She’s not a weirdo, she’s just wearing something that’s not in style anymore.
Most cameras shoot one picture at a time.
Please tell me that was never in style!
I have no idea and had not really ever used the term, but the minute she said it I knew what she meant.
I now have to go meditate to rid myself of the knowledge that I have stereotyped and degraded the Ashleys for stereotyping and degrading those that are not like them. 
Anyway, yes, I do silently snicker at some of the getups I see but posting it for all the world just seemed, I don’t know, the same but a little more hateful. Do as I say and not as I do? Possibly. I just hate to see people like the lady in the ugly overalls publicly mocked. She obviously has what I would consider a horrendous sense of style but I don’t want to be mean to her over it.
Italian Sausage
I feel… conflicted.
The term Ashleys comes from the TV show Recess. The clique of popular, fashion concious girls were all named Ashely and they went by their last initial. “Oh, what a super idea, Ashley A.!” “Thanks, Ashley Q.!”
Man, she’s got balls to wear those pants!
There was a time when Jackson Pollock’s overalls were in style?
I suspect that first dude (and some of the other get ups on people) are folks going to or coming back from some sort of performance related job. And someone wearing a rainbow mohawk should expect people to gawk.
But some of those outfits really are “no one should leave the house wearing shorts that expose your ass cheeks to that extent.”
Screw the pictures of the people, the cars are fantastic! The car with the dinosaurs glued all over it and the limo with the cow print and giant pile of plastic shit on the trunk were comic gold! They best is the unicycle handcuffed to the bike rack though.
I mean, they weren’t all the rage or anything, but flowered corduroy in skirts, shirts and pants was briefly in the mainstream, yes.
It was the 80s, Laura Ashley ruled. What can I say.
Kind of reminds me of Chloe Sevigny’s clothing line.
I don’t think it’s classism to look at today’s (Oct. 5) posting from West Virginia and go :eek: . Bad/inappropriate taste isn’t confined to a class.
Also, calling the picture subjects “Wal-creatures” is a bit excessive, especially since everyone knows that the proper term is “Walmartians”. 
I admit that I am not entirely sure what you are getting at with this comment, but I am just gonna go 'head and submit this.
Fashion industry designs for thin models whiles the food industry bombs people with carbs and corn syrup, and then the entertainment and advertising industries mandates a larger-than-life self image.
The crazy thing is that the people in those photos appear as they do out of a quest for some dignity, not to surrender it.
This site makes me feel terrible about myself. I laugh and then I realize how terrible I am for laughing. I won’t even look at it anymore. It’s sad.
I saw this site a few weeks ago. Seriously, where is the dignity? The chic with the flowery overalls is indeed out of style. The chic with her size 28 ass cheeks hanging out is just wrong on so many levels. You don’t have to dress like that if you’re poor. Really.
This shirt must come in handy for all those times he gets asked for his opinion on queers.
There’s definitely an element of classism to it. This could be “people of Whole Foods” but money buys homogeneity and you’re therefore not likely to see outliers like the Laura Ashley overalls or African garb (which is exactly what the black, white and red “jester” outfit is, WTG, site maintainers, for being so culturally aware) or bomber cars in the lot. You’re not going to see people so poor that they’re beyond caring about their appearance, or have visible missing teeth, or lack of maternity clothes to properly fit over a pregnant belly. Oh, and since WF doesn’t provide electric carts for those of us with mobility impairments, there couldn’t be any point and laugh at the fat rolling people (or “fat cripple”) element.
This is all about pointing and laughing at vulnerable people; we could point and laugh at a moron who pulls into the lot in a $60k SUV that gets 11 mpg in the city and pays $5 a pound for organic cherries, but those people potentially have the power to smack back at us. Someone at WalMart who is scraping together their pennies to pay for their toilet paper (since food stamps don’t cover that) or oil for their 12 year old car, the only transportation their family has, has no power to advocate for themselves when they’re mocked.
Exactly. It’s the same childish need to be better than someone that prompts schoolyard bullying, brought to the internet age.
Having a different sense of (or value on) fashion than you or the “mainstream” (as defined by the media and their corporate overlords at the behest of the fashion companies that pay for said definition) doesn’t make someone a weirdo. It certainly shouldn’t be justification for setting them up for the sorts of classist, ableist, sizeist and sexist attacks that are the stock in trade of the small minds that comment on that site.
Frankly, I think it’s a classist assumption that the Wal-Mart people are funny because they’re poor. It’s kind of paternalistic.
ETA - and a lot of those people (okay, not the floral overalls lady) are dressing like that because they want to be looked at, are they not?
The first Uncle Jesse that came to mind was Bo and Luke’s, not Mary Kate and Ashley’s. A definite “ewwww moment” with a relieving realization. Need brain bleach now.