Now wait a minute, everybody.
That one chick isn't a primitive or a sub-primitive, obviously, and when I read the bonfire, I didn't see the primitive or sub-primitive who posted it, alleging it was her.
It's obviously something the primitive or sub-primitive scanned out of a Sears, Roebuck catalogue.
We all know primitives lie, primitives lie all the time.
This is why I'm sort of leery when primitives and sub-primitives post their "pictures."
What's to stop franksolich, for example, from posting a photograph of Clare Booth Luce, and saying this is franksolich? Who could disprove it?
But this primitive, or sub-primitive, didn't allege that was her.
One has to be a little careful here. It's safe to assume anything a primitive or sub-primitive says is a lie, but one can get tangled up badly if one assumes a primitive or sub-primitive said something the primitive or sub-primitive didn't say.
