• sunbrrnslapperEnglish
    18·
    2 months ago

    It absolutely was. It was tangential to my comment. Information I already had (which you could glean from my comment). And completely unnecessary.

    Thanks for calling out the typo!

    • CaptnNMorganEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      So were you saying people called cocaine “speed” back then?

      • captainlezbianEnglish
        2·
        2 months ago

        I believe they were trying to say that the stimulant of the 50s was speed (aka an amphetamine)

        • CaptnNMorganEnglish
          2·
          2 months ago

          Then the person who originally responded to them wasn’t mansplaining, and used facts to contradict what they said. Then they acted like they already knew that

          • sunbrrnslapperEnglish
            12·
            2 months ago

            The person who had the lengthy the explanation about cocaine and Coca-Cola was correct - it just wasn’t what I was talking about. I was referencing diet pills in the '50s that were made out of amphetamines (“momma’s little helpers”).

            • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
              2·
              2 months ago

              You did so in comparison to cocaine, in response to something that only mentioned cocaine in the context of cocaine cola. If you say it wasn’t cocaine but speed back then, how am I supposed to get that you are referencing diet pills and not at all contradicting the whole cocaine cola bit?

              But yeah, diet pills were basically just speed back then too. I can’t argue that. Not sure why that’s related to cocaine in cola though. Turns out people do all kinds of drugs, especially when readily available.

      • sunbrrnslapperEnglish
        11·
        2 months ago

        No, I think they did speed, not coke in the 50s. In the form of diet pills