After the success of the popular 2k8 gimmick ALTBRO or ALTBAG, Carles from the Hipstar Ranoffs has decided to try out new gimmicks where the HRO reader must decide how 2 genre-fy a particular person or group of peoples.
What do yall think these young men are?
Please justify ur answer in order to receive a gift certificate to Applebee’s + a $100,000 iTunes gift card.
For example: “They are blipstaz because that’s how blipsters will dress in 2k11 after Kanye is President and then there will be some sort of law written into the Constitution/Dec of Indy that every1 has 2 wear progressive street wear and take ’swagger’ classes.’
or “They are fggts because they look like they just completed a progressive circle jerk where they also talked about ’stuff cultured white people appreciate.’”
Which 1 do yall think?
Loading ...
63 Comments
1ST POST
kanye and the bro next to him look c00l evry1 else is kinda fggty.
Reply
the first dude – looks asian as hell but a fggt
second dude – big time fggt
third dude – random dude in background fggt
4th – kanyebro; psudeo blipster
fiff – looking classy; def pro blipster
number six – looks high; half blipster
Reply
//////////Reply by anonymous
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 10:41 am
@notMordecai, blackwatch plaid=blepster? (blipster + prepster). kanye is his own personal brand/meme.
Reply
two words – Identity Crisis!
Reply
i think lol
Reply
I’m going to say it’s the new and gayer Living Colour. You know all those black guys trying to play rock and they had that one hit, Cult of personality. It’s the updated version of the band so they added more people.
Reply
//////////Reply by dax jax
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
@Valerie, ahaha I was thinking the same thing!
Reply
It beats the baggy pants hanging down past their asses. I welcome the change.
in 2k9 the afro pic stuck in the afro will be big again, this time the pick will be brightly colored like that green blazer. This will be a pleasant sight.
BTW, dude in the P-coat looks fashionable (except the hat) P-coats are always classy.
Crls:
Looking forward to your show today and some of your authentic/shocking/funny musings.
Reply
//////////Reply by La Aarryf
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
@AltCauc,
Hat is a necessity because it matches bag.
Reply
//////////Reply by .
//////////Posted February 10th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
@La Aarryf, fggt
Reply
FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Reply
the hetero-identifying male is a dying breed in the new alt order – he is like an animal trapped by a badger the badger being the designer of the new alt order – the hetero-identifying male catches glimpses of the arbitrarily androgynous nature of the universe but spurning intellectual integrity is unable to reconcile with the looming prospect that perhaps his rigid doctrinaire concerning gender roles is that of social construct – mere affectation sublimated and deployed to deflect intellectual/ dialectical reconciliation and reflection of aforementioned universal conditions. watch the hetero-identifying male’s body language grow increasingly spurious as he squirms in discomfiture like a conflicted animal contemplating gnawing off its limb in order to break free the otherwise inevitable in the hetero-affected male’s case evolution into the hetero-flexible intellectual, altyr. Cricket’s spin won’t come to rest.
Reply
//////////Reply by AltCauc
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 11:12 am
@we all kunt be alt,
Are you trying to say the prevalent coulter is becoming feminized and the Alts are conforming?
Yes, it’s true. Be a man. Be ghey, but be a man, not a feminized pansy with no spine or mind of your own.
Reply
//////////Reply by Pseudonym
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
@we all kunt be alt,
stop this idiocy immediately. there is no ‘arbitrarily androgynous nature of the universe;’ there is an arbitrarily gendered social order developing within biological constraints. social constructs are actual and real, they are not ‘mere affectation’ unless you are a 19th century romantic, in which case i recommend you get back to ‘nature’ and off the internet. your schtick smacks of Marxist false consciousness, Heideggerian aletheia, early psychoanalysis, and other lines of thought that believe humans could enter into a real (preconceptual) world if they would only shrug off their economic servitude, inauthentic mode of being, or false superego. you try to find behind your ‘hetero-identifying male’ an undefined, emancipated sexuality, but this is no less ‘mere affectation’ than the initial state. freeing, transforming, or developing desire is generally a good thing, but the becoming still resides within the same economy, is still produced arbitrarily and holds the same limited claim to any sense of reality beyond the existent and the contemporary.
