r/LiveFromNewYork • u/MsBenovanStanchiano I didn't know you wear sandals, Sally. • 1d ago
Cast Photo Cecily gets it
165
u/casual-catgirl Learn a book, Seth! 1d ago
she’s always been one of my favorite cast members (especially girl you wish you hadn’t started a conversation with at a party)
49
→ More replies (1)2
670
u/morphinecolin 1d ago
It’s not a popular opinion, I’m sure, but Kate-Cecily-Vanessa-Aidy was as strong as SNL ever was. Goddamn those women were funny.
76
u/innomado 1d ago
That reminds me that it's almost time for the annual viewing of the Cecily/Vanessa/Aidy girls night out / Halloween sketch. It's a yearly thing in our household, much like the Christmas Macy's kids commercial.
179
u/JoeyZasaa 1d ago
2018-2022 was peak: Heidi, Ego, Aidy, Kate, Melissa, and Cecily all on at the same time.
106
u/morphinecolin 1d ago
No Vanessa though, and there’s no one on that list I love as much as Vanessa Bayer, unfortunately
68
u/JoeyZasaa 1d ago
Yeah she missed it by a year (her run ended in 2017). The Totinos skits were the best.
27
u/Head_Bread_3431 1d ago
Jeez that’s crazy she’s been off the show nearly a decade now.
10
u/morphinecolin 1d ago
It’s a real shame that the Dawn Lazarus character came by so late in her run. If that had happened three or four years earlier, it would have been star making.
6
5
u/CheekReasonable1653 1d ago
Plus Chloe Fineman from 2019 to 2026, Lauren Holt in Season 46, Punkie Johnson from 2020 to 2024, and Sarah Sherman starting in season 47 and the only aforementioned still in the cast now
27
21
u/bavmotors1 23h ago
fey, dratch, rudolph, poehler, gasteyer can hang with mckinnon, strong, bayer, bryant imo - both really great groups
60
u/DempsyPrice 1d ago
The Kate McKinnon cast was the most cohesive cast ever. She is the best troop leader of all time too.
39
150
u/this--one--time 1d ago
Women have had to carry that show for so many years.
61
u/morphinecolin 1d ago
Yeah, and it’s clearly continuing. Ashley is the no doubt star rn, I also didn’t include Heidi or Ego and they were always great. Just put some generic brunette men around them who all look the same, and Kenan, obviously, and we’re basically good to go
9
u/postALEXpress 1d ago
They were part of An Golden Era.
→ More replies (1)2
u/morphinecolin 1d ago
I didn't realize this was a common opinion, tbh. Since most of what I read and hear is about how SNL has been bad for (whatever amount of years it has been since the poster was 16)
edit: also the internets frustrating relationship with women, I thought would play in a lot more to this
6
13
13
u/James_2584 1d ago
It's probably the GOAT female cast of the show ever. At the very least, equal to Molly/Cheri/Ana/Rachel.
42
u/Zaphoid411 1d ago
Fey, Pohler, Wig and Rudolph would like a word...
→ More replies (1)15
u/James_2584 1d ago
Wiig and Fey only overlapped for less than a full season. I get what you're saying though. That's another stellar lineup.
Tbh, since the late 90s, the women have mostly been carrying this show.
6
u/InAllTheir 1d ago
Yeah and Kristen doesn’t seem like part of that friend group. She is significantly younger than the others.
I would add Rachel Dratch and Ana Gastneyer and Paula Pell as their friends and contemporaries.
→ More replies (3)3
178
25
73
u/cheesekween 1d ago
what the fuck are these comments lol
98
u/this--one--time 1d ago
I had a guy directly call me a whore in the pop culture chat. It takes zero effort.
30
→ More replies (1)35
104
271
u/macaronitrap 1d ago
I was gonna type out a long post about how tired I am of reading all these comments about how the joke was misinterpreted or anyone offended by it has no sense of humor or doesn’t get Shane and should just shut up about it.
But that won’t make men who are willfully ignorant change their minds or seek to understand how fucking exhausting it is to be a woman.
13
31
7
→ More replies (150)3
u/TACharlotte 11h ago
That and the joke was hack and poorly delivered because he has the stage presence of an open mic.
10
u/grrltype girl you wish you hadn’t started a conversation with at a party 18h ago
If these are Pilates gripper socks, I need them!!
