My kind of place

posted on 16 Apr 2017 in Buildings, Chinglish


No egalitarians allowed…

Photo courtesy of Erik Schmitz.
Found in Beijing, China.

28 captions

  1. Marum | 4:01 am |

    Does the corner point inwards our outwards? (In the middle)

  2. Conventi | 4:01 am |

    Only for Rothschilds.

  3. algernon | 4:02 am |

    No riff raff allowed

  4. algernon | 4:03 am |

    Donalds sort of place. I really mean it.

  5. Droll not Troll | 4:04 am |

    Come in and be dominated.

  6. Yu No Hoo | 4:06 am |


  7. Marum | 4:06 am |

    Capn’ the poor are up in arms, they can’t afford petrol.

    WELL. Let them buy electric cars then!

    (A Marie Antoinette moment)

  8. Marum | 4:09 am |

    I wish that corner wouldn’t keep popping in and out. It’s spoiling my aim, when I try to pee in the sink.

  9. Droll not Troll | 4:09 am |

    Our club is better than your club.

  10. Seventy2rd o clock | 4:12 am |

    Also called ‘Toilet’

  11. Marum | 4:13 am |

    Have a distorted view of reality.
    Join an elitist club.

  12. Droll not Troll | 4:15 am |

    Giving the bird to the rest of the world.

  13. Marum | 4:18 am |

    Kant said: Our observations of an oblect are merely our observations, and have no bearing on the true nature of the object. (being observed)

  14. Droll not Troll | 4:18 am |

    With all those blocks it could be Mar-a-Lego.

  15. Big Fat Cat | 4:19 am |

    Is this the lounge for UA frequent flyers where you will be club and reaccomodate?

  16. Marum | 4:29 am |

    I get it.
    It’s an “unisex” toilet.

  17. Seventy2rd o clock | 4:34 am |

    For rave-society E-after parties

  18. Marum | 4:34 am |

    ON EXTERNAL OBJECTS By Immanuel Kant From Critique of Pure Reason (1781) __________________________________________________________________ General Observations on The Transcendental Aesthetic To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain, as clearly as possible, what our view is regarding the fundamental constitution of sensible knowledge in general.
    What we have meant to say is that all our intuition is nothing but the representation of appearance; that the things which we intuit are not in themselves what we intuit them as being, nor their relations so constituted in themselves as they appear to us, and that if the subject, or even only the subjective constitution of the senses in general, be removed, the whole constitution and all the relations of objects in space and time, nay space and time themselves, would vanish. As appearances, they cannot exist in themselves, but only in us. What objects may be in themselves, and apart from all this receptivity of our sensibility, remains completely unknown to us. We know nothing but our mode of perceiving them – a mode which is peculiar to us, and not necessarily shared in by every being, though, certainly, by every human being. … Even if we could bring our intuition to the highest degree of clearness, we should not thereby come any nearer to the constitution of objects in themselves. We should still know only our mode of intuition, that is, our sensibility. … What the objects may be in themselves would never become known to us even through the most enlightened knowledge of that which is alone given us, namely, their appearance. …
    The representation of a body in intuition … contains nothing that can belong to an object in itself, but merely the appearance of something, and the mode in which we are affected by that something; and this receptivity of our faculty of knowledge is termed sensibility. Even if that appearance could become completely transparent to us, such knowledge would remain toto coelo different from knowledge of the object in itself. …
    It is not that by our sensibility we cannot know the nature of things in themselves in any save a confused fashion; we do not apprehend them in any fashion whatsoever. If our subjective constitution be removed, the represented object, with the qualities which sensible intuition bestows upon it, is nowhere to be found, and cannot possibly be found. For it is this subjective constitution which determines its form as appearance

  19. Droll not Troll | 4:44 am |

    “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.”
    – Groucho Marx.

  20. Marum | 4:44 am |

    There! I would say, that that, is my Kant rant. However, as puns are the lowest form of humour, I can’t.

  21. Classic Steve | 7:15 am |

    Who knew China valued honesty so much?

  22. Geo | 8:34 am |

    DEFINITELY not found in Communist China.

  23. Seventy2rd o clock | 10:49 am |

    At least it’s not Elitits

  24. Pete | 2:30 pm |


    Actually if it were elitits it draw a “bigger” crowd!

  25. Long Tom | 4:38 pm |

    In the USA, “elitist” is the term used to describe people who think they are smarter and more sophisticated than everyone else-but who aren’t. In other words, a know-it-all or a stuffed shirt.

  26. Droll not Troll | 4:46 pm |

    @Seventy2rd o clock | 10:49 am: They would be so busted!

  27. pasdrole | 9:27 am |

    CONGLOMO, We Own You!

  28. zankhana | 9:58 am |

    “I say!!!!!!! The peasants are revolting!”
    “Yes they are rather, aren’t they!”

Caption is made at here!

Caption is made at here! (please leave a caption for the Engrish photo; all vulgar entries, spam, etc. will be deleted. Let's Creative!)

Home | Brog | Store | Massage Board | Advertise | Contact Us | Disclaimer

© 1999 - 2013 All rights reserved.