Reply
//////////Reply by colander
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
@Pseudonym, I’m not sure what yer tryin to say, and I’m not tryin t’read kunt be alts whole comment becuz I have self-esteem
BUT, are u, in an overly wordy way, suggesting that our reality is shaped by our biological needs and how they manifest within our particular societies? becuz how do you explain the greeks buttfucking each other and thinking ‘women suck except to make behbez’? I think the first point is meant to suggest that the ‘hetero-front’/tough guy attitude/closetcase-stratedude thing is dying off, not that ‘being straight is a front’.
it’s like if eating pizza fell out of fashion, nobody would admit to wanting to it, even if it was all they thought about.
Reply
//////////Reply by anony
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
man fuck all yall – both the proper-talkin ones and the one who seems to be talking in lolspeak.
//////////Reply by Pseudonym
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
@colander,
first, the claim to an ‘arbitrarily androgynous nature of the universe’ is an outrageous overstatement that ignores biology completely. sexual conceptualization is limited by biology; the sexuality of a given society is always characterized by culture interacting with biology.
this person states that the ‘hetero-identifying male’ either fails to recognize or fails to reconcile with the arbitrary nature of gender/sexuality constructions, and as he uncomfortably does so, he will become ‘hetero-flexible.’ this new sexuality suggests a potential break with the arbitrary and false hetero-identifier. the problem is that this ‘hetero-flexible’ state is simply a new (though not without precedent) cultural construction, so this transformation is not a liberation of some sort of true desire, but rather just the shift to a new form of arbitrary sexuality produced by dominant social/cultural formations. that is not to say i don’t support this process, i just avoid sentimentalizing it or making exaggerated claims on its behalf.
//////////Reply by we all kant be alt
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 2:45 am
@Pseudonym, @Pseudonym,
Particularly shaded by Pseudonym’s rather ad hominem his response is somewhat muddled. He is either saying the universe is sexually biased/nature displays sexual preference. in which case he’s failed to prove his point or he is not saying much at all.
Specifically, according to Pseudonym there is an “arbitrarily gendered social order developing within social constraints” – “arbitrarily gendered social order” is not exactly the type of construct I’d prefer to acknowledge given its relatively hermeneutically disjointed form – that of a misaligned attempt to debase in the vein of detournement.
if i am to respond with fidelity though to the aforementioned, rather shabby construct which failed to negate the supposition initially posed and more perspicuously ordered, in my opinion, that nature seamlessly vacillates betwixt and beyond the attributes, delimitation of gender, sexuality as arbitrarily as is possible in a non-causal universe or for all intents and purposes, within a causal one –
if i am to respond to that malformed attempt at negation in the ill wrought guise of a poorly performed detournement, i will have had to deviate from my preferred chateau a rebours.
nevertheless, if you insist – you have not disproved the veracity of my statements – your unconscious tautology is not so erudite, perhaps if you understood the irrational source of your vitriol your tautology would more accurately reflect the playfully insouciant idiom with which i chose at leisure to in the spirit of HRO inveigh. I’m sure you need me to spell it out for your though, you righteous bore, you. But it’s OK I can get vulnerable for you if you need me to. just ask me politely. I must say though, your vituperations, while not by any means foreign to the commnt threads are nonetheless, sanctimonious, FGGT, lugubrious, whiny, and just not that funny or meaningful really. sigh.
You see, contrary to your scathingly inept assumptions there is not the spectre of regard in my statements for the plight of the worker, Heideggerian chiaruscuro, or reference to early psychoanalysis, etc.