2
55
u/hyperjengirl New York's hottest club is J E L L Y B O W L. 1d ago
I love Cecily, and I especially love that she's using this to actually talk about the shit that's more directly harming women.
But if we're talking about Cornell and SNL jokes, then personally I was more annoyed at the recent Update bit that used the Cornell 7 as a setup to another joke about how Colin is a perverted privileged white guy (which ultimately doesn't say much about the real issues with the Cornell 7 and the normalization of sexual violence in hazing), delivered by a guy who has built his career off of "edgy" jokes about women and has outright cracked jokes about a sexual assault victim.
People who think Shane is uniquely bad are willfully ignorant of the environment of SNL and comedy as a whole.
6
u/culminacio SPACE OLYMPICS 1d ago
well. two of those people you mentioned are joking, and people are saying they are too soft with their jokes and should go more in the uk direction. one of those people you mentioned goes to trump events and his fandom is in big parts right wing, and he's being "funny" by saying things that his, in huge parts right wing, audience just really thinks and says unironically.
we know if someone is just joking in an edgy way, or if they actually don't care about others and just want to appeal to their asshole audience by saying what they say.
→ More replies (2)2
u/CockyBellend 16h ago
Imagine trying to lie on the internet in 2026. We see right through that shit
228
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (35)46
u/LTPRWSG420 1d ago
Pretty insane the amount of support he’s getting, he’s got a whole damn army of fans. I question all those people’s sense of humor.
→ More replies (3)1
u/poison-bilberry 18h ago
I’m glad they’re getting downvoted but it is disheartening to see how many there are. I’m hoping most of them are bots
25
15
43
u/Lpdrizzle 1d ago
The men in these comments are killing me. You’re all defending a random dumb joke instead of even considering why women might be upset by this! “How is this even connected to the Cornell case??” Do you need a diagram lmao
20
u/koala-balla 1d ago
The diagram showing the connection between Shane Gillis’ joke about women dressing like whores at the gym & the Cornell case would look like this:
Shane’s joke ——> Cornell case
If asked to show your work, the clarification would be:
Women can’t go about their daily lives without being sexualized and subsequently blamed for it——> Women can’t go about their daily lives without being sexualized and subsequently blamed for it
→ More replies (4)16
u/Emceegreg 1d ago
It's because rape culture is more prevelant than ever and so many men simply hate women...I absolutely hate how weak the men in America are
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (7)10
54
u/Scarlett_Billows 1d ago
I don’t think that’s actually what the NY law says though
81
u/bespindeathspin 1d ago
There is a voluntary intoxication defense which is being used.
If a person willingly drinks alcohol or takes drugs and becomes too impaired or semi-conscious to consent, New York's current statute does not automatically classify them as mentally incapacitated unless they cross the threshold of being completely "physically helpless". This gap is frequently called the "voluntary intoxication exclusion" or loophole.
12
u/Scarlett_Billows 1d ago
Yes I understand that. Do you understand the distinction between that and basically saying that you are automatically consenting to everything that happens if you drink?
13
u/bobpaul 1d ago
Laws are more than the text as written on a page. You have to evaluate what a law does based on enforcement and court precedent. If I were explaining this to a child I would say, "Sometimes we plan for one thing to happen but then something else happens." In this case the "something else" (extremely frequent success of the voluntary intoxication defense) is the net effect of the law. Without changing the law, as other states have, it will continue to be the net effect.
I don't think it's unreasonable to summarize laws in terms of net effect.
5
u/Scarlett_Billows 1d ago
There are plenty of instances where people could drink and still be considered a victim of rape under this law.
I understand people are attempting to make the argument “New York has failed to make a distinction that at a certain point of intoxication, one is unable to meaningfully consent and that discourages people who were drunk from coming forward” but I still think that is a far cry from “if you drink you consent to whatever happens”. Framing it that way is more harmful than helpful tbh.
For example, if someone has a couple of drinks and then is attacked in the street violently, the fact that they had a couple of drinks will not be a meaningful factor in most instances. This is an extreme example, but I don’t think that it’s helpful to frame the law in an inaccurate way.
→ More replies (2)3
u/bespindeathspin 1d ago
I was just stating some context of what she was likely referring to…
2
u/Scarlett_Billows 1d ago
Yes I understand it which is why I clarified that what she said is not an accurate description.
