How could it, when there are weirdos like this
The Anna Edit #13 The lying liar who lies
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Anna Edit Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Aimee aka mark on his burner account
He walks in an complains that the tripod is set up for Nanna’s height and people only see his beard. They decorate gingerbread houses and he says he’s the kind of guy who copies the decorations from the box. There’s more of him. See how much creepiness you can stomach.
I guess posts about items that turned out to be an “investment” afterwards are more useful.I understand your point, and, indeed, that is the literal textbook definition of the word. However, economists (disclaimer: I’m an economist by training) would say an investment does not necessarily have to have monetary returns; it can also lead non-monetary returns such as utility or enjoyment. In reality, any time we buy something, we are making an investment, i.e., hoping to get a return be it because we can make money out of it or get utility/enjoyment from it; otherwise, we wouldn’t part with our money. If we buy something expensive that we end up using for a lot more years than a cheap item, we could say it was a better investment, i.e. we got more utility or use from it, even if we never resell it. If we do resell it and are lucky enough to make money off it, the returns would be not only the money we made but also the enjoyment we got from it. Just because clothing will almost always depreciate in value doesn’t mean we shouldn’t approach purchases with an “investment” mindset. That said, I wholeheartedly agree that influencers, Anna included, use the term too freely. They don’t have true capsule wardrobes, so no, they are not getting as much utility from each item of clothing and therefore not really making wise investments (then again, they don’t actually buy the items and earn a shitload of money from affiliate links, so I guess they are getting infinite returns).
Because for many people the term investment has now just become an excuse to buy something. Everything we buy has become an investment. It just sounds nicer.
The thing is though, is it an ‘investment’ if you don’t actually buy it? Anna seems to call lots of things an ‘investment’ when they’ve actually been gifted to her - so she’s not ‘investing’ in anything, apart from herself in a roundabout way. I get that she’s suggesting to her followers that if they buy it, it’s an investment for them, but is she qualified to give that sort of advice?
I mean in a weird way, yes, she has so much, so if something stands out in her wardrobe, it must be worth while, because she has a lot of options (sponsorships and brand relations aside). Unlike other people who maybe get a lot of wear out of a coat, because they only buy a new coat every few years.
Anyway, maybe I’m projecting. I have A LOT of clothes, all purchased myself, but I have tried to stop this way of thinking of things as investments to justify buying them. What does it matter what the cost per wear is, or how much joy I get out of it. Many of us don’t really need anything, we just want things. That’s fine, but that is something different.
That sounds like way too much Mark for me!
I get the investment thing, buying better quality is generally a good thing. But with Anna, she over consumes and calls it an “Investment” as an excuse for her luxuries.
“No one can criticise me because IT'S AN INVESTMENT!!!”
“No one can criticise me because IT'S AN INVESTMENT!!!”
What bloggers failed to mention is the boot theory. It is an investment if you can afford it to begin with, many of them shun fast fashion but how many people can afford investment pieces.
moneywise.com
Understanding the 'Boots Theory' of Socioeconomic Unfairness
This is why poor people can't afford to save money.
moneywise.com
Ooo good point. It reminds me of an article I read by an influencer/writer I really like:What bloggers failed to mention is the boot theory. It is an investment if you can afford it to begin with, many of them shun fast fashion but how many people can afford investment pieces.
Understanding the 'Boots Theory' of Socioeconomic Unfairness
This is why poor people can't afford to save money.
Fast Fashion Is Bad For The Environment. For Many Plus-Size Shoppers, It’s The Only Option.
While there are plenty of plus-size fast-fashion brands available today, it is much harder to find size-inclusive sustainable labels.
What is going on she looks like a bleeping goblin??
Which one of you geniuses does the edit of her ‘An Edited Life’ newsletter? Because I woke up to some new crap content in my inbox that needs your red pen…
What do you mean, emphasise?
Not OP but for me it's the way she smiles. She seems to be hellbent on having her mouth agape in every picture like, babe, that's not how people normally smile in photos? She looks deranged. Close your teeth, then smile. It's not that hard.
What also bothers me in that photo is her hair sticking out, just put it behind your ear ffs!!!
Is not her fault that she was born like that, back in GG days people were trolling her jaw and her lower row of teeth. Is not her best features but she seems to only do headless which showcase everything from jaw downwards
She looks a lot thinner in pictures than in the video 
That was what stood out to me too. But it felt more like that 3-5 day unwashed hair that’s a bit crunchy and does what it wants.
I looked at that picture and my first thought was: you sit on a throne of lies & your “content” is just you pretending to have it together.
Mark has improved his skills?She looks a lot thinner in pictures than in the video
Maybe finally bought the right bleeping lens so not everything he shoots looks three times wider than it is
- Status