Not at one point had i suggested that social constructs are not bound by biological constraints – i did suggest that gender roles are massively influenced by social constructs which in the modern world are not bound by the same biological constraints as that of a “hunter-gatherer” culture. therefore, given the new paradigm you can not say that gender roles as they normatively play out collectively today are determined by a biological imperative to perpetuate the species, or for men to reflect rigidly linear ideation of what it is to be a man versus the more passive, acquiescent, less linear let’s say, images that for a very long time have popularly and legislatively even, dogged, so to speak, women. In fact, we can not say what is natural and biologically derivative versus what is socially constructed. the wrestling match between those two forces or motivations is of a magnitude and convolution that effects parallax no matter what reductive, mechanism, scope we attempt to observe it under. we can say however, that we have had a hand in the mix (if we are not subscribing to causality – and why should we if we are to converse at all?). And since we have had a hand in the mix and for all intents and purposes, a relatively large hand in the mix – then we can also resolutely state given the hermeneutically veiled nature of the etymology of this conflict that it is impossible to state when and where nature begins and is in the present day versus what is social construct in the past and present. in other words, it has been going on so long that we don’t know who started it or when it started but we do know that it has definitely started. there has definitely been what amounts to patriarchy. what motivates patriarchy though? sex? what motivates the promotion of patriarchy or patriarchal propaganda? does patriarchal propaganda inadvertently homo-eroticize culture – i.e. american culture – when the civil rights of homosexuals are repressed legislatively as they have been in the recent past and are in the present prolifically what happens? what is the result of that sublimation of civil rights? does that not reinforce the notion that men and women are to assume the gender roles prescribed, sanctioned, authorized, decreed, by the state? Surely, Pseudo you are not so dense to believe such actions do not influence the nature of gender roles in society en masse. How then do we measure the influence of the state versus the influence of biological imperatives in defining gender roles?
Children – humans – learn social constructs by mimicry essentially. If you do not reach a feral child early enough there is the likely hood that that child will never be able to speak or function in society. do you think that child that was raised by dogs gives a fig about who they roll around in the mud with? the nature of the universe is arbitrarily androgynous. the universe, nature what have you doesn’t give a fig about who you roll around in the mud with (unless you believe in intelligent design), and sure as hell, doesn’t give a fig about what you think about it producing hermaphrodites, people with one too many x’s or one too many y chromosones, or what have you. it is all arbitrary to the universe. sink, swim, live, die, peace, war, girl, guy, homo, straight, hermaphrodite, amoeba, human, planet, words, stars. it’s all the same to the universe, nature.
if you fail to acknowledge that you are as i said before, either a believer in intelligent design/causality or you are compromising your intellectual integrity and practicing a willful ignorance. perhaps you might say that one who is agnostic potentially believes in an intelligent design of sorts and/or a causality but in those cases he is either without choice (in a causal frame) or he only gains his choice through the indoctrination of belief and if he rejects the arbitrary nature of the universe with regard to sexuality then he is practicing an anthropomorphic revision that science aka logic as it is delineated through the intellect can not support without a cognitively dissonant effect.
history is replete with instances wherein affectation appeals to popularly sanctioned, traditionally observed social constructs. when one in a circle of male rappers with no women in sight, transposes whatever myriad issues plague him inwardly into fuck fags, or even when CRLS does it – it speaks to a societal anxiety over the subject. if that one rapper is influential enough among his peers and a few others join in the slurring – what likely hood do you think there is that all who are present will join in? the exact numbers and probabilities are irrelevant. history illustrates that mob rule is not to be underestimated ever. Kanye knows this well. He knows that he can only push it so far before he falls out of favor with a certain constituency. He toes the party line but he will never cross it completely because the social construct he subscribes to states that FGGTS (that is if they’re the same as fags, for all intents and purposes again) are pansies, fairies, punks, pussies (do you see the misogyny here?), fags, etc etc. this notion, sentiment, being reinforced by not only culture, peers, family en masse is legislatively enforced through the subjugation of civil rights just like words like nigger, etc were essentially advocated culturally through legislative bodies failure to recognize the civil rights of Americans of African ancestry. this is all rhetorical though, right? i mean it’s obvious.
the often pseudo-righteousness and pseudo-intellectuality of rappers makes them easy prey for mockery and deconstruction. their transparent marketing/ get rich quick schemes masquerading as music/the work of “artists” is less likely brilliant subterfuge in the guise of mediocre, redundant memes to bring attention to civil rights issues for all and more pathetically an unintentional highlighting of a desperation endemic in America and even the world’s intellectually, socially, culturally impoverished peoples alike.
but you know what? we all kant be alt? we all can’t rap! gotta getcha dollaz on cause it’s on like that!
