Monday, July 11, 2011

rule 34

Time and again I have to tell some of my more, how shall we say...degenerate friends that just because a woman is wearing glasses and might be somewhere in the same general vicinity as a book, it does not make her a librarian.



And good Lord, that's not even an entire pencil skirt. That's like a pencil stub skirt.

Oh, & this is only marginally SFW because of the use of a clinical, yet incorrect, term for the entirety of a lady's lady bits. Rhymes with angina. Consider yourself warned.

24 comments:

Alan said...

Sorry, Hot girl + glasses + book = librarian.

I don't make the rules.

Weer'd Beard said...

Glasses +books = HAWT!!

Never got the guys who were into the dumb girls....

Mike W. said...

Glasses + books + big butt + pencil skirt = HOT, even if she's not a librarian.

Weer'd - dumb girls aren't entirely worthless, but yeah, smart women FTW.

And I'm with Alan, if she looks like a hot, naughty librarian how are we to know the difference, eh?

TheAxe said...

True, she might be a conservative lit professor (one I dated was awesomely hot):)

Sean D Sorrentino said...

So where is that library? I suddenly need to borrow a book.

DaddyBear said...

I have this sudden urge to read something in an easy chair surrounded by shelves and shelves of books.

DaddyBear said...

Oh, and what do degenerate mean?

Old NFO said...

LOL :-)

Dannytheman said...

I would attend the library more!!

TBeck said...

I'm sure the young lady has plans to become a veterinarian because she wants to work with children.

Not too many years ago my daughters probably would have made some kind of much too loud comment about the skirt.

Robin said...

OK, this isn't fair. There is no comment that comes to mine that won't get me banned...

Marty said...

I'll be in my bunk...

ASM826 said...

Rule 34. Applied to librarians. If you can imagine it,...

Bubblehead Les. said...

Flashing back to Van Halen's 80's video "Hot for Teacher". This clip is one of the reasons we killed off our Directv and went to Roku Box. Old material, done badly, why pay for recycled Garbage?

Morobir said...

I'm not even sure this counts as a rule 34 instance, because librarians are inherently sexy.

JB Miller said...

That is the look for you!

fast richard said...

Degenerate friends? What degenerate friends?

I suppose there must be Librarian themed calendars available, featuring girls who know as much about books as the girls in the girls with guns calendars know about guns.

Justthisguy said...

All of the names for our, um, "parts" are silly when you think about it. For instance, the "clinical' Latin names were just Latin slang to start with. "Vagina" means "sheath", as in sword. "Penis" was originally a Latin slang word for "tail."

Which reminds me, do you know how the pituitary gland got its name? Yes, by onomatopoeia. "Pitui" is Latin for spit, much as in English.

I think we should just stick to the good old honest monosyllabic English names for our privates.

Justthisguy said...

Oh, librarians? Some of them, if I did not already know that they were librarians, I might find sexy, but I have pretty much maintained a grudge and an animus against librarians since I first learned how to read, over half a century ago.

They have been the people who wouldn't let me read what I wanted to read, the people who wouldn't buy the good books and bought the stupid books instead, and with their latest irredeemable, unforgivable atrocity, the so-called "weeding", they have lost every bit of residual sympathy I might have had for them.

Breda said...

@ justthisguy - we librarians wouldn't have to weed things if you'd check them out.

Justthisguy said...

On further consideration, and remembering what I have seen on the 'net, I think it is impossible for humans to refrain from making up silly stupid joke names for the parts between their legs, in whatever language.

I'll just say that I'll never address mine as Lyndon. That would exceed the extreme limits of partially-acceptable bad taste.

Justthisguy said...

That's not true. I have seen things weeded here because they were well-loved and checked out lots of times. They were out of print and new copies were unobtainable. Instead of preserving and repairing them, they were tossed because they were "worn out."

Never fear, we have plenty of murder mysteries here, lots of bodice-rippers, some pretty good military history (lotsa old guys here) more fantasy than SF, absolutely not one chemistry textbook, no math books except for lightweight popularizations, no books of log and trig tables, no copy of Machinery's Handbook... I could go on. At least I did see a copy of the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics last time I was in there, but they seem to have "weeded" their copy of "Cartridges of the World."

Justthisguy said...

And further, I think I detect a "newer is better" attitude at the P. Library here, in the sense that "Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc." I think we should keep, say, both a 1911 and 1948 Britannica around, so people can make up their own minds about what used to be, intead of being lied to about it.

I mind an earlier edition of "The Joy of Cooking" I bought there at a weeding sale for $0.50. It is pretty much the same as the latest one, except for having the turtle soup recipe. Even reading about turtle soup is now officially doubleplusungood .

Sometimes the earlier editions are better than the later ones.

Justthisguy said...

Hey, I see an opportunity to refer back to the Original Post! It's not about the parts between the legs, it's about the parts between the ears!

I prefer books which appeal to the parts between the ears, not the parts between the legs. No chick books, nor dick books, either, for me. Y'all can buy those with yer own money and knock yerselves out, but really, the way things are going, I think the public libraries need to stick to stocking serious useful information.

Sadly, the one around here doesn't do that, except for botany and horticulture, in which it is absolutely first-class. (We do love our mangoes here.)