Slut-Shaming: L.A. Edition

Is this 1953? Why is my head suddenly filled with images of Dudley Smith once again running things in L.A.? Of course, he's not and all I've got is real life LAPD Chief William Bratton running his mouth.

Recently a measure was introduced by the City Council to put tighter reins on the paparazzi. But the proposal is an "unnecessary farce" according to Bratton. Why? Well, you see, there'd be no trouble with the paparazzi if the famous womenfolk of Los Angeles "started wearing clothes and behaving." Umm… okay.

In an interview yesterday with NBC Bratton said:

"If you notice, since Britney started wearing clothes and behaving; Paris is out of town not bothering anybody anymore, thank God, and evidently, Lindsay Lohan has gone gay, we don't seem to have much of an issue."

See? It's all the women's fault. It's not like male celebrities ever get drunk and crash their cars and injure two people and end up on the surgeon's table being sewn back together. Hell, that type of thing didn't even happen just this week. No, men, in Bratton's view apparently, don't misbehave. I guess that's just boys being boys. That's different.

And really, the paparazzi aren't vultures either. Like moths to a flame, they're merely lured to celebs by the siren song that is their bad behavior. You know how it is, they just can't help themselves. If only women would just stop dressing provocatively and going outside and visiting restaurants and such, the paparazzi would surely just leave them alone. Right? Right.

(By the way, what the hell does "evidently Lindsay Lohan has gone gay" even mean? I'm trying to wrap my head around the connection between "going gay" (as if there's such a thing to begin with) and "behaving." I'm also trying to wrap me head around the news that Lohan has "gone gay." Did she come out as a lesbian recently? Oh, nevermind. I'm sure I don't care.)

(Thanks to Liss for the awesome Photoshop job.)