'08
Lindsay Lohan’s girlfriend, 30 year-old British DJ Samantha Ronson, wore a pretty obnoxious t-shirt out in LA yesterday. It featured men making out and engaged in sexual acts as well as frontal shots of genitalia. Our advertisers don’t like us to put stuff like that right in the stories so you’ll have to click to shirt to see it. (If you are under 18 or find gay sex acts bothersome do not follow that link.) The thing that bothers me about this shirt is that little kids can so easily see it. That’s not funny at all and while I don’t try to shield my child from seeing nude people in non-sexual situations (i.e. at the beach), there is obviously more going on in the scenes depicted on Sam’s shirt and that’s troublesome. I used to have a decent impression of her as the person who helped Lohan turn her life around. Given how much of a self-entitled brat Lohan has been thus far, I don’t think it’s too much of a leap to assume that Sam has some obnoxious traits herself and is not the amazing person the media is making her out to be. She’s sleeping with Lohan and just because she’s a woman that doesn’t mean we should give her a pass or say how great it is when we used to make fun of all the other douches willing to be linked to the thrice-rehabbed actress.
Lohan and Ronson are back in LA after a few days in NY. Ronson sported a new hair cut along with this t-shirt that is only suitable as a pajama top and not in mixed company. I think it’s time the paparazzi stopped following these two around, and maybe Ronson was trying to make that point with this shirt. Hopefully she wore it for like 10 minutes and there were no kids around.
Lindsay has had more than one panty-less photo taken, but she looks a little embarrassed to be seen with Samantha here. I wonder how long they’ll last.
Written by Celebitchy
Posted in Lindsay Lohan, Samantha Ronson
- Diet secrets from Jessica Alba's nutritionist [Hollywood Life]
- Hef's twins have beautiful hair [D-Listed]
- The Twilight kids: more "Hills" than cool [Lainey Gossip]
- Ellen premieres on Idol tonight [Popeater]
- Cute photos of Anna Paquin and Steven Moyer exercising [Popsugar]
- JWoww wants bigger implants [Celebslam]
- Look at Handy Manny now [Go Fug Yourself]
89 Responses to “Samantha Ronson wears obnoxious shirt with guys’ d1cks hanging out (NSFW)”
-
“just because she’s a woman that doesn’t mean we should give her a pass or say how great it is when …” by that same token, don’t defend sluts.
The shirt is trashy, anyway. -
While I agree that it certainly may have not been the classiest article of clothing for her to choose from that day, I think you’re being a little hard on her Celebitcy. Just because she wore an inappropriately funny shirt doesn’t mean you should throw her under the bus. You think they should stop following these girls because Sam wore a shirt, but I bet you will have no problem posting an article today about how Amy Winehouse was seen acting a damned drugged fool on the streets of London and then follow it up with an “Oh poor Amy. I hope she gets better.” Little harsh, don’t ya think?
-
Well I’ve seen far worse on a t-shirt in public so can’t get too worked up on that count but it’s definitely smacks of attention-seeking. Kind of strange for Sam Ro tho’, she doesn’t (or at least hasn’t up to now) seemed the media-whorey type. Maybe everything else was in the wash. *shrug*
-
Funny until I have to explain the images to my kid…
I’d have the same problem if my kid and I walked past a stoned out of her head Winehouse and I had to explain that.
Sure I can try and choose what my child does and doesn’t see, but if I had just happened to walk by her on the steet. Personal choices fine, but to subject those choices to the general public, well…
-
I think Sam is probably just as obnoxious as Lindsey. She is the one who drove a passed out LL to a gas station filled with paparazzi after all.
-
Perez alleges that Ronson is the one who grabbed the paps and had them take that picture of LiLo you see everywhere where she’s passed out in the front seat of an SUV with her mouth open. And yes, I know it may not be true because Perez ond Ronson don’t get along.
EDIT - Whoops, Bodhi and I cross-posted.
-
I think that most parents would agree that they would be mortified if their young child saw that shirt, stared at it, and started asking questions. I don’t expose my child to porn and that’s what it is. It’s not “inappropriately funny,” it’s adult images that only adults should see. I have not seen anything like that out and I would be very upset if my 4 year-old child saw that. There are sex shops and things but it is different to see a sexy topless woman or a regular naked person vs. an image of someone with their head in another person’s crotch. I do not know how I would explain that to my child and this is not a benign t-shirt.
