Olsen twins on Rolling Stone cover

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Being a little more aggressive in targeting their new demographic of 14 yr old girls and paedophiles, I see =/

Next issue, Amanda Bynes?

― ham on rye (ham on rye), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:03 (twenty-three years ago)

you know they're 18, right? people don't stay infants forever. it's biologically impossible. (i find them terrifying on many levels.)

also: oh no!! 14 yr old girls listen to pop music OH NO!!

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:05 (twenty-three years ago)

(meaning i find both the olsen twins AND people AND infants terrifying on many levels.)

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:06 (twenty-three years ago)

I mean sure they're 18, but still...they'll be old as Rue McClanahan one day and everyone will still look at them like they're 12.

But they're apparently as powerful as Oprah, at least in the demographic of pre-teens. Maybe that's why.

― ham on rye (ham on rye), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:09 (twenty-three years ago)

It says: 'America's Favorite Fantasy.' That means everyone is thinking about having sex with them.

― d k (d k), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:11 (twenty-three years ago)

Eat your heart out, Larry Flynt.

― Jann Wenner (MarkR), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:13 (twenty-three years ago)

they're way richer than oprah for one thing.

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:13 (twenty-three years ago)

Rolling Stone slips further into the abyss.....

― chad (chad), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:15 (twenty-three years ago)

oh and...FUCK EVERYONE responsible for Rolling Stone. e-mail me and i'll tell you again in person...you worthless PAID SCUM!!!

― chad (chad), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:17 (twenty-three years ago)

yes EVERYONE...advertisers too. y'all suck balls.

― chad (chad), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:18 (twenty-three years ago)

hahahahahahahahaha x 1000

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:18 (twenty-three years ago)

(oh and that's at, not with.)

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:18 (twenty-three years ago)

Why are you so upset, chad?

― d k (d k), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:19 (twenty-three years ago)

he's got media integrity.

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:19 (twenty-three years ago)

Rolling Stone has a standing cover offer for any female child star ready to "grow up".

― Mark (MarkR), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:26 (twenty-three years ago)

why you ask? first, my wife and I received a subscription to said publication for xmas from my clueless mom, therefore have been reading this magazine since Dec. second, I have been consistently amazed by the lack of and poor quality of the music journalism. third, hahahhahhahha X2000 to you strongo at you. ya whore.

― chad (chad), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:31 (twenty-three years ago)

Why bother with Rolling Stone when you can pay $90 a year for Mojo...and then they just randomly stop sending you issues about 2 months into the renewal. Im very displeased with them at this point.

― Fecal Jesus (mawill), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:37 (twenty-three years ago)

you worthless PAID SCUM!!!

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Friday, 15 August 2003 22:38 (twenty-three years ago)

What if your mom finds this, chad?

― d k (d k), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:48 (twenty-three years ago)

To be fair your mum probably grew up in a time when RS had some merit.

― ham on rye (ham on rye), Friday, 15 August 2003 22:56 (twenty-three years ago)

You mean like when they were putting David Cassidy on the cover?

― Phil Freeman (Phil Freeman), Friday, 15 August 2003 23:52 (twenty-three years ago)

It's SO repulsive. I don't even get what Rolling Stone is, it's like a kind of pamphlet. Didn't it used to be a counter-culture magazine?

― m.s (m .s), Saturday, 16 August 2003 00:16 (twenty-three years ago)

Didn't it used to be a counter-culture magazine?

That myth has been passed down for generations.

― Andrew Frye (paul cox), Saturday, 16 August 2003 00:37 (twenty-three years ago)

As far as I'm concerned, Phil Freeman nailed it with the above post.
And while Rolling Stone is certainly repugnant, I sure love those trashy true-crime stories they run every few months (recent gems include a sensitive biography of a guy with a 15" dick and a chronicling of some killer-dog breeders. That stuff is TITE!)

― Ben Boyer, Saturday, 16 August 2003 01:17 (twenty-three years ago)

...the Olsen twins are 18?! Last I looked, they still resembled 10 year olds. Not frightening, just weird.

― Barima (Barima), Saturday, 16 August 2003 02:00 (twenty-three years ago)

17 and like 50-some days I think...

― Dan I., Saturday, 16 August 2003 02:12 (twenty-three years ago)

they were born in mid June of '86

eek

― ham on rye (ham on rye), Saturday, 16 August 2003 02:15 (twenty-three years ago)

Dear people of ILM,

I would just like to thank you all for not making any stupid jokes about, or reffering to, the fact that you want to have sex with the Olsen twins, and can't wait until their 18, or blah blah blah. Because really, everybody else on the internet did that, and it wasn't funny the first time.

