFW. or anywhere, really.)
posted by yoga at 5:53 AM on July 24, 2007


I've wanted a seersucker suit for ages. We don't really have them in the UK, so I've been looking on the net for a place where I could buy a classic blue and white job, but I've yet to find somewhere.
Jos A Bank Clothiers sells seersucker suits (look, a sale!).
posted by Comrade_robot at 6:53 AM on July 24, 2007


Thanks to the Sartorialist I now know that Nehru jackets, flood pants, and looking like you have to pee are in style.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:09 AM on July 24, 2007


ghatstlyfop + grumblebee, that's been covered on AskMe before!
posted by wemayfreeze at 8:33 AM on July 24, 2007


As a follow up about Vice, in all fairness, even though they're complete fuckbag hipster dicks, man, their Dos and Don'ts are some funny, funny shit. Way funnier than this.
posted by mckenney at 8:34 AM on July 24, 2007


you guys chastised me once before because my take is on the sex appeal of pretty women walking the streets of nyc.

personally i don't find what i do to be any different then the sartorialist or the ugly clothes site.

whether you look at someone because they are dressed nicely, horribly, weird, or scantily you are still gawking or ogling.
posted by hpsell at 9:03 AM on July 24, 2007


Didn't you get chastised for self-linking?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 9:08 AM on July 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


oh, and ditto emjaybee's comment:

"Walking down the street and people-watching there [NYC] is better than any TV show."
posted by hpsell at 9:10 AM on July 24, 2007


no, someone accused me of self linking but it was a false accusation
posted by hpsell at 9:13 AM on July 24, 2007


Thanks to the Sartorialist I now know that Nehru jackets, flood pants, and looking like you have to pee are in style.

Everyone in SoHo really DOES have to pee. It can be bitching hard to find a place to use the restroom down there without spending $14 on an artisanal bread sandwich, and if you've blown all your money on designer flood pants, you'd better hold it till you get back to Brooklyn.
posted by hermitosis at 9:14 AM on July 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


hpsell: do you get your ass kicked much?
posted by Burhanistan at 9:17 AM on July 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


not since i got bigger then my 3 older brothers
posted by hpsell at 9:22 AM on July 24, 2007


hpsell, my memory is that you pay women to walk by your camera (or at least you get model release forms).

If this site does the same, I'm cool with it, but I doubt they do.

I don't think there's anything wrong with looking at a sexy woman, ugly woman, sexy man, ugly man, etc. LOOKING is very different from posting a photo on the web.
posted by grumblebee at 10:10 AM on July 24, 2007


grumblebee - I think there is considerable difference in poking fun at ugly people and poking fun at people who dress ridiculously. The former is inherently mean-spirited while the latter can be funny.
posted by Justinian at 10:31 AM on July 24, 2007


Funny to whom? The people who dress badly?
posted by grumblebee at 10:44 AM on July 24, 2007


Funny to whom? The people who dress badly?

Clothes sense is 99% attitude. If you feel comfortable in it, you can make the wierdest outfit look good.
posted by jonmc at 10:47 AM on July 24, 2007


I just sent this comment to Ugly Outfits:

Dear Editor:

I’m calling you out, you coward. That’s right; you’re nothing but a stinking, yellow-bellied, lily-livered coward. You take people’s pictures from behind and then mock them on the Internet. You don’t even have the courage to sign your name! If you’re really offended by the way people dress, you need to walk straight up to them, look them in the eyes and tell them how bad their outfits are. I dare you.


I signed my real name. Let's see if it gets past moderation.
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:58 AM on July 24, 2007


See, I still don't quite get all of this anger. Honestly... I truly appreciate the brilliance of people who take fashion risks even if they don't work. I wish more people did. I think it's cool to be an individual, and most of the people who do so are doing so BECAUSE they don't want to blend into the crowd. I know I was when I used to dress funky in art school. And I know that some outfits worked but a lot of them probably horrified many an innocent bystander at the time. But did I really want to look like everyone else and have my clothing be acceptable to everyone? Hell no.

Honestly, what's the big offensive deal about anonymously posting people's clothing choices from behind? How is that so horrible, how is it any worse than that black bar Glamour put across people's eyes? Who is being mortally wounded by this? I really don't see how it hurts anyone if it's totally anonymous. That's what fashion is about, the hits and the misses and the risks that people take which sometimes work and sometimes don't. They're good to see. Sometimes for fun entertainment and other times just as a heads up so you know not to try that look yourself. It's good to learn from other people's fashion mistakes & live vicariously through them.

