shady-brain-farm: This is a post that currently has over 200k notes and this is my reblog of it as y
shady-brain-farm: This is a post that currently has over 200k notes and this is my reblog of it as you can see I was fooled by it as well, before I decided to google it because it didn’t seem to make much sense. Basically it said the rule was “no space, leave the place”, that if you touch a mirror and there’s a space between your finger and the reflective one, then it’s a real mirror. If there’s no space then it’s a two way mirror and people could be watching you undress. THIS IS FALSE AND WILL DO NOTHING BUT CAUSE UNNECESSARY PANIC AND ANXIETY. From Jowein.net: “You can not tell if a mirror in a bathroom is a two-way mirror (where someone could observer you from behind the glass) by placing your fingernail on the glass and observing if there is a gap to the mirror image or not. There are regular mirrors with and without that gap. Two-way mirrors rely on different brightness on the two sides to create the illusion of a mirror on one side, not on some arrangement of the glass sheet.You can not tell if a mirror in a bathroom is a two-way mirror (where someone could observer you from behind the glass) by placing your fingernail on the glass and observing if there is a gap to the mirror image or not. There are regular mirrors with and without that gap. Two-way mirrors rely on different brightness on the two sides to create the illusion of a mirror on one side, not on some arrangement of the glass sheet.” A girl in a changing room might think this rule is real, then test it and have a panic attack for no reason if there’s ‘no space’, when it may very well be just an ordinary mirror. Proof here is that this is my finger on my hand mirror (the back of which is cardboard, so I doubt anyone can see through that) As you can see, there’s no space between the reflection of my finger, and my finger. Here’s the Snopes link also confirming that it’s a hoax. Please signal boost and reblog this, it could cause a lot of anguish when this rule is utterly FAKE. Thank you -- source link