real talk

there is absolutely no reason for nirvana's "nevermind" to sport such a disgusting album cover and anyone who opposes my point is just the type of phreak those images attract.
putting swim trunks on spencer wouldntve subtracted from the message or artistic value in any way and he had every right to sue.
what type of douchebag greenlighted that anyway?
yes nudity is natural and beautiful, and artistic nudity needs to be normalized, but not with GODDAMN CHILDREN?? ESPECIALLY BABIES HELLO???
that is absolutely child porn. no doubt about it.
id like to say that part of my sympathy for spencer comes from my own experiences. of course, his exploitation is on a larger scale since nirvana had literally reshaped the music industry and introduced grunge to the scene, but ive pretty much been exploited in the same way. my grandma has countless pictures on facebook of me shirtless for anyone to see. i am afab i have BOOBS. i remember all of them were when i was a baby to about age 5 when i realized that shit was nasty. some of the pictures were of me in the bath, some were of me just sitting there? like why did i have a shirt off huh???? and one of them, a picture she uses for HER GODDAMN PFP in some places, was a revolting shot of baby me, shirtless of course, with a view right up my skirt.
you could argue that i wasnt fully developed but thats still a child's goddamn titties out for everyone to see???? and some people probably got OFF to the fact that i was undeveloped, lets be real.
not only that but recently she came up with the bright idea of publicly posting a pic of my bikini area (i was only in underwear) just cuz i self harmed
im kinda missing the plot but yeah i think nirvana kinda sucks ass for giving that the green light

---

subspace t. mine Other July 13, 2025 at 2:01 am 1 0