Two new rude illusions….

37

Patrick L kindly sent me these…..

Impressed?

 

37 comments on “Two new rude illusions….

  1. Mk says:

    More like this pls.

  2. leslielu ♔ says:

    The second one was a little easy for me, but that first one… pretty cool.

  3. Jimbo says:

    At first I couldn’t see the illusion. Then I noticed these are photos of domino-toppling arrays taken from above.

  4. kelly says:

    Ohhh… I see now =p

  5. Lazy T says:

    not ‘impressed’….. smirking!

  6. Anonymous says:

    Almost two real-life examples of the “It’s a vase… no, it’s two faces! No, wait… it’s a vase!” thing. Almost. Except maybe replace “faces” with “legs”, and “vase” with ….well… something else.

    But “rude”?
    O Internet, you have truly robbed me of all my innocence.

  7. Lindamp says:

    Not impressed. Fewer like these please😉

  8. runslikeabeetle says:

    I don’t get it. Sorry for being dense but what’s the illusion?

    • Anonymous says:

      ok got it now…maybe you need to be a man to figure this out quickly…
      fewer like these please😉

  9. Chrissie says:

    Oooh I can see a lady’s pants!! Hmmmm less of these please

  10. nanda says:

    Not at all

  11. ButMadNNW says:

    Not impressed.

    Although I fairly quickly saw the “illusion” of the first photo, the side of her car seat is too obviously not a leg. So while I could “see” it, I couldn’t see it. If that makes sense (it’s late).

    The second one, I scrolled up and down it at least three times before I got an inkling of what the sophomoric mind who sent it on to you saw.

    Maybe if I hack a leg off one of my X chromosomes, these will be more impressive/funny…

  12. Mad Kev says:

    What a strange man you are.

  13. The first one – at first I could not see the reality. Now I’m disappointed that I can🙂 Very good them.

  14. I got the “illusion,” but didn’t understand what made it “rude” until someone explained. Evidently I am Out of the Cultual Loop.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Anybody noticed the strange shape of the rear window in the first picture?

  16. Ivan says:

    Anyone else noticed the “strange” shape of the rear window in the first picture?

  17. Heather Cawte says:

    Oh dear. How old are you??

    Less like these, please.

  18. Yana says:

    Is there any experimental data looking into whether sexual orientation affects the power of this illusions?

  19. NoAstronomer says:

    Not terribly impressed. The 1st one feels photoshopped.

  20. Emma says:

    The second illusion is very like the first, so if you’ve seen the first, the second is nothing special. Also, there isn’t much illusion with the second one. It’s pretty obvious that the legs aren’t the girl’s own legs!

  21. fluffy says:

    Even after reading all the comments I have no idea what the illusion is supposed to be or why it’s ostensibly rude. Anyone care to explain it to a poor befuddled asexual neutrois?

  22. Ashley says:

    Disgustingly RUDE and CRUDE… More please!

  23. matt says:

    @Yana – I too wonder whether sexual orientation affects this.

    I liked the first one better than the second one. Second was too obvious.

  24. peculiarpotato says:

    Meh!!!

  25. Anonymous says:

    You are a professor of what exactly?

  26. Harry says:

    Bit crap illusions but rude? You lot must be very old.

  27. ~Colors~ says:

    At first i didn’t see it.
    Its not hard to see the truth, it is hard to see the Illusion.
    Sorry.

  28. Arnaud says:

    Love it, more of these please🙂

  29. heather says:

    I doubt sexual orientation is as big a factor on spotting this ilusion. Rather, I suspect it’s that many men here, when they are looking at the picture of a woman on the internet, like as not it’s porn. Ergo men are predisposed to seeing photos of women viewed on the internet as probably pornographic.,
    Obviously not all pictures of any woman. Just usually young, attractive ones with a lot of skin-tone in the picture.

    so, it’s not that men are predisposed to seeing it but that it’s viewed via the medium of the Internet, where this sort of picture is commonplace.
    (I’m female)

  30. Legion says:

    ok. not seeing it. at all.

    thanks to all the people who read the pleas of those of us asking what it is yet won’t answer specifically.

  31. Chrissie says:

    Legion-I think I was fairly clear about the “illusion”. It looks like you can see a woman’s pants (or underwear for those in US). Despite this sight being fairly common in swimming pools, beaches etc, some men seem to find it thrilling if it’s seen in a car or on the front page of a newspaper.

  32. Legion says:

    oh, well then that’s probably why I didn’t notice it.

    I’m a big boy now! No giggles for panties! Ha!

    Thanks for the explanantion!
    🙂

  33. hoopyjoe says:

    I still think “More like this pls.” is funnier than the illusions…

  34. bench jacken men guenstig
    Nice information, wonderful web page style, keep up the good work

  35. Marius says:

    The second one is quite obvious. I have trouble getting the first one to be honest. Maybe I am trying to hard now and can’t see the obvious.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s