Reply
//////////Reply by Pseudonym
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
@we all kant be alt,
criticism of my prose is silly when, well, your writing is easily more obnoxious than mine (which i don’t make any claims for). for example, don’t accuse me of attempted ‘negation’ when i simply disagree with you in non-dialectical fashion, that’s not only pretentious but incorrect. i thoroughly accept the importance of cultural sexual differentiation, as demonstrated in my formulation of an arbitrary social order operating within biological constraints. put another way, sexuality is the intersection of physiology and psychology. perhaps if it made reference to the universe and ignored the physiology, it would be inflated enough to please you. if you want to waste more time trying to convince me of something i already accept, go for it.
“watch the hetero-identifying male’s body language grow increasingly spurious as he squirms in discomfiture like a conflicted animal contemplating gnawing off its limb”; indeed, i think we can eliminate ‘body’ and make this statement properly reflexive. for clarity’s sake, i’ll state my argument in terms of this passage of yours, since it contains most of the misguided elements of your perspective.
‘grow increasingly spurious’ and ‘animal’ are the two keys to the statement, both suggested the falseness of the current position and the possibility of a reconciliation with something closer to ‘nature’ or ‘instinct.’ first, we have the notion that the protagonist’s body language becomes spurious due to some disjunction triggered by the reality he glimpses: gender and sexuality are social constructs. second, he is compared in this state to a conflicted animal – with the implication of instinctual nature lying behind it. thus, he shall throw off his false, illegitimate, constructed notions of sexual differentiation (’mere affectation’ you’ve told us, as opposed to the following) and adopt the more natural ‘hetero-flexible’ pose. this a naive, problematic position because as i posted earlier:
you try to find behind your hetero-identifying male an undefined, emancipated sexuality, essentially a blank state colored only with “arbitrary androgyny,” but your hetero-flexible male is no less ‘mere affectation’ than the hetero-identifier. freeing, transforming, or developing desire is generally a good thing, but the becoming still resides within the same economy, is still produced arbitrarily and holds the same limited claim to any sense of reality beyond the existent and the contemporary.
to restate again, social constructs are actual and real, i think it’s naive to consider them ‘mere affectation,’ but if you view them this way, at least have the consistency to view them all this way. at the intersection of physiology and psychology, or the body and the socius, or however you prefer, all of our notions are affectations, including both hetero-identification and hetero-flexibility; you are not unmasking the true nature of the gender by revealing that sexuality is constructed, nor does this ‘revelation’ allow for the realization of any true state behind it. this is precisely the relationship between your post and say oedipal psychoanalysis, that if the falseness of the protagonist’s superego’s gender constructs were shrugged off, he might be liberated into heteroflexibility, rather than identifying heteroflexibility as another constructive, potentially repressive in its own course. again, that is not to say i oppose this development, i’m just more suspicious of its potential.
//////////Reply by lawl
//////////Posted January 28th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
@we all kant be alt,
tl;dr.
//////////Reply by den
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
@we all kunt be alt,
you ever hear of the idea that what you perceive in the world is a reflection of yourself? it sounds like you might be describing your upcoming plans to go from straight to pseudo-ghey, or perhaps you’ve already done that and you’re ahead of the curve. either way, i share pseudonym’s opinions.
Reply
//////////Reply by we all kant be alt
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 3:01 am
@den, maybe since i’m pseudo-ghey i can suck your pseudo-cock den? or maybe you’re too busy sucking pseudo’s cock?
