this post was submitted on 23 May 2026
125 points (98.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

39969 readers
4513 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

The Wuthering Heights director Emerald Fennell said it was “unfortunate” that a scene showing Margot Robbie’s hairy armpits did not make the final cut, because women in period adaptations are often shown with clean-shaven underarms.

Robbie’s character, Cathy, had “extremely hairy armpits” in the 2026 adaptation of the novel, but “unfortunately the scene that we see them didn’t make it in there”, said the director.

Cathy having unshaven pits “was so important to me”, she said, adding that she often wonders “where are the razors that these women are using?” when watching Jane Austen adaptations.

“They’re all kind of hairless like eels. I’m like: ‘What’s going on? It’s completely mad.’”

I think something pretty normal and understandable that people – who are used to being bombarded by other, very vocal, people's paraphilias online – will immediately and erroneously assume is something sexual.

[–] texture@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago) (1 children)

yeah id have just assumed the hair didnt make the final cut bc patriarchal bullshit. i dont see how this is a shitpost so much as just a shitty thing that happened? i figure we judge and control women's bodies more than enough day to day that we dont really need it in the shitpost sub. idk, just struck a cord with me this time i guess.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

You're just assuming that (practically unfalsifiably) when the director suggests nothing of the sort, when footage gets cut from movies literally all the time for every reason under the Sun, and when there's shit in that movie an order of magnitude more provocative (see: the skin room) than a woman with hairy armpits (let alone historically accurately).

[–] texture@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago) (1 children)

yeah thats why i said "id just assume" not "i think"

also, youre really mixing up provocative with patriarchal and thats unfortunate.

anyway, simple misunderstanding. cheers

edit - my issue isnt with the decision or the details as they are given, its of this being a post in a sub i love. i'll edit my comment to say "id have just"

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 points 26 minutes ago* (last edited 25 minutes ago)

"I'd just assume" unprompted is functionally the same as "I think"; nobody first asked you "well if you had to assume, what would've happened?" We're all adults here; we all understand what words mean.

And I used "provocative" because you're directly implying a form of patriarchical censorship for inherently one of two reasons or some combination: the patriarchical system 1) thinks it's too provocative or 2) thinks it's too superfluous, and (2) isn't per se patriarchy; reasonable minds can differ on whether the scene merited inclusion. I'm sure it wasn't like that scene from The Room where they make a big deal out of Mark's clean-shaven face; I'm sure the protein filaments growing out of Robbie's armpits weren't the nominal objective of the scene. Thus I assumed you were referring to the only one that's strictly, inherently patriarchical for which there wouldn't be a more plausible explanation.