But yes I think this is what she is misunderstanding
8
u/Sunburntvampires 1d ago
Seems like more of a , if you get hammered or take drugs and have sex, do you, but they aren’t getting involved. I’m not a lawyer but that seems like a nightmare to prosecute.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (8)2
u/Common_Ad_6362 1d ago
There will be no rational discussion about this case (which is certainly at least 2 counts of rape but not 7) because rationally discussing it does not suit any of the emotional masturbation occurring around it. As you point out, the voluntary intoxication defense doesn't provide autoconsent, it just makes consent while choosing to be intoxicated a valid way to consent.
→ More replies (1)10
u/TP-BANDIT77 1d ago
Surely you understand the difference between that defense and “if you consent to drinking you consent to anything that happens to you”
19
28
22
→ More replies (26)14
u/Practical_Yoghurt802 1d ago
It's not, the law is that if you voluntarily become inebriated then you're still legally able to make your own decisions and consent to sex. Basically it treats drunk sex the same way we treat drunk driving or drunk murder or any other activity you can do while drunk.
9
u/adolfnixon 1d ago
Except that drunk murder and drunk driving are accepting liability for acts you perform while drunk, not excusing the actions of other people taking advantage of your drunken state. I guess such a dishonest comparison shouldn't be surprising coming from somebody looking to play defense for rapists.
→ More replies (8)8
u/IOnlyWntUrTearsGypsy 1d ago
I could be wrong, but that didn’t sound like a defense of rape.
It sounded more like a summary of how that law is treated. They don’t have to agree with the summary.→ More replies (2)3
5
46
u/Toyger_ 1d ago
This is the best take I’ve seen. It’s not pearl clutching, it’s actual opinion expressed in a smart and witty way. You go Cecily.
12
→ More replies (8)14
u/TP-BANDIT77 1d ago
Except it’s a completely wrong description of the New York law which will only inflame people further. Shit like this is just stupid and reckless.
12
u/LinkLT3 1d ago
22
u/TP-BANDIT77 1d ago
The voluntary intoxication defense means if you voluntarily ingest alcohol, you can still voluntarily consent to sexual activity.
This differs from states that do not have this defense, where if you voluntarily ingest alcohol, you no longer have to capacity to consent to any sexual activity if you are drunk.
So in short, it does not mean that if you voluntarily ingest alcohol, you can just be taken out back behind the bar and raped. It just says a drunk person still has the capacity to consent to sex if they so choose.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (2)2
u/OhmyGodjuststop 1d ago
Being able to consent to things after drinking =\= drinking means you consent to things.
Does that make sense?
→ More replies (6)
26
u/bat_in_the_stacks 1d ago
This isn't exactly a sub to discuss this issue, but since it's here, I'd like to consider what happens if this law changes.
As is, if you're voluntarily intoxicated, you can still choose to consent. You can also choose not to consent. If you're unconscious or can't communicate, you can't consent (which is obviously good).
With the proposed change, when you're voluntarily intoxicated, you can not consent.
So, this means that if you drink at a bar, or smoke a joint , or get high at a rave, and then someone has sex with you, they're legally raping you. It doesn't matter what you want, because you're intoxicated.
I don't think anyone's recording a field sobriety test before having sex.
Is that what people really want the law to be?
26
u/FantasyBazaar 1d ago
There’s also often a glaring hole in this conversation where a certain fact is ignored—it is possible somebody who is intoxicated, even to the point of blackout, to push boundaries and commit sexual assault, and it is possible for a victim of such assault to be less intoxicated than the perpetrator, or not be intoxicated at all. Drunk people can rape sober people. Sober people can be coerced, threatened or pressured into sexual acts by drunk people. Hinging the whole judgement on who was drunk (or drunkest) is ridiculous, and dangerous.
→ More replies (2)2
u/SkyLower2621 15h ago
The way people have morphed it into ‘getting drunk doesn’t mean consenting to sex!’ Is also pathetic.
Are people deliberately misconstruing things to drum up hysteria or are they that dumb.
Yes is yes, no is no. Regardless of voluntary intoxication. You can still be raped if you’re drunk if you say ‘no’ or otherwise reject consent. JFC I can’t with these people.
8
u/Cute_Macaroon_4488 23h ago edited 19h ago
This is true is we look at this as a case of rape and not a case of human trafficking. The best case scenario for the defense is to keep framing this as “only” a case of rape.
According to NY law, if they supplied the drugs (regardless if she consensually took them or forced, doesn’t matter) in order to subdue her to then act as a broker and “advanced” her (advertised her location and body available for sex) they have effectively trafficked her to other men.
