#french label

[paulpingminho]

[plus-low-overthrow]

ARTWORK: Morrison's Green Group - Beatles Cover version (Les Teteaux)

All Beatles cover's LP, see The Beatles Funk Orchestra.

Nice artwork this from mid-seventies french pressing, though I have a distinct feeling from the discogs listing it may have been repackaged from a Studio Five LP. The French label in question was started by Daniel Janin & Jean-Claude Pierric and there is similar artwork of this ilk across some of the labels output, worth taking a peak. I recognise Jean-Claude Pierric from an ABRAX LP if memory serves me correct he was the impersario between that project, I have previously posted a track up on the site a long time ago.

[dresshistorynerd]

I've seen a post you've reblogged and added to, among many things about women showing nipples. Can you recommend any ref material (articles, videos, etc.) are share your knowledge about this? Cause I'm curious about that, as nowadays going out in a shirt without a bra makes you indecent, while in like 90s it was okayish? I wonder how it was in previous centuries.

There is a really cool academic paper about bare breast dresses in 17th century England specifically. I think anyone can read it by creating a free account.

Abby Cox also has a good video about the cleavage during the past 500 years in which she goes through also the nip slip phenomena.

I don't have other sources that specifically focus on this subject, though many sources about specific decades touch on it, but I do have my primary source image collection, so I can sum up the history of the bare nipple.

So my findings from primary source images (I could be wrong and maybe I just haven't found earlier examples) is that the Venetians were the first ones to show the nipple for courtly fashion. At the same time in other places in Europe they sported the early Elizabethan no-boob style that completely covered and flattened the chest. In the other corners of Italy the necklines were also low but less extreme. Venetian kirtle necklines dropped extremely low as early as 1560s and they combined extremely sheer, basically see-through partlets with their kirtle. First example below is a 1565-70 portrait of a Venetian lady with the nipples just barely covered waiting slip into view with a movement of arm. There was an even more extreme version of this with the kirtle being literally underboob style, still with a sheer doublet. Though I believe this was not quite for the respectable ladies, since I have only seen it depicted on high class courtesans. They were not exactly respectable ladies, but they did have quite good social position. The second example is a 1570s depiction of a courtesan, which is revealed by the horned hairstyle. By the end of the century this underbust style with only see through fabric covering breasts, had become respectable. In the last example it's shown on the wife of the Venetian doge in 1597.

Around the same time, at the very end of 1500s, the extremely low cut bodice fashion enters rest of Europe. The low cut style was present in the bodices of all classes, but the nipple was really only an aristocrat thing. The lower classes would cover their breasts with a partlet, that was not sheer. Bare breast was ironically from our perspective a show of innocence, youthful beauty and virtue, and to pull off the style with respect, you also had to embody those ideals. Lower class women were considered inherently vulgar and lacking virtue, so a nipple in their case was seen as indecent. Bare boobs were also a sort of status symbol, since the upper class would hire wet nurses to breastfeed their children so they could show of their youthful boobs.

Covering partlets and bodices were still also used in the first decade of 1600s by nobles and the nip slip was mostly reserved for the courtly events. The first image below is an early example of English extremely low neckline that certainly couldn't contain boobs even with a bit of movement from 1597. The 1610s started around 5 decades of fashion that showed the whole boob. The first three were the most extreme. Here's some highlights: The second image is from 1619.

Here the first, very much showing nipples, from c. 1630. The second from 1632.

The neckline would slowly and slightly rise during the next decades, but nip slips were still expected. Here's an example from 1649 and then from 1650-55. In 1660s the neckline would get still slightly higher and by 1870s it was in a not very slippable hight. The necklines would stay low for the next century, though mostly not in boob showing territory, but we'll get there. But I will say that covering the neckline in casual context was expected. Boobs were mostly for fancy occasions. It was considered vain to show off your boobs when the occasion didn't call for it and covering up during the day was necessary for a respectable lady. You wouldn't want to have tan in your milk-white skin like a poor, and also they didn't have sun screen so burning was a reasonable concern.

