Subscribe via RSS Feed

Things on the internet

[ 82 ] December 26, 2012 |

[Edit: Potentially disturbing photo moved below the fold out of deference to the delicate sensibilities of the LGM readership. Note the effect is, to quote Woolsey, J., more likely to be an emetic than an aphrodisiac, NTTAWWT]

(1) I’m tempted to ask SEK for a semiotic analysis of this:


(2) Be very careful if you use Google Image to try to find a photo via the query “Guy in underwear with gun.”


Comments (82)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. c u n d gulag says:

    Thank for reminding me – I need some Brillo pads after having baked a big fat ham a couple of nights ago.

  2. Leave it to you liberal thugs to demonize a man for posing with his Guitar Hero guitar.

  3. rea says:

    On the internet, no one know you are really a dog . . .

  4. Hogan says:

    It’s been fun, everyone. I’ll be back when this post is off the front page.

  5. Law Spider says:

    THIS picture is precisely the type of item for which “under the fold” was (or should have been) developed.

  6. STH says:

    What I want to know is whether he was looking for a man or a woman, ’cause I can’t figure out who in the hell that picture is supposed to appeal to. Am I (a woman) supposed to get all tingly about seeing a man about to shoot himself in the foot?

  7. Mister Harvest says:

    “Athletic.” You keep using that word…

  8. Hmm, I remember him. The Poor Man or Sadly, No!

    Titles came later I think.

    • Snarki, child of Loki says:

      I think you’re right about that. That thought dredges up loads of muck from the thankfully-forgotten earlier eras of the intertubes.

      Whatever you do NEVER google for “Spanky the Clown”

  9. Origami Isopod says:

    Oh, you’re just seeing that one for the first time, huh? It’s an oldie.

  10. thebewilderness says:

    Unless you know that the person shared the pic the the whole wide interwebs themselves I take a dim view of posting pics to shame and humiliate the target. It has become a very serious problem for the very young who may only be goofing around when trusting someone unworthy of trust and next thing they know they are targeted.
    This was not well though out. I hope you rethink it.

    • rea says:

      Poe’s Law strikes again . . .

    • Jberardi says:

      It has become a very serious problem for the very young who may only be goofing around when trusting someone unworthy of trust and next thing they know they are targeted.

      You know what else is a serious problem? When people who don’t have the basis sense to keep their hairy twats off teh Google are allowed to own MANY DEADLY FIREARMS.

    • Philip says:

      This would be a valid point if the picture were actually of one of those kids.

    • STH says:

      I agree that it’s out of bounds to shame somebody for his or her looks, and I do my best to avoid it. What I’m talking about–and I do consider more justifiable–is the pose and the implication that posing with your gun collection is somehow sexy.

    • Anonymous says:

      I agree with this comment. Apart from the gun fetish, what exactly did this dude do to deserve creepy fat-shaming bullying? Hetero male commenters feigning exaggerated outraged disgust at other men’s bodies is fucking gross and homophobic, dudes.

      • witless chum says:

        Double fucking this. I really don’t get grossed out by the big, naked hairy dude. I see something similar, though with a more socially acceptable hairstyle, in the mirror every morning.

        Do people really mean it, or is it performative? Like the guys who will turn out to say a slightly chubby celebrity woman they’d crawl across glass to fuck in real life is “eww, gross, dudez?” I never know if they really mean it or if they just say shit because they think they’re supposed to say it. I cut out saying shit like that around age 20, but I’m never sure if I’m actually experiencing things differently or if I’m just more honest.

        • Anonymous says:

          I never know if they really mean it or if they just say shit because they think they’re supposed to say it.

          Neither me, but I suspect the latter. Stating dumb and largely subjective opinions loudly and as if they’re factual is sort of the default mode for some men. Gawking at Uglies is part of that sport.

          Plus, it would blow a lot of these dudes’ brains to realize that many heterosexual women would find this man (silly pose and guns aside but ‘do included) attractive. Which is why stuff like this is slightly bothersome in the first place; denying the existence of female desire as broad and as strange (to some) as male desire.

      • Halloween Jack says:

        As noted below, the subject is a Something Awful goon that goes by the name Micromancer who has deliberately posted more risible pictures than this of himself. If you can’t fit that into your worldview, I’m sure that there’s a circus with a sad clown that you can lecture about how they’re making money off of someone’s grief.

        • Anonymous says:

          Oh, dude. It fits my worldview just fine. Men intent on proving publicly their het credentials are the ones with a problem. Obviously.

          The fact that Micro’s one their side makes this display all the more pathetic.

        • Anonymous says:

          Here’s fun: a photograph of a perfectly normal male body elicits from the commentariat disproportionately camp and theatrical expressions of revulsion, but I’m the one acting too sensitive. Hilarious.

  11. Jberardi says:

    So, uhh…. he’s ransoming his junk, then?

    I hope his demands aren’t too high…

  12. lightbulbout says:

    this is forums poster Micromancer. he is one crazy guy. there are more pictures from the series.

  13. Sherm says:

    What’s his BMI?

  14. KLG says:

    If he’s not careful he could leave that room half-cocked.

  15. actor212 says:

    Wow. David Gregory dyed his hair?

  16. ignobility says:

    He’ll shoot his balls off! He’ll shoot his balls off!

  17. misfire says:

    You just know he jacked it having a gun fantasy two minutes after that photo was taken.

  18. brandon says:

    I wasn’t quite sure I respected Russell Brand as an actor, but damn if he isn’t doing the legwork to get into that role.

  19. DocAmazing says:

    You can tell he’s thinking “If this doesn’t get my place into Architectural Digest, nothing will.”

  20. The angle. OMG. It looks like he’s holding his penis hostage ‘date me or I’ll shoot it off’. Poor thing. Judging from the evidence, unless he’s a very good shot, he’ll miss. The target is VERY small.

  21. Davis X. Machina says:

    Hugo Black could only have the position he had on the First Amendment because he didn’t have a chance to see that picture.

  22. parsimon says:

    Is the “23/Male/Athletic/Successful” actually original to the picture?

  23. greylocks says:

    Then there’s the bed.

  24. Pastor Tobin Maker D.D says:

    Russell Brand has really let himself go.

  25. Manju says:

    Puh-leeze. Just a few days ago you guys were begging to see his head on a stick.

  26. witless chum says:

    Is like being in high school, when I determined my far flung hometown was precisely two years behind the more fashionable portions of the state by questioning the other attendees at a nerdcamp about when they’d last tight rolled their jeans? If we get this picture now, when will Campos post other years old Internet things?

    I’m looking forward to clicking on a law school corruption link and finding myself Rickrolled.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.