The defense wants to keep this as much as a standard “rape” case as possible so they can take advantage of that “voluntary intoxication” part of the law.
→ More replies (11)9
u/No-Gap-198 21h ago
What if both people have been drinking or smoking? Is it a wash or are they both raped and the raper?
6
u/Ok_Wealth_7711 20h ago
That's where these laws get a lot more complicated. I don't know the answer, I'm not a lawyer, but I know the law can't be some unnuanced version of "drunk people can't consent" because that would obviously be legal chaos.
→ More replies (5)1
u/XMistingRainX 18h ago
This is why the law should not change. The alternative is completely unreasonable.
10
u/skepticalbob 1d ago
The change doesn’t do that. It simply allows prosecution for people so incoherently intoxicated that they can’t meaningfully consent, even when they weren’t drugged by someone else and voluntarily got intoxicated. The old law treated these intoxications differently when it came to consent. Right now there is a loophole where it is open season on them for perps, as long as the perp didn’t drug them without their knowledge and they got themselves intoxicated. This prevents that.
→ More replies (10)2
u/SkyLower2621 15h ago
Bat sht insane take. It is not ‘open season’ on drunk people by perps.
Anyone can reject consent to sex at any time, and anyone who ignores that is a criminal. Drunk people can be raped if they reject consent and the person doesn’t respect that and does it anyway.
How about you be responsible for your own actions? If you want to ensure you are never in a position to feel violated, opt out of getting intoxicated and getting intimate. Wow! What a novel concept!!!!
You really want a world where you can go out drinking, get blitzed, show up at someone’s house and pounce on them, then when you regret it cry rape. Disgusting.
2
u/skepticalbob 14h ago
My wife is a SANE nurse in Texas, that had similar laws until recently, that supervises a team of nurses that did over 800 exams last year. Perps know that they can drag some wasted girl off that is too incoherent to consent and rape her without her consent and get away with it, provided she is the one that drank it on her own. It is the most common kind of sexual assault in college towns.
You are just making shit up based on your biases based on no real knowledge except demonizing rape victims.
→ More replies (4)5
u/EvePsycheBlubeardwfe 15h ago
This is such a pathetic understanding oh my god, how are there so many upvotes?? No wonder vast majority of Americans have a low comprehension understanding if THIS is your takeaway message from the law
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (50)10
u/Kissing_Books_Author 20h ago edited 16h ago
Is that what people really want the law to be?
What people want is to not be raped. Right now the law is much more effective at protecting rapists than holding them accountable. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but it seems to be based on this idea that people press charges out of regret or revenge, which doesn't really exist outside of B-grade thrillers.
EDIT: FYI, I'm not responding to any manosphere loser who replies to this, but know that I will be privately mocking you.
→ More replies (9)3
u/Cute_Macaroon_4488 12h ago
>NY state law § 230.34 Sex trafficking
>A person is guilty of sex trafficking if he or she intentionally advances or profits from prostitution by:
>1. unlawfully providing to a person who is patronized, with intent to impair said person's judgment: (a) a narcotic drug or a narcotic
preparation; (b) concentrated cannabis as defined in paragraph (a) of subdivision four of section thirty-three hundred two of the public
health law; (c) methadone; or (d) gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) or flunitrazepan, also known as Rohypnol;“Advancing" prostitution means engaging in any conduct that facilitates an act or an enterprise of sexual exploitation.
When a person blasts out a Snapchat message to dozens of people advertising an incapacitated woman (using phrases like "free pussy upstairs") they are acting as a broker. They are treating a human being’s body as a commodity and actively organizing a crowd to come exploit her.
It does not matter if she willingly swallowed the drink or did the drug. If the men provided her with illegal substances (like ketamine and alcohol) with the intent to impair her judgment, and then used that impairment to broadcast her location and facilitate a group assault, they have legally crossed the line into sex trafficking. The drug use becomes the tool of the exploitation, not an excuse for the perpetrators.
The defense all day would want this to be framed as a rape case or just simply a “hookup gone wrong” kind of grey area case so they can use those loopholes instead of prosecuting it as a known and coordinated sex trafficking operation.
3
u/Grenache-a-trois 17h ago
That is literally not what the NY law says at all what the actual fuck bubbles are people living in
11
u/muhkuller 21h ago
Remember when everybody was angry at what Sydney Sweeney wore in her workout clothes ad?