1720s to 1740s saw necklines that went to the nip slip territory, though they didn't go quite as low as 100 years earlier. The nipple was present in the French courtly fashion especially and rouging your nipples to enhance them was popular. Émilie Du Châtelet (1706-1749), who was an accomplished physicist and made contributions to Newtonian mechanics, was known in the French court to show off her boobies. An icon. Here she is in 1748. Here's another example from this era from 1728.

The Rococo neckline never got high, but in the middle of the century it was less low till 1770s when it plunged into new lows. In 1770s the fashion reached a saturation point, when everything was the most. This included boobs. The most boob visible. There was a change in the attitudes though. The visible boob was not a scandal, but it was risque, instead of sing of innocent and did cause offense in certain circles. I think it's because of the French revolution values gaining momentum. I talked about this in length in another post, mostly in context of masculinity, but till that point femininity and masculinity had been mostly reserved for the aristocracy. Gender performance was mostly performance of wealth. The revolutionaries constructed new masculinity and femininity, which laid the groundwork for the modern gender, in opposition to the aristocracy and their decadence. The new femininity was decent, moral and motherly, an early version of the Victorian angel of the house. The boob was present in the revolutionary imagery, but in an abstract presentation. I can't say for sure, but I think bare breasts became indecent because it was specifically fashion of the indecent French aristocracy.

Here's example somewhere from the decade and another from 1778. The neckline stayed quite low for the 1780s, but rose to cover the boobs for the 1790s.

The nipple didn't stay hidden for long but made a quick comeback in the Regency evening fashion. It was somewhat scandalous by this point, and the nipple and sheer fabrics of the Regency fashion gained much scorn and satire. The styles that were in the high danger nip slip territory and those that allowed the nipple to show through fabric, were still quite popular. The sleeves had been mid length for two centuries, but in 1790s they had made a split between evening and day wear. The evening sleeves were tiny, just covering the shoulder. Showing that would have been a little too much. Like a bare boob? A risque choice but fine. A shoulder? Straight to the horny jail. (I'm joking they did have sheer sleeves and sometimes portraits with exposed shoulder.) But long sleeves became the standard part of the day wear. Getting sun was still not acceptable for the same reasonable and unreasonable reasons. Day dresses did also usually have higher necklines or were at least worn with a chemisette to cover the neckline. Fine Indian muslin was a huge trend. It was extremely sheer and used in multiple layers to build up some cover. There were claims that a gust of wind would render the ladies practically naked, though because they were wearing their underclothing including a shift, which certainly wasn't made from the very expensive muslin, I'm guessing this was an exaggeration. Especially though in the first decade, short underboob stays were fairly popular, so combined with a muslin, nipples were seen. Here's an early 1798 example of exactly that. The short stays did disappear eventually, but in 1810s the extremely small bodices did provide nip slip opportunities, as seen in this 1811 fashion plate.

Victorian moralizing did fully kill the nip slip, though at least they were gender neutral about it. The male nipple was just as offensive to them. In 1890s, when bodybuilding became a big thing, bodybuilder men were arrested for public indecency for not wearing a shirt.

[etherealyoungk]

comfort and love - hoshi

pairing: hoshi x fem!reader

warnings: reader has their period, fluff

word count: 1.1k

when you wake up feeling icky and your stomach lightly paining, you internally groan because you know your period started. you change and go back to sleep, only to wake up a few hours later to your doorbell ringing and you wake up sleepy and dazed. when you open the door to a smiling hoshi. your heart sinks because you forget to tell him you couldn't make it to the date he had planned. and here he was at your doorstep.

"shit, hoshi im sorry", you mumble out as you make way for him to enter. he looks at you confused. "why are you saying sorry baby", he asks and then he realizes you're still in your pyjamas and you look tired. "i got my period so i don't think out date can still happen", you tell softly. his gaze softens with understanding. "that's okay. i can still be here and spend time with you. i'll take care of you", he says with a newfound passion and before you know it, he's guiding you back to the bedroom and making you lie down.

periods are a little bit of uncharted territory for hoshi, but it's nothing a little research can't fix. so after quickly searching for what to do when someone is on their period he's coming to your room but you're curled up in a ball and he's running to your side.