-
whatever… i wear a betty page t-shirt with her tided up and her tits out. i never got any complaints. granted i don’t wear it in the middle of the afternoon…
-
Again, Nikki, there is nothing wrong with nudity. There’s a blowjob depicted on this shirt and semi-erect dicks. That is my problem with it. If you’re a parent and would approve of your little kid seeing that, by all means defend her shirt.
-
Celebitchy, I too have a young child, a 5 year-old boy. No I would not want him to see that and no I DEFINITELY would not want to have to explain to him what it meant. I was merely pointing out that you are critcizing her for a shirt that she wore but when it comes to, what I believe to be, far worse things (such as Amy Winehouse in all her drugged glory on the streets where every one can see her) you were being just a little harsh. That’s all. I completely agree with you that she should not have been wearing it in public…but you have to admit, that shit IS funny. LOL
-
Why is there a circle on Samantha’s head?
-
what i was trying to say is that believe it or not there is a time and a place for shirts like these. one of them NOT BEING in the middle of the afternoon where anyone can see it. i’m certainly not defending this shirt in it’s present context.
-
The argument that a child might see it and question it didn’t make much sense to me at first because I was thinking you’d barely notice something like that if you passed it in the street. But I guess if she’s static, eg. sitting down in a restaurant or standing in a queue or something in broad daylight, where it’s clearly visible to others (kids included) then yeah, innapproriate. See what you mean.
-
My kid can spot small things and moving things from across the room that I would never notice. Usually they’re candy, gummi bears, or spongebob-related, but he’s very perceptive and curious. He also picks up on a lot that wouldn’t occur to me and we have to be careful what we say around him. I understand what you’re saying Nikki and CelebitchyFan about the shirt being funny in the right context - maybe at night at a party or something, but it’s definitely not appropriate for the day. People had a shit fit over Janet Jackson’s boob. These are sex acts on a t-shirt and this woman is not being funny or clever by wearing it. Also I do feel sorry for Winehouse. There are stumbling people on the street all the time and you tell your kid they’re sick, they can’t feel their legs or they drink too much beer. There are also people with disabilities that give them trouble walking and you explain that clearly too. Winehouse is different to me. I believe in personal responsibility of course, but she’s an addict. There’s nothing admirable about that, but it’s a much different issue than chosing to put on an obscene t-shirt.
-
Love her new hair
Not really bothered by the shirt - if she was wearing it at Disneyland that would be different….did wonder if she could be arrested in California for obscenity or public indecency for wearing it?
-
Gosh, we wouldn’t want children asking questions. That would lead to conversations.
-
Questions are fine.
Having to explain pornography to a six year old is not. -
Meh. I’m not going to get worked up over it. But I do I have a question for other posters… were/are any of you guys/girls into Jane’s Addiction? Do you remember the Jane’s Addiction t-shirt for “Nothing’s Shocking” with the naked women with their hair on fire? I used to have it but someone stole it. OTT, I know, but the t-shirt was so inappropriate I had to change it once in high school…
-
Welcome to 2008. Parents can’t control the world. Shit like this stupid shirt is not going to stop, so parents have to adjust.
-
Just in case you feel like replacing it:
http://www.amazon.com/Janes-Addiction-Nothing-Shocking-T-Shirt/dp/B000BT073U
-
Thanks, Jann!
-
Thats what I was gonna say- theres a slew of tshirts demeaning women and female bodies all the time- and that goes hardly criticised… playboy t shirts, “john did-er”…
I think Sam is being iconoclast by reversing what is typically done by guys and accepted… thats if she thinks like me LOL That would be the only reason I would wear it; to break the glass ceiling and prove the double-standard is still alive and kicking. Good that it makes people think… -
i don’t give a crap about the shirt. what really disturbs me is that i actually think lindsey looks cute in these photos. oh god what’s wrong with me?!
-
Good one ri23. Its the puritanical ‘hypocrisy’ that leads kids into more trouble than honesty and acceptance.
