Page 2 | Am I being prudish, or do I have a point?

AmIJustAPrude · 2025-01-08T09:39:29+00:00

NC for this. I've just sent the following email to a company I ordered underwear from: *I've just received my order confirmation and was quite shocked by the accompanying image. I don't want to screenshot it to resend, so hopefully you can work out the image I mean: it is of two women/girls lying on their fronts outside wearing black pants.* *The woman (I hope) or girl on the left is very thin, which immediately made me assume she was a teenager. One of her breasts is clearly visible. * *I'm not prudish about breasts at all, but it made me extremely uncomfortable to receive an image of what appears to be an almost-naked teenage girl. Given you also sell bras, it seems totally unnecessary for her to be completely topless. * *I recommend you review the images you send out to your customers, as this has put me off using your company again. * As I say, I don't have an issue with breasts- I've breastfed in public many a time. It was mainly the fact that, based on her body shape, the woman/girl in the photo looks very young (post-pubescent, but pre-adult) and the exposed breast was completely unnecessary. So what do you think: did I overreact?

Original poster

AmIJustAPrude · 10/01/2025 06:26

Guys, do you think I should cancel the cheque? 😉

OP posts:

QueenRainbow · 10/01/2025 05:03

Me again
I actually went back and placed a second order after receiving an email saying an extra 10% off sale prices .
Was refreshing to see models of all shapes, sizes, ages and nationalities without an airbrush (as far as I can tell)
so I now have several pairs of knickers and a few bras to come. Ha ha.
oh and I would be extremely cautious of the person who implied that those of us that enjoy colours/ patterns are doing it for kink or whatever, if your mind goes there YOU are the dodgy one not me.

OatMilkshake · 09/01/2025 23:53

DiaryofaProvincialLady · 09/01/2025 23:49

Thats her left elbow ffs!!

Show quote history

She knows ‘ffs!!’

Read the thread ‘ffs!!’

murasaki · 09/01/2025 23:51

'It's an elbow' is going to become the new 'cancel the cheque'.

DiaryofaProvincialLady · 09/01/2025 23:49

Datesandprunes · 08/01/2025 10:21

Is this the picture. Sorry OP but I don't think she's teenager-esq at all.

I do think it's unnecessary boob though! https://stripeandstare.com/blogs/news/what-does-being-a-b-corp-business-mean

*edited to ask question

Edited

Thats her left elbow ffs!!

AlleycatMarie · 09/01/2025 23:48

Thank you for this thread OP. It has given me such a giggle - I shared it with dh too who also has a laugh 🤣

BrieHugger · 09/01/2025 23:40

ClassyJen · 09/01/2025 23:31

If this is the photo then this is not a breast! It’s just her other arm you can see leaning on the rug! You can’t see any boobage at all!!! You need to have another look!!!

Calm down, Jen. We established this 500 posts ago.

ClassyJen · 09/01/2025 23:31

If this is the photo then this is not a breast! It’s just her other arm you can see leaning on the rug! You can’t see any boobage at all!!! You need to have another look!!!

OrangeWallaby · 09/01/2025 22:18

Brilliant thread, @AmIJustAPrude . Love your good humour. Ignore all the po. Think you should use that voucher. I'd never heard of them either and now quite fancy some smart pants, having just bought a pack of very plain ones from Sainsbury's (£7 for 5 pairs, mind)

Thmssngvwlsrnd · 09/01/2025 19:06

Crudd99 · 09/01/2025 18:28

TBF I don't want to look at or be sent any nudity especially if it is emailed to me when I'm buying knickers. The your order has been dispatched picture is like soft porn and there is no need for it. The model does look young and its unfortunate that she's the one who's breast is exposed. I've got no problem with breast feeding in public etc but the way the first picture is its not appropriate its sexualised. Not something I'd want to look at when buying my draws.

If you read the rest of the thread you'll see that it's not her breast, it's her elbow.

BIossomtoes · 09/01/2025 18:48

That picture wouldn’t have qualified as soft porn in the 1950s. What a puritanical age this is.

Crudd99 · 09/01/2025 18:28

TBF I don't want to look at or be sent any nudity especially if it is emailed to me when I'm buying knickers. The your order has been dispatched picture is like soft porn and there is no need for it. The model does look young and its unfortunate that she's the one who's breast is exposed. I've got no problem with breast feeding in public etc but the way the first picture is its not appropriate its sexualised. Not something I'd want to look at when buying my draws.

ItsCalledAConversation · 09/01/2025 18:08

Jumpingthruhoops · 09/01/2025 13:00

Not at all. We haven't had 'waif-like' models since the early 2000s; any brand that dropped the ball got called out and rightly so.
The woman in this photo is slim not thin and it's that picture specifically that we're talking about.