Reply
//////////Reply by den
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 9:10 am
@we all kant be alt,
nah thanks, i believe in pro-creation and am not an absolute hedonist, so maybe i can’t be alt like you, but you sound like a lonely alt anyway, i think you need to go tug yourself
//////////Reply by why am I getting inv
//////////Posted February 1st, 2009 at 1:18 pm
@we all kant be alt,
hilariouse..after all this wordy pretenshus/pointless arguing you both resort to school yard taunting…obviously both dicks x
oh and the answer is definately FGGTS
//////////Reply by IONLYFEELHATE
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 2:59 am
@we all kunt be alt,
It’s ‘Crooked spin…’ therfore you argument is wrong.
Please die.
Reply
//////////Reply by Um
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 3:01 am
@IONLYFEELHATE, It’s your, therefore your argument is proved incorrect
Reply
//////////Reply by ALTLYF
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 11:32 am
@EVERYONE,
calm down.
//////////Reply by pseudonym2
//////////Posted January 28th, 2009 at 1:36 am
@we all kunt be alt,
soooooo, snce sum of us alts have not yet attended grad school and do not really fele like taking the time out tooooooo analyze/ use wiktionary/answers.com/dictionary.com to figure out exactly what this convo was just aboutttt, can someone plz esplain the bottom line/main point/thesis statement in this convorsation?
Reply
//////////Reply by anony
//////////Posted January 28th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
@pseudonym2, penis size.
Reply
Not sure, but I think this photo is of what is known as a “pimps + hoes party.” (the one with the hat is the pimp, obvs).
Reply
WTF? Is the fggt in the leopard pants dangermouse? is that the outfit he assembled while hes working on a mashup album of Thin Lizzy and the clipse or a new gnarls barkeley?
Reply
//////////Reply by m
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
@panchizzy,
it looks like the guy from SA_RA
Reply
they blipsteres cause the iorejrj ‘oi the something ho ho ho ho
Reply
They’re neither.
this is TV On The Radio.
Reply
//////////Reply by InnyVinny
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
@jako,
ell emm ay oh
Reply
FGGTz bc 1 is AZN and can’t b a blipster.
Reply
I’ve always wondered what kanye’s entourage looked like… not really surprised though, i knew that weak ass nigg would get no love from some real niggas
Reply
//////////Reply by m
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
@dookie shoot,
too true. they would bust him up.
Reply
//////////Reply by a real nigga
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
@dookie shoot,
False.
Reply
black ppl are afraid of sexuality, so they will never be more than blipstaz, even if, each and every1 of them was born a fggt. the black god (tyler perry) does not allow for buttsex in 2k__
Reply
I think Kanye is mainstream, I think this looks like a bunch of ppl in the music game trying to project some kind of meaningful ness through a clusterf*** of high end (Louis Vuitton=Alt? umm) dezieners..like girls from LA.
Guy behind Kanye is Authentic bc his apocalypto/tribal haircut and prescription pred glasses.
Every1 else – FGGTs
Reply
LOL didn’t even see Kanye at first
Reply
NoNe OF ThEm R AuThEnTiC!!!
KanYe insulted the great Zhousteese at MTV Europe Awards in 2k6. This was just when the electro-economy experienced an unprecedented boom that launched what would become 2k7. Kanye was far from a blipster at this point. After he realized that electro was “totes in this season,” he sampled the Daft Punks and started this thing called a “weblog.”
Kanye slapped the alt-blogosphere in the face in 2k6, only to later start a blog, appear on tracks with Santy Gold and M.I.A., and “care about fashion.” Kanye West is entry-level at best. Not even close to being authentic.
A TRUE BRO NEVER FORGETS
Reply
//////////Reply by colander
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
@MooMoo, EXACKLY. H8 kanye, i don’t care how much he tries to be Kavinsky [via 808 and the heartbreaks band]. altbggt yall
Reply
//////////Reply by Partyrep
//////////Posted January 27th, 2009 at 1:57 am
@MooMoo, Except you guys are forgetting that the Ye SoMe thing was very much a planned undertaking, clearly master-minded by Daft Punk & Mr. Winter. We live in a viral/meme world, remember? Ye = M.I.A. of Blipsters + Mainstream/Alt complex.
