Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
HERE COMES THE bride all dressed in white. And, don’t look now, but here come thousands of bicyclists not dressed in anything.
Nude and body-painted participants from this year’s Philly Naked Bike Ride cruised through the wedding day photo shoot of lovebirds Ross Cohen and Blair Delson.
The couple, who got married on Saturday evening, spent the afternoon before their wedding taking photos at romantic spots around the city.
Their wedding photographer, JPG Photography studio owner Joseph Gidjunis, was snapping photos of them in Dilworth Plaza, next to City Hall, when they heard the buzz of about 3,000 bicycles approaching.
Delson and Cohen decided not to wait for the cyclists to pass before continuing with their photos. She grabbed handfuls of her tulle and lace dress and scurried toward the cyclists half a block away, and he followed.
“We saw them and I sprinted in my heels and my wedding gown and decided to get in on the action,” Delson said. ”
Cohen lifted Delson and twirled her around, and together they high-fived the nude cyclists, who serenaded them with cheers.
“We thought it was hilarious,” Delson said.
Gidjunis, who previously took news photos and now primarily does events and portraits, took about 100 photos, many while bike riders were stopped at a red light.
“They captured the moment perfectly,” Cohen said.
All images: JPG Photography
The cyclists, some nude and others in body paint or underwear, seemed to have a good time, too, smiling and flashing peace signs for the couple. Organisers of the annual bike event, which is related to the World Naked Bike Ride movement, say they hope it encourages people to bike more and to embrace nudity as a normal and enjoyable part of life.
Cohen and Delson, who are going to Hawaii for their honeymoon, said they already know how they’ll explain the R-rated wedding photos to their kids one day: “When it’s your day just love life and embrace the moment,” Cohen said.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Have they found a way to blame Sinn Féin yet?
@Niall Power: Only Monday yet
It’s not surprising Fine Gael, the party of the rich, want to increase house prices for first time buyers.
We allowed banks to self regulate then the taxpayer had to bail them out, we allowed the insurance industry to self-regulate then the taxpayer had to bail them out and we allowed the construction industry to self regulate and now the taxpayer has to bail them out. There was a cosy relationship between construction and recent governments but trust has been permanently damaged. Not just mica but fire safety. Corners cut everywhere and no one accountable. If it adds 4K to the cost of a new house to build it in a manner that means it won’t crack and crumble into the ground within ten years then that is a cost worth paying.
@Sean: how long have you had a house Sean?
@Sean: that 4k figure is an absolute myth, based on figures that nobody thought to check.
This will be a great excuse for FF to pull the rug out from under Lord Veradader before his coronation in December.
The builders will get the maximum price they can for a house. The price they get will be determined by supply and demand. So the builder or developer will be the ones paying for the levy. The suggestion that if you put a levy on concrete the builder will just add it on to the price of the house is just simplistic.
@Mick Hyland: In simple terms this is correct.
But if a developer has input costs that increase by say 1%. Then 99 houses get built instead of 100. So it’ll still affect supply.
@Paolo Fandango: Why would only 99 houses get built if the developer’s input costs increase by 1%? The developer is not operating with a fixed pot of money; as long as he’s making an attractive return on capital he will continue to build more houses.
@Mick Hyland: the 1% is being absorbed by the developer. Fixed pot or not, it’s still less net income which reduces the amount of assets they can build.
The 1% cost doesn’t just disappear
So this is to offset the cost of mica redress scheme (which I believe impacted over 7000 homes). Am I miss understanding something here, but why is the whole Country now being forced to pay and contribute to a concrete levy (which we know will be permanent)? I know they are raising funds to offset, but this seems the complete wrong way to do it! Building material costs are already excessive.
I’m simple terms this is correct.
But if a developer has input costs that increase by say 1%. Then 99 houses get built instead of 100. So it’ll still affect supply.
@Paolo Fandango: this was supposed to be a response to mick above.
have your say