Really, I'm surprised nobody made the joke. It makes me happy.

-Me

― David Allen, Saturday, 16 August 2003 02:22 (twenty-three years ago)

Years online have taught me that not every thought running through my mind should be transferred to the screen via keyboard.

― Andrew Frye (paul cox), Saturday, 16 August 2003 02:25 (twenty-three years ago)

Boy they're almost there eh? Just a little over 300 days until I can fuck the Olsen twins! WOOO HAAA!!!!

― Dan I., Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:03 (twenty-three years ago)

http://images.mp3.com/rollingstone/content/2047188/Images/00331137.jpg

― d k (d k), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:09 (twenty-three years ago)

Jesus, that's scary.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:13 (twenty-three years ago)

Who do people care about this? Why do people care about them?

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:21 (twenty-three years ago)

Note to Olsen twins: Courtney Love is not a role model.

― Andrew Frye (paul cox), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:21 (twenty-three years ago)

Why do people care about them?

Because they'll be the richest young adults in the world very shortly, and we want front row seats for the mayhem.

― Andrew Frye (paul cox), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:23 (twenty-three years ago)

Yawn. Wake me when one of them dies.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Um, they're 17, not 18... will be 18 June 13, 2004... YAY OLSENS!

― Bryan Moore (Bryan Moore), Saturday, 16 August 2003 03:50 (twenty-three years ago)

16'll get you 20 etc. That photo is too wrong.

― Barima (Barima), Saturday, 16 August 2003 05:04 (twenty-three years ago)

Alex's first post has spoken for me.

― amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 16 August 2003 06:24 (twenty-three years ago)

nick cannon is 23! i found this out reading the source today and it scared me.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Saturday, 16 August 2003 06:26 (twenty-three years ago)

who is nick cannon? sounds like a comic book.

― amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 16 August 2003 06:29 (twenty-three years ago)

rapper actor comedian nickelodian show host. b2k collaborator. also recorded a brilliant version of "parents just don't understand" with 3lw.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Saturday, 16 August 2003 07:09 (twenty-three years ago)

quite a resumé.

― amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 16 August 2003 07:24 (twenty-three years ago)

Rolling Stone's mission as a counter-cultural magazine was to make the counter-culture the actual culture. It succeeded admirably and has been living off it for 25+ years now.

― Tom (Groke), Saturday, 16 August 2003 09:06 (twenty-three years ago)

I mean sure they're 18, but still...they'll be old as Rue McClanahan one day and everyone will still look at them like they're 12.
I agree with this point.
Whenever I hear someone say "Drew Barrymore is Hotttttt..." I cringe, because I want to yell "b-b-but that Gertie from ET, you sicko!"
And she still LOOKS like Gertie to me.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Saturday, 16 August 2003 18:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, I saw ET too, but I don't automatically go to that visual of Drew Barrymore when someone mentions her name. I almost wish I did. Instead, my mind takes me to the Playboy layout and then I feel all sorts of dirty.

― Andrew Frye (paul cox), Saturday, 16 August 2003 18:04 (twenty-three years ago)

I found the "American Idol" covers a whole lot more repugnant than the sight of the apparently navel-free Olsen twins on the cover.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 16 August 2003 18:17 (twenty-three years ago)

Who do people care about this? Why do people care about them?

nyc alex = otm

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Saturday, 16 August 2003 18:36 (twenty-three years ago)

The Olsen twins are billionaires (billionairesses?). Or damn close to it. Which means that when I see their picture, I don't think "jailbait fantasy," I think "ransom demand."

They've claimed to be enrolling in East Coast colleges. So? Who's with me?

― Phil Freeman (Phil Freeman), Saturday, 16 August 2003 18:44 (twenty-three years ago)

Hmm...do you think that if only one was snatched, the other one would cough up the loot to get her twin back?

― Andrew Frye (paul cox), Saturday, 16 August 2003 18:49 (twenty-three years ago)

I heard somewhere once that they are considered "The youngest self-made millionaires in American history."

For some reason I get the feeling the most control they ever had over their career was the occasional nodding of the head when their father approached them with their new game-boy dress up adventure.

― David Allen, Saturday, 16 August 2003 21:08 (twenty-three years ago)

Which means that when I see their picture, I don't think "jailbait fantasy," I think "ransom demand."
Are you in the market for a co-conspirator?
That pair of overindulged ninnies could do with a bit of Patty Hearst Action.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Saturday, 16 August 2003 22:26 (twenty-three years ago)

Whenever I see them (especially with that picture up there), I think:

http://gfx.dagbladet.no/kultur/2001/07/31/shining_twins.jpg

― My name is Kenny (My name is Kenny), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:16 (twenty-three years ago)

whenever I see them I think

― nnnh oh oh nnnh nnnh oh (James Blount), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:41 (twenty-three years ago)

people don't become billionaires by nodding their heads.

