Once I saw it, I couldn't see what I originally saw.
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
181 points (93.7% liked)
theyknew
687 readers
1 users here now
Pictures created by people who knew full well how they could be interpreted. For pictures to fit in here there needs to be an element of plausible deniability, although it can be a tenuous one...
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The illusion is so prominent I don't even know what else it could be
Edit Oh it's legs. Had to zoom very in
Oh shit you're right.
Same, once I saw the shoes the picture corrected itself (and i can't force myself to not see them now) but up until then it was like that duck/rabbit photo except both were.... something else.
oth were.... something else.
go on..
Definitely made with the thumbnail in mind
I had to zoom in for a minute or two to see shoes. I'm just too biased.
I have looked at it for some minutes now. I don't see anything out of the ordinary.
Nothing unusual about some daisy dukes at all
I'm more confused now. What do you mean by dukes? Is the joke related to the weird shoes with open toes that for some reason have shoelaces when they don't need any?
It's an 80s era pop culture reference.
There was a character on the tv show, the Dukes of Hazard, named Daisy Duke.
She was known for wearing very tight fitting, cut off jean shorts.
That type of shorts became known as "daisy dukes", and was later popularized again in a hip-hop song.
The image in the post, if you aren't looking at it right, looks like a nice ass in those kind of shorts.
Someone help, I only see shoes
Mentally make the background foreground, if you can, so the bottom corners are something like legs.
It's a vagina
And behind the knees vaguely looks like tits
The pubic hair kind of gives it away..
Yeah, except that just ankle skin, not hair.