• hesusingthespiritbomb@lemmy.world
    31·
    2 years ago

    If you reversed the gender on this you’d the comment section would be a combination of roasting the hypothetical dude and complaining how trashy the shirt is.

    I don’t even think the double standard is related to sexism. I think you’re all horny degenerates who are emotionally stunted to the point where any woman implying anything sexual breaks your mind.

    • filtoid@lemmy.ml
      1·
      2 years ago

      I actually disagree with that, if I saw a larger gentleman wearing this I’d feel proud of him for owning his thing with self-depracating humour, and think it was funny, the same as I do here.

  • Monument@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    1·
    2 years ago

    I became disappointed when I zoomed in to realize she had a wallet chain and not a sproingy yellow coiled lanyard thing that was somehow attached to her phone. (Sorry, Amazon link: One of these)
    I don’t know why. I guess I just thought the idea was kind of cute and fun. This dad-fucking, bacon grease swilling, subway texter uses a cute little bouncy cord thing to keep her phone handy, amidst an otherwise austere getup - just a zany detail to contrast with the rest. Alas. Just a boring ass wallet chain.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    1·
    2 years ago

    is your dad… the greasy strangler!

    for the blissfully ignorant:

    https://youtu.be/k0sk7QsZF64

    Even the trailer is completely demented.

    It’s worth watching if you like. really really weird shit, I can’t say I’ve ever seen anything exactly like it before.

    • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
      0·
      2 years ago

      I thought the same thing and I’m still not convinced that’s not what’s going on. I remember in the '90s so many people were putting chains to their wallets, you know wear your money is… Well your cell phone is probably attached to one of your accounts, so it’s money. This weirdly makes sense to me.

      • shastaxc@lemm.ee
        1·
        2 years ago

        I think it makes perfect sense, and a cool retro throwback. Fashion is cyclical after all! But I think the other poster was correct and she just has it fed through 2 belt loops.

        • Anticorp@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          2 years ago

          Fashion is cyclical after all!

          I just heard today that you’re considered old if you wear ankle socks now. It was the opposite when I was younger, not wearing ankle socks made you look old and out of fashion.

  • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
    01·
    2 years ago

    Cringe.

    She must have been fucking our dads every night for years.

    Edit: Lol at the downvotes, if you want to wear an edgy shirt in public you’re going to have to expect some edgy retorts and furthermore I think anything that attempts to normalise obesity is absolutely terrible. I know I have to accept that some people are fat, and good for her if she’s happy at that size, but I don’t have to accept edgy excuses for someone else’s poor choices.

    • cheddar@programming.dev
      1·
      2 years ago

      You didn’t get any replies yet you decided to edit your comment to argue with an imaginary opponent. Mate, take a breath.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        02·
        2 years ago

        37 downvotes, yet no one brave enough to put their neck on the line and offer a counterpoint. So yh, I made an assumption and yet still no one has made a counterpoint which means I’m probably right 🤷🏼‍♂️

        • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
          2·
          2 years ago

          I’ll reply: no one is offering a retort because your comment is weird, pointless, and not worth the time or effort to give a genuine response to. Your edit makes it even more obvious that you just wanted to stir shit and get in bad faith arguments over a silly picture

        • cheddar@programming.dev
          2·
          2 years ago

          If you want to write edgy replies, you have to expect some downvotes. I think that attempts to normalize toxicity and trolling online are absolutely terrible. I know I have to accept that some people are provocateurs, but I don’t have to accept excuses for their poor behavior.

        • Lupus@feddit.org
          2·
          2 years ago

          Lol no one cares enough to reply to you mate. The reaction is “what a dork” downvote and forget.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 years ago

      your retort sucks because you’re trying to own her by saying something she already acknowledges. weak af.

      “I’m fat because I fucked your dad”

      “oh yeah? well you’re fat!”

      …

      “I bet you fucked my dad a lot!”

      genius insults

    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      2 years ago

      anything that attempts to normalise obesity is absolutely terrible

      Boy have you missed the boat on that one. By several decades.

      • kofe@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 years ago

        People seem to love to jump to this assumption without acknowledging any fallibility, when in reality you don’t know from just looking at someone. Even if it’s a likely reason, it’s not the only one. I’m going to at least hope you aren’t a doctor based on this single sentence.

        • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
          01·
          2 years ago

          Excluding weight gain from corticosteroids or something exotic like elephantiasis, it is literally always overeating. I’m prone to it, and nobody can consider it an individual moral failing when obesity has become a massive global epidemic. But there’s genuinely no getting around the fundamental reality that it’s calories in, calories out. Apparently the majority of humans overeat when living a sedentary lifestyle with a readily available food surplus. The incredible success of GLP-1 agonists really hammers that point home if anyone was still unconvinced.

          • kofe@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 years ago

            “excluding [things I know about], it is literally always [the only other thing I know about.]” Again, I stress fallibility.