A man shared an analogy about approaching a couple, becoming flirtatious with the wife, and a fight breaking out before he apologized. He later justified the incident by claiming the woman did not “look like a wife” because of her dressing and accessories, implying her appearance invited the attention.

Reacting to this, one comment openly justified flirting with married women, stating “Any married woman dressed half naked is liable to be toasted and flirted on. A married woman with rings on her finger, tinted hair and bands on her legs is liable to be toasted.”

The comment dismisses marriage as a boundary and places responsibility on a woman’s appearance, suggesting that dressing choices override marital status. It reframes inappropriate advances as acceptable reactions to how a woman looks, rather than a deliberate disregard for consent and respect.

LINKS

https://www.facebook.com/share/1D2JpCixHf/

https://www.facebook.com/share/1H7ufAsAJo/