-
And I could go another step to say it could bug people in part because it is a display of female sexuality- which is always hyper-scrutinized and condemned, in sharp contrast to male displays of sexuality. Nobody’s fault in particular thuis has been going on for eons. But that is of course splitting hairs here… LOL
-
Nah, honestly, I’d just like my little girl to be a little girl while she can be. She’s going to have grow up soon enough and not having to be so adult so early in life isn’t a bad thing.
She has no reason to have fellatio explained to her.
Hopscotch and hula hoops for a few more years please! -
In no way do I condone the robbery of childhood innocence; I am looking purely on the political/cultural side of this. But if childhood is a concern then there are billions of things we could point to for robbing innocence too early- like, everythign on tv and in all the magazines, for example– not just one t-shirt worn by someone for a day.
-
Sam’s a DJ and she’s just wearing a shirt promoting the band The Virgins… the shirt may offend some and it’s certainly not one I’d be wearing out in public, but then again if the press wasn’t always hounding these two we probably would never have seen the shirt nor be talking about it!
-
Eh, i find nothing wrong with it, but then again, I’m not a parent.
-
heehee, plenty of parents choose to limit t.v. for their children for that exact reason. And I can say the only magazine my children really pay any attention to is Highlights for Children. You can’t say that just because there are parents who don’t monitor their childrens, this shirt is acceptable on a public street in broad daylight. Nor can you say its “puritanical hypocrisy” to want to keep our children from being exposed to porn. If it were just a few pictures of nude men, no big deal. Pictures of sexual acts, whether by men or women or both, big deal.
Oh, and how in the world can pictures of male sexuality be “a display of female sexuality”? I think you’re overintellectuallizing just a bit.
-
CAN SOMEONE TELL PAMELA ANDERSON WAT SHE JUST WORE!
-
I love that shirt, where can I get one like it? Woohoo! This is possibly the coolest and greatest thing Samantha Ronson has done in her life, wearing that shirt.
Yay! -
Or maybe she’s a DJ and into underground music and a fan of The Virgins. They were just in NY, she’s probably just promoting the band. Maybe knowing she would be photographed, someone asked her to wear the shirt to promote the band.
Obviously you don’t get the joke, a picture of a blowjob representing people calling themselves The Virgins is the truest intentional ironic statement I’ve seen in a long time. I’m thinking the fact that Sam Ronson is wearing it while walking next to her straight girlfriend is probably a bit of unintentional irony. Get it? -
OMG Jen you have me cracking up..LOL It’s a t-shirt for God’s sake…calm the f*ck down.
She is a DJ and she has a group’s promotional shirt on. Her new haircut looks so much better.
Look at so many things kids see nowadays and yet parents how do you explain.. A 17 year old getting pregnant (Jamie Lynn Spears) Miley Cyrus a teenager with partial nudity shots (wtf)half naked women walking the streets of LA and NY. It is called a conversation people with your child.
I really like Sam and Lyndsay, however, I would not have worn that shirt myself, but that doesnt make her a bad person. I mean come on and be real.. gggeeezzzz.
-
I actually can’t understand why everyone loves Ronson, she’s riding Lohan’s coat tails like everyone else in her life.
Porn is not ok for children, it’s pretty simple but I’m not sure how I feel about this t shirt. I don’t blame CB for reacting so strongly and honestly don’t think people without children clearly wouldn’t understand why she would object to her child seeing this shirt. I can’t really see it (damn), are they engaged in a sexual act or just naked? Clearly aroused though.
-
I think the issue isn’t about being uptight. Everyone has the right to set their own standards about that stuff, and what’s okay with you and for your kids. The problem is that by wearing a shirt like this out in public, it’s more of a challenge for parents to keep their kids from seeing it. It’s not like turning off the television or hiding your husband’s Playboys under lock and key. There’s probably nothing a parent can do to keep their child from seeing this until it’s too late. I tend not to notice stuff like this. If I were walking down the street with a child, no way in hell would I even realize what was on Samantha’s shirt until I was within a few feet of her and the kid saw it too. So seeing the shirt isn’t a choice like seeing nudity on TV is. There’s no real option not to see it. Yeah I could cross the street, but it would only be after the fact. I couldn’t know ahead of time that a penis shirt was coming my way. And everyone should have the choice whether or not to see something like that; it shouldn’t be forced down anyone’s throats.