Reply
they are so kewl..
Reply
fagsterz
Reply
Crls:
Are you listening to your own show from you fashionable yet authentic pad?
Is it meaningful for an Alt to stay at the “W” or the “Loft” by W hotels or is that too mainstream? Where should an Alt type stay that is authentic? Can you still be Alt and have a decent amount of money?
Reply
//////////Reply by Elxr
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
@AltCauc,
naw fuck hotels, up da punx and stay at a hostel.
Reply
//////////Reply by AltCauc
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
@Elxr,
hostels r rare in the US. Besides, I like to tug in private.
Reply
//////////Reply by anony
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
@AltCauc, circle jerks are totally in for 2k9
Kanye’s stance screams his deep alt atitude of defiance…
oh and i think any blak guy with neon coloured glass = instant blipster/fggt/altfggt/black guy who wants to go against teh grainz…
Reply
L-R
blip, fggt, fggt, blip, blip, blip
Reply
//////////Reply by hdizza
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
@colin, agreein w dis
Reply
Gawd, I hope you’re joking about loving John Mayer. Less AnCo by all people, Any Grouper? H8 Blitzen Trapper. Can’t understand anyone liking that shit. XMU plays them way tooooooo much.
Reply
FGGTS
B/C THEY FORGOT 2 “HAVE FUN W/ IT” LIKE ANDRE 30000
Reply
in 2k9 it will be okay for men to wear leopard leggings with thigh high boots. phantom memory power will allow them to believe that they too were once a part of prince and the revolution.
Reply
//////////Reply by AltCauc
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
@m,
I want to wear leopard leggings with boots!
I won’t wear the green jacket, rather black.
Although, my monstrous package will shock women, and threaten men.
Will the CodPiece make a comeback in 2010 after the leggings have become mainstream? I hope so!
Reply
also, kanye’s got a frollet now. what are your thoughts on that carles?
Reply
————————————————————————–>
blipster, FGGT, fggt, blipster, blipster,1/2 blipster+1/2 fggt
Reply
they r black and they r hipster thus they r blipster duh
Reply
//////////Reply by anony
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
@alexander, and all hipsters are gay so by extension……
Reply
green leather blazer
leggings
boots
purse
def fggt
Reply
blggts
Reply
the three on the right- blipsters
three on the left- fggts
explanation- look at them
Reply
Can we say RACIST…yall???
Reply
//////////Reply by AltCauc
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
@Marissa,
You’re humourless and too easily offended. Besides, you’re probably a Wop!
Reply
Hypebeast yall, Kanye is the man tho stop hatin.
Reply
black people wearing bright colors.. when will the world learn !!? and the white dude looks like a dumbass
Reply
ya’ll hateful. “fggts” is such a derogatory word.
Reply
//////////Reply by thetruthyall
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
@azn, I’m black and I’m also a fggt, and I don’t think crls hates either of things about me. [via, i mean, he doesn't does he??]
Reply
//////////Reply by anony
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
@thetruthyall, hipsters secretly wish they could adopt blister style, in 2k12 they will and thus the circle will be complete. it will of coarse be claimed evolution of there own style.
Reply
//////////Reply by AltCauc
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
@anony,
Secretly? Uh-huh. I’m going out and buying that leopard get-up tonight! BTW, that dude has nice legs. I’ll bet he’s got a big tool and tight ass.
//////////Reply by Armon
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
@anony, course he has a big tool, that’s why he’s covering it up with his hands. he doesnt want the press to see his package through his leopard print tights
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qf4EXLHGj00/SGgYLLoLPZI/AAAAAAAAA3w/x_cNd9B-YeQ/s1600/6288kwtazpainter.jpg
i’m pretty sure leopard print man is taz arnold.
but not sure how i feel about him…
Reply
//////////Reply by lacey
//////////Posted January 26th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
@lacey,
p.s. maybe this is the year CRLS starts blogging bout Stones Throw and shit
Reply
kanye’s swagger in this picture looks more like a slouch, which means he’s really insecure, which probably explains why he’s always writing his blogs in caps, which leads me to believe he’s really a 14 yr old girl, which means he’s neither a blpstr nor fggt but a transgndr
Reply
//////////Reply by anony
//////////Posted January 28th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
@den, he writes blogs in caps? apparently it IS possible to hate him more than I already do.
