If the woman that JK rowling posted an upskirt photo of had been a cis woman snopes wouldn't have said this was "mixed" and you know it.
Not that it was necessary, but I looked up definitions, and yeah, obviously "taking a photo under someone's skirt" is literally it. Fuck Snopes so fucking hard. I need them to explain to me how it doesn't fit the definition to a fucking t:
And what the FUCK do they mean, "public setting"?? Yeah, upskirts are mistly taken in public fucking settings! That's not an eycuse, that's part of the fucking issue
And truly what do they mean it was in public? Does that mean that the upskirt photos people take on subways dont count because other people are around? OF COURSE IT WAS IN PUBLIC THATS HOW THE PHOTO GOT TAKEN IF SHE HAD BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED AT HOME IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BREAKING AND ENTERING
