→ More replies (12)
31
u/melvingoldfarb 1d ago
the original joke was dumb but these "owns" are also dumb.
30
u/Busy_Aardvark3372 1d ago
I saw a video on Tiktok where someone said "Shane Gillis called women who wear shorts whores" and then argued about that.
We can't even start with a direct quote from 3 days ago to have a discussion? This is crazy
27
u/butterbean8686 1d ago
I can’t believe we’re splitting hairs between “women who dress like that are whores” and “women are dressing like whores.”
Both statements are misogynistic and offensive. The latter is not any better than the former.
→ More replies (8)
36
u/stick-jockey 1d ago
The way that people are willfully misinterpreting his mid joke and trying to frame it as something nefarious and evil is insane. My god what are we doing here people
47
u/nachoz12341 1d ago
Is there a positive interpretation of it? Its literally just a lazy insult. Not really funny in the first place made worse by recent events.
15
u/idklmao2024 1d ago
Yeah it’s not funny it’s also not warranted a gender cultural war
9
u/Outrageous-Break3585 1d ago
Culture war? Is this not just the normal reaction of people? Instead of booing at the tvs in our own homes or heckling the comedian in-person, people are posting their boos online.
My version of booing is to call this misogynistic because it’s a bad joke whose entire punchline is “women who dress a certain way are whores,” which is basically textbook misogyny.
5
u/safetydance 1d ago
And yet the tweet from the celebrity calling Shane fat is celebrated as hilarious. Body shaming is only ok if done to men. Understood.
5
u/Outrageous-Break3585 1d ago
Did you respond to the wrong person? I don’t even know what tf you’re referring to and I would hope I don’t have to point out to you that two things can both be wrong. But also, you should probably check the discourse because Gillis called himself fat and the outrage against him has nothing to do with body shaming.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (11)2
u/skepticalbob 1d ago
If you have to exaggerate, you’re just being dishonest. And the irony is that you are accusing others of exaggeration for saying it was lazy, unfunny and sexist.
4
u/tristn9 1d ago
Unless youre going to argue that wearing neon shorts tight enough to count your butthole wrinkles is appropriate gym wear, its literally not nefarious.
These interpretations are literally the least charitable possible, to the point that it literally requires falsely pretending he was talking about completely normal gym wear. We all know that neon butthole shorts aint appropriate.
That was the joke. Lazy? Overdone? Sure! But hes not talking about gymwear like in the photo above. Insisting otherwise in bad faith in direct contradiction to the evidence kills the credibility of your argument.
1
u/ChiefMuppetWrangler 1d ago
The underlying premise of the joke is that men who think women in the gym are dressed like whores are also the ones consuming their content and enjoying the view.
30
u/ElectronicAd5847 1d ago
People seeing misogyny and calling it misogyny is insane to you?
→ More replies (27)4
u/Due_Support8790 1d ago
is it misogynistic to point out some women wear skimpy clothes in gym ? cause they do
→ More replies (2)2
u/skepticalbob 1d ago
So they are exaggerating the joke by saying it is lazy, funny and sexist, but when you pretend they are saying it is “nefarious and evil”, an obviously hyperbolic characterization, you aren’t exaggerating at all. Is that what you’re trying to say here?
14
u/Blunderbussss 1d ago
Right? In the same joke he talked about how hot gay dudes were and how fat he was. I mean, laugh or don’t laugh but it was a joke and turning it into a commentary on the state of society is dumb.
11
u/scorpiknox 1d ago
"You're either gay or Hitler." Jesus is Shane Gillis...smart? I resent that I feel compelled to defend him, tbh.
14
u/Least_Rush_4616 1d ago
Watch this backfire majorly. This joke is NOT the hill to die on. Gonna be that much harder to be taken seriously when an actual hateful comment is made.
10
u/jscummy 1d ago
It reminds me of South Park with the trolling episodes and Trevors Axiom
• Person A (The Troll): Posts an offensive, inflammatory, or controversial comment aimed at provoking a reaction.
• Person B: The direct target of the initial remark.
• Person C: A third party (often media, commentators, or a self-righteous online user) who delivers a massive, over-the-top reaction to the trolling.
• Persons D through N: Regular internet users who see Person C's self-righteous overreaction and cannot resist chiming in to mock or attack Person C instead.
→ More replies (1)4
u/gwy2ct 1d ago
“Going to the public gym as a fat guy, especially in New York, is a nightmare, dude. It’s just the hottest gay guys you’ve ever seen.