"baby? are you okay?", he asks worried. "i'll make you a hot water bottle wait", he says and he rushes off to the kitchen. a few minutes later he's bringing you the hot water bottle and gently placing it on your stomach. you gladly take it and mumble out a small thank you to hoshi who's sitting on the edge of the bed. "have you eaten?', he says, looking at the time. you shake your head weakly. "not hungry", you tell and he's now even more worried. should he get you some chocolate? icecream? some snacks?. he decides to at least bring you a glass of water for you to sip on.

"you don't have to stay, i can manage", you tell him but he denies, telling you he's gonna take care of you. you try to lie down and rest, but the cramps only get worse. you open your eyes and don't see hoshi in the room. you weakly call out for him and he comes running, skidding across the floor in the process. "what's wrong?", he asks, concern flashing across his face but the tears brimming in your eyes are all the answers he needs. he wastes no time in coming by your side and gently engulfing you in his arms. you lean into his warmth and snuggle into his arms as you rest your head on his chest. he lightly rubs your back in hopes it will somewhat help ease the pain. but the way you were occasionally gripping his shirt told him you were still in pain and he hated in so much. he wished he could take your pain instead.

when you finally fall asleep, he gently tucks you in bed and decides to make a quick run to the convenience store to get you some snacks. you stir awake from your sleep and realize hoshi isn't next to you. you hear noises coming from outside and the smell of something in sweet in the air. you get up and waddle out of the room to the kitchen to find hoshi in front of the stove. "babe?", you call out and he turns around, smiling when he sees you. "you're awake?", he asks and he removes something from the pan and puts it on a plate.

"i made you some french toast, i know you like it so i tried following a recipe", he says in one breath, grinning as he presents the plate to you, guiding you to sit down and take a seat at the dining table. the other half of the table is covered in snacks of all kinds. you look at hoshi. "i thought you might want to snack or eat something sweet? i read up about period cravings but i didn't know what you'd like so i got some of your favorite stuff and things i thought you might like", he explains. you look at him and pout. you could cry right now. '"hoshi", you tell and he thinks maybe he's done something wrong. "what's wrong? did i not bring the right snack? did i forget something?", he asks, a lopsided pout forming on his face. you shake your head.

"you're so sweet, this is all so sweet", you finally tell and the tension disappears from his shoulders. he watches as you eat the french toast he made, happy.

if you told him you were feeling cold, he's drowning you in blankets. hungry? ready to order food or make you something again. thirsty? aksing you if you wanted water or an other drink, the phone in his hand ready to order whatever you wanted. want ice cream? he's ready to buy all the flavors.

but then later when it's afternoon he can tell your mood is a bit off and he's confused. (he's a little clueless about how the mood swings work sjjgg) so when he comes over to cuddle you when you are watching something you move away telling him you don't want to cuddle right now. he's shocked. how could you not want his cuddles? poor boy will be next to you and just be all pouty and glance over at you.

after a while, you feel find yourself scooting closer to hoshi and linking your arm around his as you lean your head on his arm. he's over the moon from this small action and pecks the top of your head, happy.

he'd sit on the counter as you watched him make ramen for you for dinner, even though you said you were feeling a little better now and could do it yourself. he'll order ice cream and watch as you eat, happy to indulge you in whatever you want.

he'll stay over that night, mostly he didn't want to leave you in pain and because you asked him to stay. if the cramps bothered you in the middle of the night, and you woke up in pain, he'd take care of you and do his best to help alleviate the pain. you're grateful he stayed as you slowly fall back asleep in his arms, his presence comforting and warm.

taglist: @idubiluv @icyminghao @kyeomyun @joshuaahong @daisycheols @fallingforshua29

[r-aindr0p]

I have a bunch of songs mentioning fire or burning stuff in my playlists so I decided to do a little something with Rollo for each song even if they don't mach the vibe 100% ! Flamm and Flames series 2/? : Universe on fire - Gloryhammer

[vlepkaaday]

Uuuch another quick one with just flat colours and a bit of light. But I really like this one :D

I wanted to do an Ork but realised its the Sisters week so did Sister of Battle instead:) Here’s a beautiful Imperial Propaganda for their finest Holy Wine

______

[jenevas]

Milfposting

[nofatclips]

Jaojoby by Labelle (featuring Vola) from the Post-maloya EP (Free download/Name Your Price on BandCamp)

[nursemimosa]

the academy fries are his favorite! enough to make him almost dance!

