Proclivities wrote: 
Gawd! That takes me back.
I used to watch the TV show with my Grandpa, '58 or 9 when I got in from school. One day I came home and he was wearing a cowboy hat with 'BRONCO' on it and  I couldn't work out how he got it until my Grandma showed me the box of  which he had cut out the word and stuck it to his hat

I thought Ty Hardin was so cool

 hippiechick wrote: 
If he wants to. 

 kysmet wrote: 
I guess. It seems really bizarre to me to wear a dress to your wedding named after a Disney character. Oh well, I was never a big fan anyway.

Does the groom dress like this?

 JrzyTmata wrote: 
Yeah, it's different on DisneyBridal.com.  I love Snow White on there and Cinderella.  I like tulle and garden-type dresses.  They're all beautiful, though.

 hippiechick wrote: 
Sure, why not?  Many brides want to be princesses on their wedding day.  Why shouldn't they be a Disney princess if that's what they want?  Maybe someone has very fond memories of her father reading her Snow White when she was a little girl and he's passed on.  That could be a very special way to honor him and have him there with her in a way.  Etc, etc.

I have to go with the Ariel....

 Antigone wrote: 
I like Cinderella and Jasmine too.
Snow White isn't the same on the site as what HC posted.

 JrzyTmata wrote: 
The Belle is pretty too.

 hippiechick wrote: 
That's a pretty dress.

Disney wedding dresses??? Really???



http://www.disneybridal.com/products.html?category=bridalgowns

Curious name choice for toilet paper.  Image links to a cool site of old British magazine ads.

 Manbird wrote: 
California tree stand?

 newwavegurly wrote: 
That picture changed a lot of things.  RIP Farrah.

 BillnDollarBaby wrote: 
Ah yes, I see. I just thought it was bad typesetting.
 
And if this was from the 70s, I would hazard a guess that they were trying to mimic the Farah Fawcett look from her infamous poster:

 
But really, who wants to walk around looking like they're cold all the time? 

 BillnDollarBaby wrote: 
Viva (the seller) was an "adult" magazine back in the 1970's, and judging by the typeface (Avant Garde?), the ad must have been from that era.  It is funny that lingerie companies now sell products to "cover" that occurrence.  Major design error as well - a broken word on the first line.

 BillnDollarBaby wrote: 
Different people like different things. Some women don't want their nipples to ever show, some want to display more.

 newwavegurly wrote: 
$20

Some people like their nipples to show and be sticking up, but they don't want to go braless.

 newwavegurly wrote: 
I think its $20, $1.50 and $2.  Look at the spacing.  And based on the style, I'm guessing the 70's which would make those numbers about right.  I think its bizarre but at that time, it would have been way sexxxxxxy.  The ad cracked me up.  Now they sell inserts for your bra to make sure you don't have headlights.  Fashion can't make up its mind.

 Proclivities wrote: 
Does that say two THOUSAND dollars? That's the most messed up part of it.
Don't even get me started on the ridiculousness of the item in the first place.