(Post a new comment)

	telesilla 2004-01-27 05:39 am UTC (link)
	That was fast; it's been deleted! (Reply to this)(Thread)

	chaobell 2004-01-27 05:43 am UTC (link)
	What the-- Well, shit. And of course I don't still have the tab containing the wank open. Sigh. Move along, nothing to see here. :P (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	aruru 2004-01-27 07:27 am UTC (link)
	There, there. You can't win them all, I guess. Loved the Christ on a cracker icon, though. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	coyotegirl 2004-01-27 05:41 am UTC (link)
	It's gone already. Too bad. Though that means that I can't be tempted to swat mialynneb on the head and tell her that breastfeeding often does not involve bare breasts. (Reply to this)

oxydosic
2004-01-27 02:52 pm UTC (link)

Arrrrgghhhh. Why does it always seem it's assumed that breastfeeding = having your boobs flapping in the breeze? I breastfed my daughter in public all the time and i never was exposed. It's called a nursing top! Even a big t-shirt will do the job.

Some people are just grossed out by the very idea of breastfeeding though. That's really their problem, not mine.

*stops before she splurts*

(Reply to this)

	smo 2004-01-27 03:45 pm UTC (link)
	The irony of public breastfeeding wank is that women are being castigated for putting their breasts to their intended use, i.e. feeding their young. Anyone who sexualizes breasts to the degree that they can't see a woman feeding her child without getting all het up shouldn't be allowed out in public. [/tittywank] (Reply to this)(Thread)

If I may be a bit snarky...

eiviiaru
2004-01-28 12:41 am UTC (link)

customers_suck does seem to have a problem with wanking over people and things undergoing natural functions -- things like "customers asking questions of employees" and such. Not that there aren't a whole lot of genuine Horrible Customer Stories there, but it seems to be second only to the nastier bits of childfree in its ability to wank about people who dare to do perfectly normal things that apparently inconvenience the wanker by proximity.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: If I may be a bit snarky... smo 2004-01-28 01:23 pm UTC (link)
	"customers asking questions of employees" gasp The nerve! What do they think the employees are there for, anyway - to HELP them or something? Sheesh, some people. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: If I may be a bit snarky... eiviiaru 2004-01-28 08:34 pm UTC (link)
	If I see one more post on customers_suck in which the poster complains about customers asking them to do their job ("so I work at tech support, and omg, these people keep CALLING me and wanting me to FIX THEIR COMPUTERS"), I'm getting a clue-by-four. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: If I may be a bit snarky... smo 2004-01-28 08:40 pm UTC (link)
	clue-by-four What an excellent icon that would make. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: If I may be a bit snarky... kijikun 2004-01-29 02:29 am UTC (link)
	I second that (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: If I may be a bit snarky... northatlantic 2004-01-30 06:50 am UTC (link)
	would either of these do? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: If I may be a bit snarky... kijikun 2004-01-30 07:26 am UTC (link)
	oh yes they will :) (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: If I may be a bit snarky...

iczer6
2004-01-28 10:41 pm UTC (link)

but it seems to be second only to the nastier bits of childfree in its ability to wank about people who dare to do perfectly normal things that apparently inconvenience the wanker by proximity.

Childfree can be damn wanky about breastfeeding too. One post had someone bitching about how gross they find breastfeeding and yet they can't look away!

So naturally it's the mother's fault for daring to feed her child and not the posters fault for gawking at something that really doesn't involve them in any way.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	hobbitsexual 2004-01-28 12:24 pm UTC (link)
	word. (Reply to this)(Parent)