Show quote history

This is absolute bunkum. The fashion industry is still full of size zero models.

muckandmerriment · 09/01/2025 14:46

This is the picture I got on another email from them. I like their marketing, they use a range of ages and sizes. I've bought from them repeatedly.

Sensitive content

Am I being prudish, or do I have a point?

muckandmerriment · 09/01/2025 14:45

I'm guessing it was this picture OP? I didn't even notice it until I read your post and went to check my emails from the company.

Sensitive content

pointswinprizes · 09/01/2025 14:43

Jumpingthruhoops · 09/01/2025 14:19

The early 2000s is 25 years ago... so not remotely 'recent'.
Yet 25 years on people are still using the BS phrase 'real women'. OP was so alarmed at seeing a normal, slim woman, she started a thread about it.

Show quote history

Well..comparatively recently (compared to the 60s/70s/80s).

I don’t think the thread is meant to be about the models weight though. Some people have picked up in that but that’s not why the thread was started.

Jumpingthruhoops · 09/01/2025 14:19

pointswinprizes · 09/01/2025 13:35

Yes, I did say up until recently. I was just making the point that slim/thin models may touch a nerve after decades of being told we should all fit into the same clothes/look like them (hence the “real women” comment used by a pp).

Edited

Show quote history

The early 2000s is 25 years ago... so not remotely 'recent'.
Yet 25 years on people are still using the BS phrase 'real women'. OP was so alarmed at seeing a normal, slim woman, she started a thread about it.

pointswinprizes · 09/01/2025 13:35

Jumpingthruhoops · 09/01/2025 13:00

Not at all. We haven't had 'waif-like' models since the early 2000s; any brand that dropped the ball got called out and rightly so.
The woman in this photo is slim not thin and it's that picture specifically that we're talking about.

Show quote history

Yes, I did say up until recently. I was just making the point that slim/thin models may touch a nerve after decades of being told we should all fit into the same clothes/look like them (hence the “real women” comment used by a pp).

NosinaBook · 09/01/2025 13:12

TheWeeKelpie · 08/01/2025 13:30

It’s true and Im happy you’re having a laugh. In fact I mentioned the CrossFit on a weight loss thread early this morning with regards to BMI not taking a persons muscle mass into consideration when doing the calculation.

In the meantime Ive been away for a 5km walk in the glorious sunshine with just the right amount of a cold breeze and I’ve had quite the laugh on my travels as well at this thread - the elboob (amongst other things).

Edited

Show quote history

I'm so jealous of your multi-tasking skills, I've never even thought of scrolling social media during exercise, especially outdoors. I'd definitely do myself an injury.

Jumpingthruhoops · 09/01/2025 13:00

pointswinprizes · 09/01/2025 12:26

I think that’s a bit disingenuous. Everyone knows that up until till very recently models were always mega thin rather than an average weight.

Edited

Show quote history

Not at all. We haven't had 'waif-like' models since the early 2000s; any brand that dropped the ball got called out and rightly so.
The woman in this photo is slim not thin and it's that picture specifically that we're talking about.

Pancakeflipper · 09/01/2025 12:43

I ❤️ you OP.
That's a hilarious misunderstanding of ripples and elbows.

Salad666 · 09/01/2025 12:37

And just to add - your picture was top notch and definitely got across what you were describing 👌🏻😂

Salad666 · 09/01/2025 12:35

OP, thank you for this thread. This is the best thread I've seen on here since I joined and I will always remember the breast that was an elbow 😂

(P.s. in your email image it definitely did look like tit and nip - I showed my husband with zero context and he asked why she had her breast out so hopefully that helps you feel less silly 😂).

pointswinprizes · 09/01/2025 12:26

Jumpingthruhoops · 09/01/2025 10:40

We're talking about a 'thin' (??) woman in an advert.
PP wrote: 'If you're selling knickers show real women in them'.
Thus suggesting slim women don't exist.

Show quote history

I think that’s a bit disingenuous. Everyone knows that up until till very recently models were always mega thin rather than an average weight.

pumpkinpillow · 09/01/2025 12:21

LittleRedYarny · 09/01/2025 01:37

I don’t think larger ladies in stockings and tights is a fetish thank you very much!

I’m a size 16/18 and I appreciate seeing my body type being used to model items designed to fit my body shape so I can make an informed consumer choice. This doesn’t not make it fetishised advertising!

Show quote history

If you go to the Snag stocking and suspender page some of the models are more than just showing how the products looks IMO.