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:08 (twenty-three years ago)

(according to vh1 [thank you vh1 for filling my life with such useless trivia] the olsen's became billionaires through the extremely lucky circumstances of having a viciously capitalist manager, parents who weren't out to rape their children financially like, say, the kid from home alone, and the meeting point between the each of their needs, i.e. parents won't let them sign their lives away to the manager; manager won't let the parents have total control of the contracts; girls reap benefits of no one knowing what else to do.)

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:10 (twenty-three years ago)

yeah, that comment seemed so stupidly kneejerk sexist I just ignored it

― nnnh oh oh nnnh nnnh oh (James Blount), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:12 (twenty-three years ago)

it's along the lines of "knowing what will sell to teenage and pre-teen girls is a. so simple a chimp could do it and b. inherently evil, since all children and teenagers should be wearing potato sacks to keep them from the corrupting influence of freedom of choice.

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:15 (twenty-three years ago)

ha ha but i guess it can all be summed up in "david allen in stupid kneejerk statement shocker"

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:16 (twenty-three years ago)

i don't really know why grown humans - but especially males - really get off so much on defining themselves as "above" the entertainment and fashion of teenage girls. ignoring it is one thing; capitalizing on it is one thing; but kneejerk statements designed to make you look above it all like "their new game-boy dress up adventure" seem a little on the side of protesting too much. maybe it's the general culture version of the indie superiority complex, anything "girly" is suspect.

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:19 (twenty-three years ago)

"just for the record, I am smarter and cooler than a 12 year old girl"

― nnnh oh oh nnnh nnnh oh (James Blount), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:22 (twenty-three years ago)

(mind you, saying such a thing makes it's validity impossible)

― nnnh oh oh nnnh nnnh oh (James Blount), Sunday, 17 August 2003 21:24 (twenty-three years ago)

That picture of them from RS reminds me that when I was a 12 year old girl, VC Andrews was all the rage.

― daria g (daria g), Monday, 18 August 2003 10:06 (twenty-three years ago)

The Olsen Twins are ugly.

― fletrejet, Monday, 18 August 2003 11:19 (twenty-three years ago)

Daria is right, for the RS pictures they do look like one of those weird illustrations from the cover of a VC Andrews book.

― Larcole (Nicole), Monday, 18 August 2003 11:35 (twenty-three years ago)

Mary-Kate is hella hawt, but what the fuck with that Ashley troglodyte!?!?

― jesus, I'm rollin' wit you (nickalicious), Monday, 18 August 2003 11:57 (twenty-three years ago)

Hahahaha

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 18 August 2003 11:57 (twenty-three years ago)

my daughter admires
them but not as much as she
likes ms. michelle branch

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Monday, 18 August 2003 12:51 (twenty-three years ago)

So it scares me to say it, but jesus, Mary-Kate is fucking hot on the cover!

― Chris O'Connor (Chris O'Connor), Monday, 18 August 2003 15:10 (twenty-three years ago)

Actually they are 17, just so everyone knows...

― bry, Monday, 18 August 2003 15:47 (twenty-three years ago)

http://content.rollingstone.com/content/2047188/images/00331115.jpg

So which is which? Cute, yes - but kind of in a Hanson way... does that make any sense? They look younger than 17.

― dave225 (Dave225), Monday, 18 August 2003 16:39 (twenty-three years ago)

Mary-Kate and Ashley is the skinner-looking one on the left. Her face always has seemed less round than her sister's. Must be weird being Ashley. Her name is always second, which means she's on the right and people see her second in guaging the photo, AND her sister is better looking. That top and neckwear combo on Mary-Kate is just slammin'.

― Chris O., Tuesday, 19 August 2003 00:52 (twenty-three years ago)

Um, I meant to put just May-Kate is on the left. Guess thew whole brand name just rolls off the tongue. :-)

― Chris O., Tuesday, 19 August 2003 00:53 (twenty-three years ago)

seven months pass...

i have been jerking off to the olsen twins pictures since they were about twelve,as they get older and hotter my cock stroking friction addiction just gets more frantic.i would eat both their shit

― balssfullosperm@yahoo.com, Saturday, 27 March 2004 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Haha, that's amazing.

― Seth, Saturday, 27 March 2004 13:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Degoogle!

― Sym (shmuel), Saturday, 27 March 2004 14:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Yawn. Wake me when one of them dies.

Cripes, I can be such a jackass sometimes.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 27 March 2004 17:09 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.