-
The T-shirt is obviously meant to provoke. It also shows that Ronson is just as much of an attention-whore as her girlfriend. I’m not personally offended by it, but at the same time I think it’s tacky and trying way to hard to be “in your face.”
Regarding Ronson, there are rumblings in the entertainment industry that she’s a marginally capable DJ and the only reason she’s getting so many gigs is because clubowners know that Lohan will show up for them. I’d like to see someone put THAT on a T-shirt.
-
Did I say the t-shirt was ‘acceptable on a public street in broad daylight’? Pardon me but I dont recall saying that.
No need to nit-pick about particulars of magazine names, just to fly past the point Im trying to make. -
Pathetic the both of them. Linds will do anything for publicity and Sam will do anything for Linds - including wear this so Linds can have photos taken of her. Linds is still not fooling us. She gets her drugs from Sam. Look at them - some drugs make you thin - and unhealthy looking.
-
no big deal to me… i see the vivienne westwood cowboy & indian shirt where they are naked with their dicks touching all the time in public and now this one is controversial too. why? i don’t get it, my nieces n nephews wouldn’t question it b/c they wouldn’t even come close to understanding it. not to mention you see and hear 10x worse things in school as a kid from other kids.
and i think they are right with the whole she’s just promoting a band… if you have a problem with it you should express it to the band that made the shirt, not someone who owns/ wore it
-
You don”t have to have children to find this shirt offensive. It”s absolutely inappropriate and in bad taste to wear this out in public. If you enjoy pornography so be it. Just enjoy it in private
-
HOLY MOSES!!!8O
-
Big Deal!
Sid Viscious made his similar “cowboys” shirt a classic. Its about time for another one-Go Sam! -
the shirt doesn’t offend me, the idea that it’s worn by people who profess a desire to be “left alone” and have “privacy” does. These celeb asshats do all this ridiculous crap for attention, period, so no whining when the paps get in your way.
-
I am not a prude, but agree with CB. I wouldn’t want my Grandkids seeing that. It is for the shock value, she doesn’t have kids, so she doesn’t care.
Would any of you feel the same if she wore a shirt with a big hairy pussy on it? -
Do you mean a cat, daisy?
-
er, um
Yes geronimo, thanks!
-
Interesting. I wonder if Samantha wore a shirt that had naked women on it, including one with her legs spread so all could see the vajayjay if people would say it was obscene or inapprpriate, but oh no, it is just some guy’s cock and pubic hair. Pffft. A bit of a double standard there, yeah.
-
I’m far from a prude myself, but I just think genitalia should be a private thing.
Someone is going to leap up and say “What about nude beaches?!?!?”
If you choose to take your child to a nude beach, then you have to be prepared for that child to gaze upon adult genitalia. Hopefully not adult genitalia being licked, caressed, or penetrated, but still genitalia. But I just don’t think it’s appropriate to have it forced upon you by someone wearing it on a public street in broad daylight. It can be embarrassing not only for children, but for elder persons who believe in gentility, manners and privacy.
-
Whether it jives with your moral views or not, unless this shirt is illegal and you can call the police to confiscate it off of Blohan’s chick’s back, everyone’s just going to have to live with the fact that she’s wearing it and doesn’t care if your kids see it.
-
Legally right.
Good manners and decency have no place in this new society. I know that.
I wonder if the supporters of the shirt being worn publicly would have everyone keep their children confined to the house then. Great Aunt Minnie better stay home too.
It seems to me that the more rights some gain, the less rights others have.
-
Good grief. Why do people have to be so goddamned dramatic? Yes, those who say, eh, let her wear what she wants, that of course means we want all children to have porn thrown in their faces, or, the obvious alternative, stay confined to their homes forever. Congratulations, you have figured everyone out.
-
Agree Syko, ri23 probably doesn’t have a child yet…………
Elisha; It is an opinion, not censorship. Relax.
I used to think alot like you about these things, I have changed in my thinking as I grew up and aged and had kids.
