• synae[he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’ll never get that woman out of her pants with that attitude!

    • flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Back in the day, women needed a man, so you were supposed to focus on catching one instead of on weeding out the overly sensitive ones.

      And it wasn’t that long ago. I knew a grandmother who had gone to college to get her degree in doing housewife stuff, which was a common method for catching a man. Gross stuff.

      • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean women couldn’t even have bank accounts until like the 60’s and I’m fairly certain it was in the 70’s before it became commonly done.

        I have to navigate all the way back to my mother in my family tree to find the first women that lived while not being allowed to have a bank account in the US.

  • ddh
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Idiot-filter, in wearable form!

  • some_guy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ll fuck her for him. I think women in pants are hot.

  • galanthus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I thought people then were sexually repressed and conservative, but he went straight to the point.

    • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Judging by the artwork, this could easily be 60s, which is nearly three quarters of a century ago.

      I don’t think it’s that wild considering how the world worked back then.