They’re jacked and they look at me like, Yeah, right. I know, dude. Also, I haven’t been to the gym in so long. I didn’t know women just dressed like whores now. Look, I’m sorry, there’s no other way to describe… Have you seen it? I’ve seen it. The shorts. Have you seen the shorts? Those neon…
They’re like artificial-bait colored.”Explain the whores joke to me
7
u/Sinnycalguy 1d ago
What whores joke? That line isn’t a joke. The joke was in the next line when he said he keeps showing up leering in the background of TikToks.
→ More replies (2)6
u/Useful-Upstairs3791 1d ago
All controversy aside, this is a weak ass routine. There isn’t a single joke in this paragraph of text. It’s just observation with nothing else to it. This is just like that Fred armisen bit on weekend update where he just reads the paper in order to make improvised comedy about it but winds up saying nothing at all.
2
u/tyler-86 1d ago
I think "artificial-bait colored" at least serves as a funny observation, which is what a lot of comedians consider jokes.
3
u/joesbalt 20h ago
It's called a setup ... The bait part was a joke ... The description of the shorts was a joke with the lines directing you to the butthole ....
2
u/Grandpas_Spells 18h ago
"Look, I'm sorry, there's no other way to describe.. Have you seen it? I've seen it. The shorts."
He's talking about the Brazilian Butt Lift compression scrunch shorts that seriously wedgie the wearer and have extra creases in the back near the butthole. Some women fold the creases so you have these long seams around each globe of the buttocks converging on their anus. They come from brands that sell this kind of stuff, and only that kind of stuff.
Jumping up front to say women can dress however they want. That said, these shorts aren't being designed for comfort or performance in the gym. They're basically serving the same purpose as lingerie - they're uncomfortable but very provocative.
When I belonged to an expensive gym in a large city, I assumed the women wearing these, always with a matching top, were sugar babies or had an OnlyFans. In short - I assumed they were sex workers.
Now, we can debate whether it's OK to call sex workers "whores," but Cecily has almost certainly seen these in whatever NYC gym she goes to, knows exactly what Shane meant, and is pretending she didn't.
→ More replies (1)2
u/CMDR-TealZebra 17h ago
I mean... You're missing half the joke. Whether you agree its a funny joke or not, you have to consider the entire joke.
→ More replies (8)4
u/AlarmSquirrel 1d ago
If it isn't a comedian who says trans rights 9 times in a row, then you're not allowed to make edgy jokes.
→ More replies (2)
24
u/hemingways-lemonade 1d ago
The joke was bad, both in taste and presentation, but it was clearly about a specific style of work out clothes that isn't anywhere in this photo.
5
u/Toastwitjam 16h ago
Any women who shows the most conservative ass clothing while talking about Shane’s joke is just so performatively liberal it hurts my head.
If your whole point is that those clothes don’t bother you at all, and that you’re just as much of a “whore” as the girls that Shane called out but you’re also not willing to wear those clothes yourself because they’re too revealing it just shows that you agree with him too you just don’t want to admit it.
Celebs talking about how they’re wearing the same clothes when they’ve got long socks on is hilarious to me. Either own it like it isn’t a problem or admit you think being one step above pasties and a piece of tape in the gym is a little too far.
19
u/CrustyToeLover 1d ago
We all know its about the shorts that literally cover nothing but ass cheek
16
u/BobVilasBeard 1d ago
That doesn't make the bit good.
13
u/duskywindows 1d ago
True, but it also makes every single "response" post of women wearing leggings and sweatshirts equally idiotic. Completely detached from the actual referenced shorts in the shitty open-mic joke - it literally was not referring to anything any of these women are wearing, whatsoever lmaooooo
→ More replies (3)11
u/Ebolinp 1d ago
Specifically that direct your attention to the anus with the lines too.
→ More replies (7)29
u/people_arent_nice 1d ago
Guess what, still doesn't make women who wear them 'whores'
2
u/hntfca09 22h ago
Did you miss the “LIKE WHORES” part? They dress LIKE a whore meaning revealing, and as a woman if you go to a gym practically naked then don’t get mad when people stare at you.. hell as a women, I’m gonna stare too but it’s because I’m wondering how they can possibly be comfortable doing squats with basically thong shorts rammed up their ass
7
u/Flat_Temporary_8874 1d ago
If I put on a chain mail shirt, it doesn't make me a knight. But I'm wearing a knights armor.