Just an opinion. -
Alright, I came back here and see there’s a full-fledged debate going on. I guess I’ll weigh in. I was sort of indifferent about this at first, but now I’m reading all this comments and realized one of the issues I stand for most is up for debate here: CENSORSHIP.
I HATE the Parents Television Council with a passion, and it’s because they want to change certain things because their children MIGHT see them. The problem is, the things they want to change are things I enjoy. So I have to sacrifice myself because you can’t chance your kid seeing it? How about using it as a opportunity to talk to your kid? Instead you want to shelter them. Those are the kids to grow up to be serial killers and have unhealthy views about sex because mommy taught them it was dirty (not talking you about you C|B, your views seem pretty healthy, mostly aiming this at the PTC). I accidently found my share of porn when I was a kid (my parents rented space out to a cuh-reeep), and even my most goodie-two shoes friends did as well (one went to Stanford and is now becoming a doctor, it’s safe to say her catching her dad watching porn didn’t ruin her life).
America is supposedly a free country, so I should be able to wear porn or watch people dirty dancing (again that’s aimed at the PTC)on TV if I want. I’m SO SICK of the goverment and fellow citizens telling me what to do and it’s ruining everything America stands for: FREEDOM.
It’s a different story if Sam were walking up to kids and going “look! look!” Then that’s contributing to the delinquency of a minor or whatever. Not that. Lewd and lacivious acts? I don’t know. Something illegal involving showing kids porn. But wearing it to some ritzy place that kids shouldn’t be shopping, no. You’re infringing on her civil liberties just because you want to shelter your kid.
-
daisy424: Oh, please. I think the shirt is stupid and immature, I simply support her right to wear it. Pushing out a kid doesn’t make you more enlightened than others or give you the right to force your personal morals on everyone else. Stick to parenting your own kids and not the rest of the world.
-
I agree with you to a great extent, Elisha. I abhor censorship. I raised my kids pretty openly, because I agree that kids who are sheltered from everything often embrace all the things they should not, the minute they get out from under your thumb. I don’t want anyone telling me what my kids can read, what movies they can see, what television they can watch. That’s up to me as the parent.
I’m just talking manners here. I’m not offended by the shirt myself. But a lot of people would be, and not just children. Do you wear things that you know will be offensive to some people just so you can show them that you have the right to do it (using “you” here as a general term, not referring to anyone who posted here)? Isn’t that a somewhat immature attitude in itself?
Call me old fashioned, but I think shirts depicting sexual acts don’t belong on city streets, even if it is a rich area where children should not be shopping.
-
oooh, that hurt ri23
-
That’s just what everyone wants to see. Especially on a lesbian! What a freak.
-
One of the perks of being childless — lots of sleep leading to an even temperment. None of that pesky postpartum passive/aggressiveness.
-
the t shirt is the tour tshirt of a band called the virgins (as you can see on the bottom of the shirt…)
& who cares if she wants to wear a shirt with penises on it. Have you never seen a penis?
Seriously, its not like shes claiming to be anyones role model.
get over it.
shes a grown woman, she can wear what she wants. -
I don’t have kids. That said, *I* don’t want to see crap like this when I’m out. Sure, nudity is natural. So is defecating. The sense of ‘appropriateness’ is sorely lacking in our society.
-
ri23 I know right? My children are grown, so I sleep late also.
Never had that pesky postpartum either.You’re right “Pushing out a kid doesn’t make you more enlightened than others”
But, Most parents you want to protect their kids from crap like that.
I honestly think you missed my point, but maybe in the future you will.
-
Yeah, you’re missing my point too. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
-
Haha MStat! Well said.
“the only reason she’s getting so many gigs is because clubowners know that Lohan will show up for them. I’d like to see someone put THAT on a T-shirt.”
-
Point 1: That shirt in fact may be illegal, i.e., considered legally “obscene” and therefore she could have been forced to remove it. Even if it’s considered legally obscene, businesses could refuse entry to her for obscenity. My guess is that no one called cops on her or businesses refused entry because, well, it’s LA. And it segs into my 2nd point.