I'd rather have a world filled with people in nehru jackets and flourescent green tights than a world where every single person wore clothes from the Gap. God, that would be horrible and just so boring.

Long live people with eccentric tastes, I say. They brighten up my day.
posted by miss lynnster at 1:24 PM on July 24, 2007


I really don't see how it hurts anyone if it's totally anonymous.

This is where we disagree. I say it's NOT totally anonymous. If it was, I'd agree with you.

I haven't seen the black bar in Glamour, but if you're saying they put a bar over people's eyes and said they were hiding the person's identity, I call bullshit.

That site is NOT just about people who are dressing in wacky ways to get attention. I agree that if you're a performer, you invite critics. And you probably get off on negative attention as-much-as you do about positive attention. This is a subjective call, but I think I see people on that site who are not trying to stand out. And people who probably think they are stylish.

When I was in my teens and early twenties, I thought it was stylish to wear wacky clothes. I wasn't trying to be wacky. I didn't want to be thought of as a clown. I was a nerd who, having never paid attention to clothes, was trying to learn to dress and failing. Eventually, some girlfriends (and a wife) GENTLY showed me what I was doing wrong. I would have been upset if my mistakes were broadcast on the web.

I would have survived. It wouldn't have been the worst upset of my life. But it would have upset me, and whoever put it up would know it was likely to upset me. To do so anyway is a moral lapse. It's not murder or rape. But it's still cruel.
posted by grumblebee at 1:57 PM on July 24, 2007


hpsell, my memory is that you pay women to walk by your camera (or at least you get model release forms).

As for Glamour's Dos and Donts--they don't pay, and they don't need release forms because of the black bar. (their photogs use mega zoom lenses and are never really visible near their subjects--they can get a great shot from way across the street or down the block)
posted by amberglow at 2:40 PM on July 24, 2007


Something like the NYTimes' On the Street or New York's LookBook where the people are totally visible or even identified does get release forms signed, i believe.
posted by amberglow at 2:41 PM on July 24, 2007


I have given up any hope of being featured in the NYMag LookBook, or the NYTimes On The Street feature, or as a Glamour Do, or as a Sartorialist (grrr). Ugly Outfits New York is now my only hope for fashion stardom :-(
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 3:39 PM on July 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


So Eideteker and I are the only ones who find the examples of "attractive, fashionable people" to be just as ugly as those of the ugly ones?
posted by Bugbread at 3:43 PM on July 24, 2007


it depends....the Sartorialist is just way too limited entirely in the range of people and range of looks they find acceptable--that's their problem.
posted by amberglow at 4:03 PM on July 24, 2007


I happen to like the Sartorialist quite a bit. Yes, it's one guy taking pics of outfits he likes (he definitely has a thing for scarves), but I think there's a wide range of ages and styles in his pages. He's looking for people who bring a bit of their own personal touch to their outfits whether it's vintage or bespoke or in between. I also appreciate the fact that he always treats his subjects with respect.
posted by oneirodynia at 4:21 PM on July 24, 2007


Long live people with eccentric tastes, I say. They brighten up my day.

Well, that's exactly my point, miss lynnster. By the Sartorialists or this 'bad fashion' bloggers standards, I'm probably a bad dresser hwat with the unhip band t-shirts (worn unironically) the minor league baseball caps, jeans, flannel, silver LP hanging from my neck and phillips head screws in my ears, but...that's me, so it works regardless of what they think. As a wise man once said 'we don't follow fashion, who needs it when you got style...'
posted by jonmc at 4:31 PM on July 24, 2007


Long live people with eccentric tastes, I say. They brighten up my day.

God bless Little Edie*#
posted by ericb at 6:26 PM on July 24, 2007


Oh haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:20 PM on July 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


I think there's a wide range of ages and styles in his pages.
As long as you're Euro & Euro-influenced/upperclass or wannabe/a model or media & fashion person/slim/almostly entirely white or Asian alone, that is.
posted by amberglow at 9:14 AM on July 25, 2007


« Older Meet Toronto's newest temple   |   Email Overload Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments