Gravity will never be repealed because of the women's underwear lobby

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Think about it.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:06 (twenty-two years ago)

is this a bumper sticker seen in the parking lot of MIT?

― The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Bananas will never be repeeled either.

Think about that

― Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Bananas will never be repeeld because of the Schadenfreude/falling over/laughing lobby.

― MarkH (MarkH), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:09 (twenty-two years ago)

What bout bells? Or indeed bell-bottoms.

― stevem (blueski), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:12 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't even know what this could possibly sort of mean but I am all for gravity anyway.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Ally's feet are firmly planted on the ground.

― MarkH (MarkH), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I think the women's underwear lobby would benefit from the repealing of gravity because there would be an increased call for more durable, less revealing underwear, made of thicker, more opaque material, for THE SAKE OF DECENCY.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:20 (twenty-two years ago)

cycling shorts innit.

― MarkH (MarkH), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:21 (twenty-two years ago)

This is the kind of thing that happens when 3 government contractors who know too much about metaphysics and information security have a rambling conversation on a Friday morning. We went from calculus prerequisites for my grad school program to discussion of various pantheistic religions and duality and somehow ended up on why gravity hasn't been repealed yet and I suggested it was because the people who make brassieres would lose a lot of money.

That's really not much in the way of an excuse, is it?

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Dastoor is probably totally OTM actually now that I think about it.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:23 (twenty-two years ago)

They would need NEW women's underwear to stop well-endowed women from getting regular black eyes, surely?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)

No. That is the most dorky excuse for anything I've ever heard. I'm also not sure why it would mean people who make brassieres would lose a lot of money: surely less gravity means MORE saggy hence increased need for bras?

xpost you did not just mix up your Nicks. Granted this is a topic very fascinating to Dastoor but yet that is not Dastoor.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Even if boobies be floatin' people will still want to errr reshape them innit. Besides which, if large boobs, they'd be bashing you in the face while you were trying to type or whatever, so restraints would be in order.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah that is what I am trying to say Matt, no gravity = more pulling no counterbalancing you would need the bra to keep everything from getting stretched out in wrong direction and what if you went into a gravity chamber?!?! Hit the floor.

Tom, you and your friends are totally wrong.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:25 (twenty-two years ago)

On the other hand, skirt and dress manufacturers would be out of business overnight.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Which, amazingly, is the first thing I thought when I saw this thread title.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I think that clothing would be the least of anyone's worries.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Velcro would make a mint.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Apparently there was a porn film made a few years back with a scene in zero gravity. Complete with cumshots and everything. Massive Attack and the Prodigy did the soundtrack.

Zero gravity cumshots. I mean, how fucked up is that?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Well at least there would be no wet patch (apart from on the ceiling)

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Nah, it'd disperse right round the room, wouldn't it? Help - physicists to thread!

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh yeah, I wasn't even thinking about bras upthread, obv.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Depends on the direction of 'shot' I'd imagine. If it was a really big room (say the Albert Hall) you'd get Coriolis force affecting it I think.

xpost why are we talking about this again?

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:37 (twenty-two years ago)

i think tom is right, ally. i mean currently the women's undergarment industry revolves around the assumption of thing getting pulled from one direction and one direction only. do you have any idea the amount of retooling they would have to do - it would be an enormous undertaking. the lumbering dinosaur that is the women's underwear industry fears change.

― dyson (dyson), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think they'd have to do much retooling, just put the wire on the other side.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:43 (twenty-two years ago)

The people to blame just finished another conversation about border routers, classification enclaves, incident recreation and vulnerability assessments, ending with a decision that someone needs to just go out and buy an 8 dollar PS/2 to USB converter so we can use the KVM switch for the Sun boxen in the lab and quit hot-swapping the cables every time we need to interface with the console.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes we're all very impressed with how smart you all are.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah. "Nice Tie" we all said.

― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Ally I don't think it's that easy unless you think that bosoms are naturally bouyant in the atmosphere, which I don't think is a very good assumption. Without gravity controlling their momentum they would just kind of bounce in every direction higgledy-piggledy which as dyson and Nick A pointed out would actually necessitate much more restrictive women's undies.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:48 (twenty-two years ago)

SO THEN YOU PUT THE WIRE IN ALL DIRECTIONS, how difficult is this? Have any of you actually examined bras? Half of them are already made like marvels of architectural engineering, it doesn't seem like it'd need MUCH change to fix the non-gravity problem. I think that the underwear lobby has less to worry about than all other lobbies ever.

Except maybe the pork lobby?

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:49 (twenty-two years ago)

they would have to add wire to every side¡ i mean all the money they've poured into research and development based on the current gravitational pull system would be out the bloody window¡

3 xpost

― dyson (dyson), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

This is almost as good as the 'Who would win in a fight between a horse and a monkey?' thread.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

I just like using obtuse technical jargon. It really is the secret to success in this job, espcially when you consider half the people here are ex-military.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

actually "half the people here are ex-military" does a lot more to explain how this thread got started than my story above, by a long shot.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:52 (twenty-two years ago)

exactly¡ how easy do you think it would be to re-engineer "marvels of architectural engineering" - hmmmm¿

― dyson (dyson), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Holy shit, I wonder if this would mean a return to the early 1960's cone bra? That would be awesome.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:53 (twenty-two years ago)

In my head now the whole world is like that climactic staircase scene in Labyrinth.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:53 (twenty-two years ago)

With more tits!

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

http://bitchcakes.topcities.com/london/morelondon.jpg

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:55 (twenty-two years ago)

NA JUST GAVE US THE ANSWER. I mean honestly do you gentlemen not ever look at the bras or are you just trying to get them off the ladies as quickly as possible?