Point 2: It’s LA. Really. That shirt is tame compared to what goes on. Some people bring up decorum and civility. Really? What’s worse? Little girls, some looking no more than 13 or 14 yr olds going about the streets practically naked, or a T-shirt with tiny pictures of gay sex that’s pretty difficult to spot? Last year I was in LA and roundarout during summer. If there ever was a pedophile heaven, it was the whole damn county. We saw at least dozen girls no older than 13 or 14 who wore see-through shirts that had their tits hanging out for the whole world to see. What’s worse? Little kids seeing and probably not comprehending what’s going on on teeny tiny pics on a shirt, or the whole damn country fetishilizing little girls’ sexuality? When people take real steps to stop sexualizing little girls, like throwing those asses who made Britney’s “Hit me one more time” music vids or fining disgusting middle-aged men who bought or d/led Britney songs/vids, that shirt ain’t nothin’
-
“Our advertisers don’t like us to put stuff like that right in the stories so you’ll have to click to shirt to see it.”
One of your advertisers is a porn rental service (Sugar DVD). The advertiser doesn’t bother me, but I just think it’s funny that advertisers are the reason you can’t show the shirt in the story itself.
-
Completely tasteless. The shirt doesn’t bother me, the fact that she wore it for attention and a lack of respect for others, is the main thing that bothers me. She’s just another punk
-
66. What a nice thing to call her. What does being a lesbian have anything to do with it? Calling her a dyke is so inappropriate and rude. How would you like it if you were called a cunt?
-
Ok Lindsay and Samantha, don’t let me down - I want to see huge matching bicep tattoos proclaiming your eternal love for each other!! Spare no ink ladies!! Ownership via ink is an essential part of any trashy lovefest!!
-
First, the new ‘do is adorable. I always thought if Ronson did the high-fashion glam drag, she’d be top-drawer.
Secondly, the t-shirt is a non-issue. She’s a deejay walking down a sidewalk, not a preschool teacher at recess. I DO have small children, and the questions they’d ask– if they even did ask– would not be as in-depth or specific as the concern expressed by a few posters here. Your reaction will dictate your child’s. Rogue gummi bears are MUCH more fascinating to a child than men’s cocks, and a simple, honest, brief explanation will easily satisfy.
It’s art or freedom of speech, not obscenity. As many posters have pointed out, it seems that it’s because it’s male and not female nudity that is raising ire.PS Elise– Point and match!
-
Attention-starved lesbo c*nt. Oh so irreverent & cutting-edge chic. Please die now. Thanks.
-
i’m totally with you, mike… and it’s not just LA, it’s everywhere. i can’t believe what some parents will allow their girls to wear. god, i sound like i am sixty. i’m not, but little girls did not wear thongs hanging out of their pants and barely-there halter tops when i was a kid.
-
my .02:
She wore the shirt on purpose to mess with the paps.
I hate to admit I want one of those shirts. For the nighttime. In my house. I don’t have kids.
-
The word ‘censorship’ is thrown around WAY too frequently when it comes to bullshit like this. This isn’t censorship, it’s common decency.
Censorship would be the government telling consenting adults that they can’t look at pictures of a penis is they want to.
Banning pornography would be censorship. Putting it in a plastic bag so kids can’t see it up behind the register is decency. See the difference? No one is being denied their right to produce or read the publication, but kids aren’t being exposed to it.
I agree that kids being exposed to nudity is fine. Anatomy and sexuality are two very different things though. Anatomy has no real social taboo, but sexuality varies a lot depending on religious and societal backgrounds, and we need to respect that.
My two year old knows the proper names for all her body parts. She knows the physical difference between boys and girls. She does not however know the mechanics of sexual relations - and she doesn’t need to learn it because some moron is mad at her daddy and wants to make a public ass of herself.
-
I don’t have a problem with homosexuality, art, or pornography for that matter, but there is a place and time for that T-shirt.
-
Of course, that being said, I bet she was only wearing this in public to offend people, so in my opinion, she’s just another desperate asshole.
-
She has been elevated to a c**t in my book because that is a skank move if I ever saw one. That is appropriate for a perverted club gig and NEVER for public consumption. I will no longer be kind in my comments about them, their looks or their relationship. I have been harsh about Sam’s looks before but now she is ugly in her soul as well. I hope this is the death knell for the fame whore duo. Yeah I said it.