Reply
why do they have those suitcases? are they on the way to the airport/travelling somewheres? i’m tired of peepz showing off their louies
Reply
AltLeprechaun and his ski club on a luggage safari
Reply
their FGGTS, cuz the guy with leprd leggins is only arond cuz he lets th other bros do him n the butt
Reply
Black people don’t smile in pictures ftw. wheres my applebee’s
Reply
they are bags, the only authentic blips got white parents (jk but srsly)
Reply
Im all for looking good and good style but will this guy and his entourage please please get there heads out of there asses! And Kanye please its ok we dont care just come out of the fucking closet already!
Reply
prolly blipstaz but like they all got together and decided that being fggts was so 2009 and that they had to change. they all look like various ghey reincarnations of george clinton and bootsy collins (both not ghey tho).
Reply
They ain’t Blipstaz Cause theyr FAT. Big FGGTz!!!
Reply
sauce?
Reply
ne1 on the ellen show is deffs a bag. all that neon and no grls —> fggts
Reply
exactly half and half.
the left half are straight ghey. fggts.
the right half at least look presentable. blips.
Reply
They look lost the type of sheep that don’t dance cos they don’t want to dirty there clothes or like there own personal space, it look’s like a vomited version of a chinese handbag stall on Canal St, they can never create there own fun so they try to be “Fun” poor poor boys run home to the milky teet of mama! They better get out of that market before some old lady mistakes you for a fruit stall and put’s one of them in her trollley! A. None of the above – They are Dickheads!
Reply
phr uv A_blk plneht “y’all”
Reply
Left to right:
Guy 1: Q-tip + Bryant Gumbell + Timbagoo(timbaland & magoo’s loveclone)
Guy 2: Duane Twain (Duane from It’s a Different meets Shania Twain) w/ handbag
Guy 3: Sluggo: Part the remainder of Duane (from IDW), part dj qbert type chap, part Grendel from Beowulf.
Guy 4: Mr Karbon Footprint Spinnerz download of the day.
Guy 5: The newest addition to the crew. Still a work in progress, the correct balance of blaxpoitation James Bond and NFL millionaire has yet to be found.
Guy 6: Dude from the roots complete with disarming cmyk-ouflage and fashionable hairline recession.
Reply
blah.
Reply
http://www.superst4r.com
Reply
//////////Reply by HowardTheDuck
//////////Posted February 7th, 2009 at 4:42 am
@Jessica,
FAKE
Reply
Guy on far left looks like he has this on
http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/1147359/2/istockphoto_1147359_funny_glasses.jpg
maybe they are disguised as french tyring to hide from paparazzi.
Reply
2nd guy makes me cry inside.
sometimes i think to myself when i see someone wearing something weird, ‘they must be actually blind and must have a seeing eye dog dress them every day’
Reply
the d00d with the leopard pantz is a FGGT. And the AZN in the corner. the rest are BLIPSTAZ.
Reply
fags. leopard tights anno 2k9 = aids
afrikaa bambaata is still the only one who can pull it off.
sxy
Reply
entries.
every.blackpersonthatwearsfittedlabelscant.shouldntbeconsidered.blippy.
there needs to be some sort of blipster cackaus asap.
no kanyes.no lil waines..no..[whoeverelse]
Reply
Where is this from.
Reply
lolz @ 1st photo
who are deez pplz n e way??
&&kanye west must h8 black ppl.
lolz again.
Reply
The second one would look like George Clinton if he had long hair.
Reply
look at the guy in the leopard leotard’s nards. damn.
Reply