Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Very typical of the post-Victorian Era. The item appears to be a hand-out card which is likely part of a series. Thanks for sharing this item Chevron! Arthur Livingston does 'ring a bell' here.
Quite so Cgsweat....and here us a link to several other cards by Livingston...
They didn't even have voting rights back then it was a very long time ago. but Tomas Edison was a shmoe for sure.
i wonder what it was like to be a young shmoe back then .you have never seen a nude woman before. you never jerk off because it's illegal. and then you go to the circus and see a strong woman wearing revealing clothes for the time. showing off her thighs calves and biceps .the lust you would feel would be unbearable.
Considering that most people here in 2023 have never even seen a muscular woman in real life, (unless perhaps they attended an event), how in the hell common would it have been in 1908 that anyone would even relate to this stupid card? Is the next card in this series one that complains about female nuclear scientists?
However it is historically interesting if real. It gives me hope that if I went in a time machine I'd be able to score all the buff chicks that men were afraid of. A few decent stock picks and I'd be living like a Rockefeller with Victorian buff chicks throwing themselves at me. I could even invent the bikini.
Indeed very interesting that there were enough buff women back then that were noticed and ridiculed. Probably circus performers, rare female athletes or physical laborers mostly and perhaps women with mesomorphic physiques. I wonder if the masculine depiction of the face in this graphic is due to comparison with males or maybe a buff woman who inspired this drawing had male characteristics like a deeper voice (much like today’s PED users).
I think that we really should consider the era the 'caricature' was produced...part of a long tradition in Britain (Cruikshank et al...spelling likely incorrect). Applying current attitudes/ideas usually does not help but can only confuse things. The card-caricature in question here was part of a series satirical of many items/behaviours of the time.
I think that we really should consider the era the 'caricature' was produced...part of a long tradition in Britain (Cruikshank et al...spelling likely incorrect). Applying current attitudes/ideas usually does not help but can only confuse things. The card-caricature in question here was part of a series satirical of many items/behaviours of the time.
My thoughts as well. This reads as satire for me.
Illustration by Arthur Livingston.
(Whoever HE was.)