-
DLR- You are totally wrong. It’s not about the gender, it’s about the appropriateness and the “in your face” bravado of this chick(?). And if you look, these men are not just idly standing side by side, they are grappling with extreme innuendo.
It’s ridiculous in the first place that she(Sam) is famous for being famous. Like I have said elsewhere, this “I don’t give a shit” attitude from these two is going to bite them in the butt. They have looked like gutter turds for the past few months, this just takes it to a new level. Hideous.
-
It doesn’t matter if she is promoting and “there is irony in it” so I am supposed to laugh it off. Not gonna do it. It was a totally c**t move on her part, but I must consider the source. Like company after three days time, this couple is beginning to stink. Bye, bye.
-
Why does Sam, who, btw, was, in fact well known and talented before hooking up with Lohan, wearing a stupid shirt suddenly mean these two won’t last?
-
Don’t look at me, I never believed for a second that these two were going to last.
Lindsay Lohan has been known for pissing off a lot of married women, or women in relationships. I think she’s a compulsive cheater.
-
Scott, thank you. I was trying to say that, and you said it better. It’s just good decency and good manners to dress appropriately for the situation. Going shopping in the daytime is not a situation in which you should wear clothes depicting sexual acts.
As for this being a match made in heaven - just because Lindsay isn’t passing out in cars, stealing cars, wrecking them, and endangering other people at the moment does not mean that Samantha has cured her. I don’t see this as the love match of the century, and don’t see it lasting.
-
Diva, thanks for pointing out that Sam Ronson has a career independent of Lohan and is a rated DJ in her own right. She may not be quite up there with the Tongs and Oakenfolds but she’s still well regarded. Just for those who think she had no life of her own before Lohan.
At the end of the day, it’s an item of clothing. Personally, if I could be bothered to be offended, it would be with those who go around with their tits and asses hanging out for all to see. That’s attention-seeking and far closer to porn.
-
Wake up, folks. Common “decency” has left the house a long time ago. The shirt is tasteless, true, but so are Daisy Dukes on 14 yr olds. Talk about being influenced negatively by harmful images. Are little children really that much harmed by tiny pics on a t-shirt that’s quite difficult to see, or blatantly public, blaise acceptance of pubescent girls’ sexuality in public?
We have created a culture of permissiveness where it is ok for little girls to flaunt their sexuality in public, in fact some parents even encourage this. Does anyone remember Jon Benet Ramsey and the world of little gals’ beauty paegants?
It is far worse that little girls are objectified and turned into sexual objects of desire in our culture, and that little girls see a very PUBLIC evidence of how it’s okay to dress like a whore everywhere they go. Have you been to malls lately? It’s more offensive, tasteless, and beyond the norms of decency that people allow little girls to be dressed thusly in public. To the destructive effects such public objectification has on the minds of our children, a tasteless t-shirt with a dick is hardly a cause for concern, or even outrage. Unless you think it’s ok for little girls to dress up like whores, but not ok to have a t-shirt with grainy pics of dick.
-
I agree with you, Mike.
And this shirt is certainly lewd in context, but I wonder how upset everyone would be if someone wore a T-shirt depicting a naked woman spread eagle.
I’m in a good mood tonight
-
I like the shirt, LOVE the intellectual debate it inspires.
But for all this talk about sexuality and “censorship” (and I use the term very loosely), I’m curious to know how parents feel about the pervasive element of violence in our culture. Surely talking to the kiddies about a male-on-male blowjob will lead to some uncomfortable questions (providing they will even notice the damn shirt), but what of the thousands of images of violence that bombard and desensitize kids on their Saturday morning cartoons? Surely something as prevalent and dehumanizing as indifferent violence ought to warrant more conversation than a few pictures of a couple of consenting adults enjoying their Tuesday night?
Leave a Reply
Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.By commenting you agree to our comment policy
Use the "Report this comment as spam or abuse" link to ask the moderators to delete a comment if it's offensive. If your comment disappears, it has been eaten by the spam filter. Please e-mail cbcomments at gmail.com to get it retrieved.
Get an icon next to your name by signing up for a free Gravatar
Classy.
Report this comment as spam or abuse