I can’t look at this tombstone without seeing a fanjo

[UnitedWire]

Aibu? I mean … I guess it must be a stylised letter M, but …

Wow, you need to take a look at yourself. This is really poor taste! Can't believe you put a photo on too.

I saw an interesting gravestone in Scotland. In fact I photographed it, though I won't put the picture on here. Changing names it said...

In loving memory of
John
His wife Laura
Their daughter Laura Jr
His wife Jane
His daughter Annie
Annie's Mum Clara

All in the same grave. The man died last and chose the be interred with his two wives, child from his first marriage, child who appeared much later and a poor woman who didn't get to be described on her own merits.

It was quite remarkable.

@Greydove28

Wow, you need to take a look at yourself. This is really poor taste! Can't believe you put a photo on too.

Oh give over. It's a 300 year old tombstone.

Looks like a bare arse bending over

As for whether or not posters are offended, when people describe something as being in bad or poor taste, or disrespectful those terms are synonymous with the word “offensive.” It’s easy to assume these posters are offended, even if they claim they’re not.

Not many people would say, “This is a hilarious thread, but I’m not amused by it.”

Calling a poster's views on the distasteful nature of your thread "rubbish" is hardly polite.

They were public statements of identity/status and now they are part of the urban fabric. That context matters, I think

The fact that we are still ultimately talking about human beings matters more.

If you just wanted to discuss the symbol, why post an extra image including their names?

You've literally started a thread mocking a memorial in honour of people's dead loved ones. How is it anything other than a piss-take?

[quote Treacletoots]Here it is..

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/29/vagina-gravestone-milan-marinkovic-wifes-vulva-tomb_n_2039378.html[/quote]
"A true likeness was achieved as Milena helpfully left a series of close-up photos of her vagina"

Bloody hilarious!

The fact that we are still ultimately talking about human beings matters more

I can't speak for everyone, but I'm pretty sure most people are talking about the headstone and not the people.

If you just wanted to discuss the symbol, why post an extra image including their names

Presumably for context. I agree it's not wholly required, but I don't think it's a huge issue.

You've literally started a thread mocking a memorial in honour of people's dead loved ones. How is it anything other than a piss-take

To be accurate 'a memorial of long dead people's long dead loved ones'.

There's nobody alive now that will remember any of them. And it's an observation. Nobody is mocking it. Some people are amused by it. Some not. But being amused by something is not the same as mocking it.

Whilst the language used in the OP is bound to cause controversy I'm actually quite reassured that strangers are interested enough to discuss a memorial that is over 200 years old - whether in terms of iconography or in terms of how we speak about memorials/show respect.

Memorials are the property of the family and the reality is that, once the immediately family have died, they are often not cared for (beyond basic health and safety repairs). Thousands of memorials around the country from the last 100 years or so are now broken and illegible. And then there are the memorials that are:

• turned over and used for someone else, damaged by iconoclasts, used as paving slabs, relocated to the edge of a churchyard to make space for new burials, moved to a dark corner of a church to make space for whatever the latest liturgical changes were, destroyed because the churchyard is being turned into a road/building/car park etc.

That these people had a memorial (so many didn't), that is still legible, and that people are interested in it is pretty impressive in the grand scheme of 1000s of years of burials.

When I’m dead, you all have permission to mock my tombstone

I won’t be too bothered (because I’ll be dead and it’ll be my loved ones fault if there is a picture of a woman bending over on it)

@ShowOfHands

I saw an interesting gravestone in Scotland. In fact I photographed it, though I won't put the picture on here. Changing names it said...

In loving memory of
John
His wife Laura
Their daughter Laura Jr
His wife Jane
His daughter Annie
Annie's Mum Clara

All in the same grave. The man died last and chose the be interred with his two wives, child from his first marriage, child who appeared much later and a poor woman who didn't get to be described on her own merits.

It was quite remarkable.

John sounds like a bit of a one

@TheMarzipanDildo

When I’m dead, you all have permission to mock my tombstone

I won’t be too bothered (because I’ll be dead and it’ll be my loved ones fault if there is a picture of a woman bending over on it)

Let me know where, and I'll construct a marzipan dildo every year and leave it graveside on the anniversary of this post.

EverybodyIsInteresting

I like the way you think

@user16395699

Calling a poster's views on the distasteful nature of your thread "rubbish" is hardly polite.

They were public statements of identity/status and now they are part of the urban fabric. That context matters, I think

The fact that we are still ultimately talking about human beings matters more.

If you just wanted to discuss the symbol, why post an extra image including their names?

You've literally started a thread mocking a memorial in honour of people's dead loved ones. How is it anything other than a piss-take?

I absolutely didn’t call that poster’s views “rubbish”. You’re not telling the truth. In fact, you saying that makes me wonder if you’re just her under a different username.

I responded politely to her a couple of times. When I did sufficiently rise to her remarks to wheel out the (really quite gentle) term “rubbish”, it was in very specific reference to the completely unnecessary it’s not difficult sarcasm she had previously directed at me, not to her views.

As for “human beings”: yes, it’s because I find human beings and their stories interesting that I like reading old stones in the first place. If a Victorian family used stylised initials on their public memorial that also look a bit like a fanjo, whether intentionally or otherwise, well, that’s totally fascinating to me and absolutely no insult to them. It is a completely legitimate thing to be amazed by and to discuss.

A lot of people telling me off seem to have no awareness that it’s possible to find something amusing not for purposes of taking the piss, but in the context of loving the fact that you’ve stumbled across it, being totally intrigued by it and laughing and wanting other people to see and like it too.

This idea that the only form of respectful interaction with a historic gravestone is serious, reverent, discreet — I’m sorry, it’s just not the case. Amusement is fine. Honest speculation is fine. Posting images of historic monuments online is absolutely fine — there are huge websites dedicated to doing this. These stones are not private. They’re literally designed to be public.

If I were going “bunch of repressed Victorians, I bet they had no idea it looks like a cunt! Clueless idiots lol”, then yes, that would be a piss-take. Obviously, very obviously from my posts I’d say, that’s not where I’m coming from though