munk

joined 9 months ago
[–] munk@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth.

Benjamin Franklin

[–] munk@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Ha, I do miss the extra crotch room. Here's actually an interesting article about why women's pants have been getting even tighter in the crotch (spoiler alert - it's money):

https://fashion-incubator.com/anatomy_of_a_camel_toe_pt1/

https://fashion-incubator.com/anatomy_of_a_camel_toe_pt2/

[–] munk@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I used to wear only men's pants, including cargo pants, and oh boy is it disgusting how much better I get treated by service workers, etc. since switching to vaguely fashionable women's pants. Fit issues aside, it's a lot more complicated than "just buy men's pants" (although I guess at least cargo pants for women are back "in" now?)

[–] munk@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

the waist thing is a non-issue

Depends on the shape of your hips. I wore men's pants almost exclusively until my hips changed a lot during pregnancy and I haven't been able to find a comfy pair of men's pants since (and I'm far from the only woman I know with this problem). Glad it works for you, though! The huge pockets are so nice and the fabric is usually sturdier, too.

[–] munk@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

I'll stick with ikea until the kids move out

Yeah, this is it for us. I grew up in a home with a lot of "grandma's heirloom dining table" type items that I was punished for bumping into, spilling on, etc. While I do believe in teaching kids respect, it seems like a lot of unnecessary stress for both parents and kids to use this stuff as your daily driver and we don't have the space for special-occasions-only furniture.

[–] munk@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

The text of the 22nd amendment is pretty clear:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

If they're going to try to argue that means 1+2 terms is ok, doesn't seem like that would preclude 2+1.