Search Results
6/29/2025, 4:55:03 PM
>>280083259
>Find me one recorded instance of stuff like hand holding or cheek rubbing being looked down upon at any point in history.
>recorded
This is stupid, not everyone had a smartphone to record everything what they say.
Either way some footage of people in the street before 1970 exists in youtube. And there i have found only heterosexual couples handholding or hugging while walking. If women handholding was so normal then why is hard to find examples of that in those videos? According to you handholding between female friends walking together was not seen bad.
Most likely handholding was seen as romantic and they would not risk being looked down by doing it. Go show me your proof of it always being normal.
>>280083335
>but it's shocking even for /a/ that you guys think female friendship, especially among young girls, didn't used to involve handholding
Nobody says that female friends can't hold hands, it's just that it can be seen as romantic or friendship depending on the context.
>Find me one recorded instance of stuff like hand holding or cheek rubbing being looked down upon at any point in history.
>recorded
This is stupid, not everyone had a smartphone to record everything what they say.
Either way some footage of people in the street before 1970 exists in youtube. And there i have found only heterosexual couples handholding or hugging while walking. If women handholding was so normal then why is hard to find examples of that in those videos? According to you handholding between female friends walking together was not seen bad.
Most likely handholding was seen as romantic and they would not risk being looked down by doing it. Go show me your proof of it always being normal.
>>280083335
>but it's shocking even for /a/ that you guys think female friendship, especially among young girls, didn't used to involve handholding
Nobody says that female friends can't hold hands, it's just that it can be seen as romantic or friendship depending on the context.
6/25/2025, 12:01:16 AM
>>279956108
>I haven't bumped this thread a single time. Lurk more.
well then, genius, tell me why bumping this thread not from page 10 magically makes you suspect i could be a yurifag.
>I haven't bumped this thread a single time. Lurk more.
well then, genius, tell me why bumping this thread not from page 10 magically makes you suspect i could be a yurifag.
Page 1