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:57 (twenty-two years ago)

well... sometimes i like to feel pretty.

― dyson (dyson), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Do you have any pictures?

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 14:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Hey, if we're supposed to look at the bras and appreciate them, why do you hide them under shirts and crap?

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:58 (twenty-two years ago)

& tom i hope you enjoyed the one day of blueskies you're gonna get there.

― dyson (dyson), Friday, 28 May 2004 14:59 (twenty-two years ago)

NA you know damn well I do not hide my bras under shirts.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:00 (twenty-two years ago)

You're going to get me in trouble.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:02 (twenty-two years ago)

When N. *does* discover this thread, it will be even more fun. When Dan discovers it, it will be insane.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:03 (twenty-two years ago)

What, Ned, we're not good enough for you?

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:04 (twenty-two years ago)

My feelings are hurt.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Apparently this conversation isn't quite wacky enough for Le Raggett.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:05 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm saying it's great already dammit!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:06 (twenty-two years ago)

That said, Le Raggett is a fine fine name.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Sa Grâce Monsieur le Duc de Ned le Raggett

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Ned John Baptiste Le Salle Le Raggett Eno.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:10 (twenty-two years ago)

A vision! (Thank god I don't have his hair, though.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, Eno would be pissed if he found you'd had his hair all this time.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:13 (twenty-two years ago)

I stole it from him at an early age.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Eno: "RAG-GETT!" (shakes fist)

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:14 (twenty-two years ago)

LESS ENO MORE BOOBS OK THX

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm torn between my love for Eno and my love for boobs.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Eh, who am I kidding? MORE BOOBS PLEASE THANX.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not.

xpost fuck.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)

"Choco-Eno" doesn't have the same ring.

(xxpost)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Seriously though, no-gravity boobs? BRING 'EM ON!!!!!!!!! FLOAT TO ME, MY LOVELIES DADDY WANNA SNUGGLE!!!!

(I am apparently stretching the boundaries of the definition for "seriously".)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Well you've just put the name Yahoo Serious back in my mind, as if it ever leaves.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:51 (twenty-two years ago)

When come back, bring more boobs k thx

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:51 (twenty-two years ago)

Fancy bra on mannequin!

http://www.crystalforest.homestead.com/files/fancy_bra_on_mannequin.jpg

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:53 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.lingeringtouch.co.uk/web_pictures/t_dcv_d.jpg

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Yahoo's wacky adventures with boobs:

http://www.popcorn.dk/images2/m061.jpg

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Ned, that's an egg, not a boob.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:55 (twenty-two years ago)

WOAH DUDE:

http://www.isisandthestardancers.com/images/Pieces/BB389.jpg

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Please note that there are boobs in the background.

(I hesitate to imagine what non-Young Einstein Yahoo Serious films are actually like. Surely it only gilds the lily.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:56 (twenty-two years ago)

(Argh I have to go back to meeting-from-hell now, PLZ MORE BRA PICS XOXOXOXOXOX)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Dan there is a store in the Georgetown shopping center that sells nothing but things like that, well that and hookahs, it is some kind of "Egyptian" store. I don't think we've passed it yet without SOMEONE pointing at the strange spangly bra/panties princess leia outfit in their window and going some variant on "Do you think you want that?"

The sad thing is the answer is yes but I'll be damned if I'll pay that much for it.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:58 (twenty-two years ago)

http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2003/04-03-bra-inside.jpg

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.talent99.freeserve.co.uk/hawaii/hawaii-shell-bra.jpg

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

http://eurekaweb.free.fr/image/soutien_gorge_foot.jpg

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.world-cup-info.com/photos/2002/girlies-16.jpg

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Viva Mexico

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:01 (twenty-two years ago)

http://chedburn.free.fr/soutine-bois.jpg

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:01 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.world-cup-info.com/photos/2002/girlies-2.jpg

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:02 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.world-cup-info.com/photos/2002/girlies-1.jpg

There is one Swiss one that I'd like to post but it is less safe for work than any of these since it involves not a bra.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:03 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.daniellelingerie.homestead.com/files/record11.jpg

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:05 (twenty-two years ago)

Wow.

This is the greatest not-quite-porn page I have ever seen.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:05 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.world-cup-info.com/images/soccer_girls/15.jpg

Newcastle Brown Ale is pretty cute!

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Not to be overly partisan, but the Leeds lass is easily the most comely of the lot.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Which one is Leeds, Motorola? She's my second choice.

The best photo on the soccer sluts website is the girl in the zidane jersey with her ass hanging out but that isn't really safe for here I have decided.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:11 (twenty-two years ago)

I remember this thread when it was only 4 posts high.

― Aimless (Aimless), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Undoubtedly the Zidane/cheek shot has high pornographic value. The Leeds lady is in the lower right hand picture wearing a white shirt with 'Packard Bell' on it.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Eh. She's alright I guess. Newcastle Brown Ale is better.

― Allyzay, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)

she just looks kind of peeved at the photographer.

I am not so interested in the pictures on that soccer smut website as I am in the possiblity that some of those outfits are available FOR PURCHASE. Wahey.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 28 May 2004 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Another bad side-effect of gravity being repealed = Cirque de Soleil will probably be able to come up with even fruitier crap routines.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)

It would make pinball somewhat dull.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 16:20 (twenty-two years ago)

but will have the opposite effect on bowling¡

― dyson (dyson), Friday, 28 May 2004 17:24 (twenty-two years ago)

OMG THE FUTURE IS NOW!!!!

http://www.fande.co.jp/syouhin_phot/br/BJBRFANCY_big.jpg

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 May 2004 19:39 (twenty-two years ago)

I see nothing Dan.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 28 May 2004 20:25 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.