Thank you for a good answer to a pretty hostile question!

Yeah, that does add to it! And the weirdly tiny nose (which is apparently also his style). And the expressionless lips. I feel like the look on her face right now is complete vacancy, when there could have been so many other options!

Apparently that's his style. Totally makes it better, right? (NO)

Yeah! That would make sense.

Okay, thanks! I missed that. (And the definition of 'immigrant' is someone moving to one country from another one, so it's a fair thing to be confused about.) I think the word when national borders aren't involved is actually just 'migration' - 'immigration' and 'emigration' contain directions across borders.

That's cool? Still doesn't make him a 'master' unless you particularly like that style (which I don't). Actually, always having flat faces and detailed bodies is more concerning to me than when I thought this might be a one-off, ew.

This is really interesting! But... I don't buy the argument that gentrification is almost always about immigrants. New transplants to an area, yes, but they can easily come from other parts in the same country, at least in the cases of USA and Canada (the only countries I have experience in). People move to Toronto…

Really? I mean, the hands are really good, and he sure paid a lot of attention to her spine and lower back, but that face is flaaaat and not the work of someone I would call a "master".

She looks so natural as a flapper! And I really appreciate the Zenon reference, yessss.

That isn't hard to find. Texting habits generally get developed based on both people's habits. Note that most people are giving context.

What are the last two or three like? I'm not sure why their campaign donations from 13 election cycles ago (or even 5) is relevant. If they're changing, that's positive. If this message is contrary to their donations, that's worth knowing.

That sounds like a play on what 'vulnerable' means - like vulnerable to social censure versus vulnerable to the kinds of risks insurance protects you against (car accidents, house fires, etc.). Sounds sloppy, because of what you're saying here, it sounds like they're implying they protect LGBT people from the ways…

Hahaha, I'm really not upset. I think it's rather obtuse to think a straight up comparison between this and naked Disney princesses is useful (really? they really aren't comparable) but I think we are having trouble communicating accurately, so I'm gonna leave it at that. Have a good day!

Considering the header image, and the fact that most of these dicks are so not even trying to be attractive (floppy dick and huge bush? Flaccid with a different coloured head? This is a joke, not pornography!) I will admit some people must see this differently.

I think you're missing something. Western society kind of revolves around men's genitals, subtly or not, literally or not. We basically have to worship the penis. Seriously. For literal examples, pick up a copy of Cosmopolitan. Witness the entitlement of men sending dick pics to strangers. Phallic imagery throughout…

Well, it really sounded like it went over yours, and still is. It's taking Disney princes and reframing most of them as douchebags sending you a dick pic. Yes, that totally caters to the 'Disney obsession'. I'm swooning over here! Those penises! <3

Because it's a fictional response to dick pics as a social phenomenon? :/

Oh wow. If you think this post is somehow catering to horniness, it has really, really gone over your head.

The news actually seems to be a) she was wrong, and b) she was held accountable for it. Weird!

That's what got me to click!