2
u/people_arent_nice 1d ago
It's weird that when you see bike shorts your head immediately goes to 'she looks like she sells sex'
like that's not a reflection on her AT ALL, that's entirely on your bullshit, 100%
2
5
u/Chemical-Fix1656 1d ago
Yeah people are talking about women wearing bike shorts lmfao
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (14)6
u/Dry_Bird1790 1d ago
Why isn't Cicely wearing them? What do you think her reason to not wear them would be?
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (11)10
u/BBQ_RIBZ 1d ago
Someone should email her agent and let them know u/hemingways-lemonade has adjudicated that their gym wear is in fact appropriate!
→ More replies (6)
2
12
10
u/Smartyunderpants 21h ago
I get the joke was bad but Cecily and a number of other celebrities post are reinforcing Shane’s point from the joke. Cecily is in no way dressing in the way Shane was describing.
Is this just solidarity which I get or are they clueless how short and butt enhancing some outfits are now?
15
u/Unsuccessful-Bee336 21h ago
I think the point is, no matter how "short" and "butt enhancing", outfits are, the women that wear them don't deserve to be called w*ores.
5
u/JessieGemstone999 20h ago
You can say whores you dont have to censor yourself lmao
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (45)4
u/itsabloodyaardvark 18h ago
I agree, but there’s a reason they are specifically NOT wearing the clothing he described.
→ More replies (1)10
u/spellboi_3048 when you hold the pinwheel, it has colors 21h ago
It’s solidarity because women don’t wanna be told they dress like whores, especially when they aren’t dressing to illicit sexual arousal which is the vast majority of women who go to the gym. That’s just not a word he should’ve used to describe their fashion.
→ More replies (13)12
u/CaptServo 19h ago
Just don't call women whores, it's very simple really
→ More replies (10)5
u/Modsluvcensorship 19h ago
Does that same logic apply to everyone who was angry about Sydney Sweeney a few weeks ago?
→ More replies (14)→ More replies (1)2
u/Adamthegrape 18h ago
People also miss the fact it was a bit on tires, and the influencer craze of wearing ridiculously tight and revealing gym clothes to catch guys looking on camera.
2
u/MsBenovanStanchiano I didn't know you wear sandals, Sally. 18h ago
It’s adorable how these incels are swarming the comments but the numbers don’t lie. 94% agree. We’re just waiting for you to tire yourselves out.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/BigJeffe20 16h ago
i think she literally doesnt get it. she's not even wearing the gym attire he was talking about lol
3
3
5
u/mermaidmanis 1d ago
Why is everyone pretending they don’t know the outfits Shane was talking about?
You all are embarrassing yourselves 😂😂
15
u/Can_Com 1d ago edited 1d ago
If Shane had done the same joke but not called women whores for wearing gym attire, no one would have a problem with it.
Calling people whores for what they wear makes you a bad person kiddo.
→ More replies (19)7
u/ladywiththestarlight 1d ago
I hate to agree with the men lol but those scrunch butt shorts Shane was talking about are clearly made to draw attention to the booty of the person wearing them. I wouldn’t say women who wear them are whores but it’s obviously attention seeking attire. I personally wear normal bike shorts or leggings to the gym as I am not looking to highlight my butthole area lmao but calling women whores on national TV is never gonna end well, bad call on his part.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Dry_Bird1790 1d ago
It's funny because these posts are proving his point. They are not wearing the outfits he was talking about. And the reason they are not is because they themselves think they are to slutty lol
→ More replies (10)5
u/supesboots 1d ago
"And the reason they are not is because they themselves think they are to slutty lol"
No. Because women are allowed to wear whatever makes them comfortable without being demeaned.
2
u/safetydance 1d ago
Demeaned? Are you saying sex workers have no value or are beneath you?
→ More replies (8)4
u/Dry_Bird1790 1d ago
Why wouldn't Cecily be comfortable wearing what Shane was talking about?
→ More replies (2)
4
5
1d ago edited 1d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (20)5
u/skepticalbob 1d ago
Part of her point is that most women don’t dress like “whores”. Is that not obvious?
→ More replies (18)6
3
5
u/JD-D2 1d ago
Guys can we put a pin in this one until after the midterms? Kinda important that we win this time.
→ More replies (10)0
824
u/PicassosHeavyPeriod 1d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/Z8eIWG1cwp0DGeXmPN
Forever my queen