I see the 'thot' bashing daily, always read the memes, listen to conversations on this and read posts on here about modern women not living up to the standard that women of the past set. But I have to remind some folks that those women were forced to dress conservatively, had no rights or not as many nowadays, forced to conduct themselves certain ways publicly but they did sneaky shyt...the same type of shyt that women of today do openly...
We still had sexually expressive women of the past...
There were no paternity tests for fathers.
Women could easily set men up back in the day (fukking men who are similar looking - race and skin tone) and get pregnant from affairs and flings and the husbands had nothing to go off of, especially if she covered her tracks.
There was no internet (like we see everything put on blast and exploited today).
Around the mid to late 80s is when we got the talk shows.
Things were more discreet then but those women still engaged in trifling behavior..
Still promiscuous, experimenting with drugs, neglecting their kids, affairs..married multiple times, everything.
Folks always bring up the 90s women as the GOAT but are we forgetting Freaknik, Jerry Springer and Ricki Lake, etc? Music videos getting malt liquor tossed on them? Topless in the videos (but censored), or how the uncut/uncensored versions of the videos even existed?
I've shared this with some people here but in the 90s my mom's best friend (who didn't dress hoeish, wasn't perceived to be a ho) slept with my father while he was with my mom. She plotted on my mom and was basically a grimey bytch and called my dad over to her place, answered the door naked and they had sex. Then had sex again another day. He didn't confess it to my mom until after they got married in the 2000s. But that whole time my mom was naive and didn't know it was going on behind her back. That was a 90s chick. Outwardly wholesome, but it said nothing about what she was as a woman and translated anything about her soul.
The only way something was put on blast was if it was featured in the newspaper, but media outlets have grown since then and that's why everything seems so emphasized and exploited now. But it's always been like this.
Personally from my own family, I know of some instances where there's grapevine chatter on how certain kids (now grown/ grand parents themselves) who look nothing like their fathers (and barely their mothers) and how there are rumors of other men potentially being their fathers. My great grand mother had like 17 kids and claimed all of them to have two different fathers only, but none of the kids look alike except like 3. Ranging in skin tone to feature to heights/body sizes. One has green eyes and her supposed father doesn't have them and neither did my great grand mother. My other great grand mother had almost that amount of children...again, majority of the kids do not look anything alike....This isn't to bash either of them. They were beautiful women and took care of their kids and suffered trauma. I love them. But we have to just take their word for if the children all belong to the selected men they claim.
But I notice people love to put women of the past on a pedestal for the standard and prototype for what a woman should be, but you don't know what all those women were doing behind closed doors. Their illusions may have carried more mystery and "class" but what they were actually doing is all in the same....
Women of older generations were still exploring their sexualities, being mischievious, carrying on traumas from rapes/sexual abuse. They just had less access to voice it and express it on platforms openly.
(nsfw - 1980s men's magazine cover)
2000s men's magazine cover.
The difference is Amber has a bigger platform....
The difference is Kakey (bottom photo) has tattoos, a tongue ring and 1 million instagram followers. Vanessa Del Rio doesn't.
It's all about respectability politics.
*I know it's a long read*
So my questions are - since this is based on illusion/respectability politics:
1.) Would you rather modern women of today ('instagram thot age') be more "classy" publicly and in aesthetic (how she dresses) /outwardly but still hoeing and sleeping around on their men/ sleeping with other women's men/dyking, etc...? (they're gonna do it anyway) Or would you rather see a chick for what she is?
2.) Can you really sum up a woman's proclivities and tendencies based on how she dresses or what she likes to do sexually? Or is it measured on what she knows and what she does based on what she knows?
Yall are so used to these respectability politics and illusions that you give women who live up to the 'natural hair', 'no makeup' and conversative fashion choices (which are for some reason associated with generational morality/'old school' traits) the benefit of the doubt when it doesn't say anything about actual "class" or morality.
I've said this many times but hoes don't always wear makeup and they do in fact wear sweat pants and look bummy/homely. They don't always have surgery. They're not always strippers or escorts or attention whores. I always think of Erykah Badu & Lauryn Hill when I think of the pedestal of modern day [Black] women who are crowned "Queens" for what they aesthetically represent and what they show people, despite us all knowing that they don't have it together. What they show the world and tell the world is pretty though. But it's not the reality of who they are. Erykah and her baby daddies and also using sex/selling sex herself but still embraced as being a Queen. Lauryn Hill, another talented woman, who is viewed as a heroine, however she got involved with a married man. Another is Alicia Keys (who is another talented woman) but who didn't face much ridicule for stealing someone else's man because of what she represents (gimmick).
I'm certain that if things were fixed how they are today for women of the past, they would've been just like the women that yall constantly drag/bash on the regular. They wouldn't have been so sneaky about it and restricted from even doing it. The only difference then from now is the bodies were a little more natural, excluding the girdles/body shapers and padding they wore. There were no advanced cosmetic surgeries.Now women are able to capitalize to new heights off of sex and looking sexy. But selling sex itself is nothing new. Sorry. We're just seeing shyt more for what it is, with all these platforms and opportunities to reach the masses. Most people love the idea of women being SEEN/objectified and not heard, so now that they're being seen (and possibly influencing people because of their platforms), it's an issue?
Last edited:
Not even Cris but malt liquor. But women been hoes any bible reader or anyone into ancient history would know.