Skip to content or view screen version

Hidden Article

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Who owns beauty? Sexy Girls reposte, (IMF)

IMF | 12.07.2004 16:25 | Indymedia

.



The original Sexy Girls post was...
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/07/294321.html

Previous posts are available from here...
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/293910.html

IMF

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

Good stuff !

12.07.2004 22:28

This seems like a very interesting contribution to the webite.

Like

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/07/294366.html

and

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/293989.html

for example, it is very difficult to see why it has been censored.

Deros

Nah I think they were probably right to hide it...

19.07.2004 18:29

It definitely constitutes as a rant... obviously it may well really get up some clones nose who would ignore the rant and let it sit on the newswire if they agreed but I cant deny it constitutes a rant - it should have been posted as a response but I love the picture too much to post it as a response. I'll come up with some other way to get the point across instead. To be honest I'd rather there was some quality control even if I dont agree with it.... everyone needs an editor. However if it was hidden coz it was sexist they need their headz looking at.

IMF