[littlefankingdom]

Okay, I'm going to complain about a fanfic I tried to read about Jason again.

This time, not only did his method reduced crimes (which, again, killing criminals, YES EVEN RAPISTS, don't lower crimes and the myth that it does is fascist propaganda to support more violent police forces and a more authoritarian gov), and Red Hood is more respected by Gothamites than Batman (unlikely. Like, he is another crime lord for them, they probably see any good he does as some tactics to get power over people and abuse them, because that's how it works with crime lords and mafia. They help you and then you have to pay your debtback or you die), we also had:

Jason understands more than Bruce that people does crimes because they are in need, which TOTALLY conflicts with him being more violent than Batman. "He only kills very bad people" you cannot judge that, you are just a human, you don't know everything. And you cannot argue that people resort to crimes because of their past and situation, THEN kill criminals, that doesn't work together. Also, Bruce knows and tries to help people, like wtf do you think he does charity for? Who do you think finance Leslie's clinic, which is opened to everyone and completely free? In some comics, he even builds better housing for people with his money, for FREE. Bruce knows, that's literally why he can see the good in his rogues.

Red Hood is hope for the Gothamites, and Batman is fear. Bro, Red Hood kills people, what kind of hope is he bringing? Hope of an early death from a gunshot wound? Batman is hope, he has been hope for decades. Always the same shit, we take Batman's shit and give it to Red Hood to paint him in a better light.

Red Hood's goons are a better police force than the actual police, that they are a reformed police. (THE EXACT WORDS USE BY THE AUTHOR) People hate the cops because they kill without repercussions, Red Hood's goons are under less control and juridictions than the cops, and they kill people more easily. Also, a reformed police means cops train to de-escalate situations, who use their guns less and don't kill people, who use violence less, who have more training in handling different kinds of situations. Red Hood's goons are some random low level criminals, they do not have these trainings people want. And, again, THEY KILL PEOPLE. Like, wtf. Wtf are we saying? Wtf are we writing? Y'all really don't understand the concepts and words you are using.

[royalberryriku]

If there's one thing I've respectively noticed from Zionists and defenders of Israeli war crimes, it's that every source, argument and potential avenue to explore each explanation is riddled with cherry picking, moving the goalposts and mental gymnastics to explain why their conclusions, which typically are barely even related to the sources they use, somehow overshadow literal reality and what we see with our own eyes.

While scrolling, one example I came across was the repetitive misrepresentation of BLM, antifa and quotes from Martin Luther King Jr, as well as statistics, scholarly journal articles and government website information. These are all good sources, yet every single time they're mangled completely until the only possible "interpretation" of any of them is "well Israel is right to defend itself after shorting rockets beforehand because the retaliation was brutal and all Arabs are bad by default therefore". As if any of these sources are even about individual exceptions of Israel versus hatred towards Arabs.

I think what I find most absurd, as someone in the middle of their own studies, is how every bit of critical thinking and logic goes out the window as they do every single thing possible to do what professors worldwide say NOT to do when evaluating sources. It's like watching a race to see who can tangle and misconstrue scientific information to fit their world view the fastest. Then said people say "um actually I studied at university before so it's actually not wrong that I'm doing this exact this everyone is warned not to do because I have a permit". Ignorance I can forgive, but willful and arrogant manipulation? That's another thing entirely.

[raccoon-robyn]

Hmmmm, lemme open this…. Gotta make sure….

THEY LIED

[carnivalcarriondiscarded]

im devastated. i got a microwaveable curry from costco and. its not good. Why

[empirearchives]

Details with the names of everyone at the death of Napoleon painting

Bonus:

Emperor on his death bed surrounded by family, servants and officials, lithograph, with pen and ink inscription in Italian and two portrait heads in the margin

(Bonhams: Napoleon Bonaparte, the British Sale)

[42bakery]

Pol is a Marc fangirl and he's fangirling about Marc and his start at the sprint

[archivesrowe]