Nice Ass

[Gonzo Joker]

An absurd analogy. Bottom line: no one has the right to attract attention, and then presume to tell others they must avert their eyes.

I doubt you have anything to worry about - you undoubtedly fall into the category of women that men avert their eyes from, and therefore hate the men who deprive you of the sexual attention you crave.

Try mixing in a salad every now and then and hitting the gym a couple times a week, maybe you could get yourself into some kind of shape that would be worth ogling, and you can drop the hate-filled bitterness.

[Yuda]

[quote="Gonzo Joker"]An absurd analogy. Bottom line: no one has the right to attract attention, and then presume to tell others they must avert their eyes.
[quote]

What a load of crap, anyone, anywhere has the right to say no to unwanted attention

[skullcap]

An absurd analogy. Bottom line: no one has the right to attract attention, and then presume to tell others they must avert their eyes.

now i know you are talking about the foxy ladies, GJ, but what about folks who attract attention when they don't want it? or when the attention is for something they can't do anything about? for instance, a muslim women in hijab in the US. she certainly gets attention, some of it hostile. or a disabled person. even in these enlightened times different folks get unwanted attention, are they just supposed to accept it?

it is absurd to say anyone here is saying "avert [your] eyes", that is a strawman, yet common decency seems to say have some discretion in staring at others, especially if they tell you not to. unless you are going to, as you are, insist on being obtuse and odious.

[Mike/R]

Were sexism smashed, people would look not seldom at human beauty, and look not askance at so looking. Sexism fucks that up.

It's good to set fears to rest; it's best to not need them. And, first, fears are not purely rational, so the request reflects anxiety, and not judgement of the one requested. And, second, courtesy-requests are often generallized, so as not to single anyone out as 'somebody who scares me.'

[skullcap]

Were sexism smashed, people would look not seldom at human beauty, and look not askance at so looking. Sexism fucks that up.

It's good to set fears to rest; it's best to not need them. And, first, fears are not purely rational, so the request reflects anxiety, and not judgement of the one requested. And, second, courtesy-requests are often generallized, so as not to single anyone out as 'somebody who scares me.'

it is all good and well to say "absent sexism..." except that we are definatly not absent sexism. for myself, if someone i know says they like my body i take that in a straight forward manner, as a complement. but if someone i don't know or know only slightly, utters such a statement it can be many things; hostile, belittling, or many shades of just plain rude, depending on the context. for me, a back off statement from me is not made out of fear but out of a sense of self worth.

if i am participating in a parade or something like that, i would expect to be looked at and even commented upon. but if i am just going about my business, minding my own self, comments based solely on my appearence are taken by me as ignorant and possibly insulting. i know the person (usually male) making said comments probably does not see it that way, so i am not (any more) aggro back, mostly i am confirmed in my view of the oblivousness of men to sexist behavior.

[|Y|]

What's most disappointing here is that, well, the one thing getting female posters to actually post is moderate sexism by one of our posters. Does this mean that we should start acting sexist all over the place to motivate them to post more? :/

I will have to agree with Gonzo on a few points, first, I don't think we have a right to tell anyone where they may or may not look. It is easy enough to ignore ones passive attention. And most people tend to look away after you've caught that they're looking at you. Part of the whole ritual of attraction and all.

Of course, a response is perfectly reasonable if someone is jeering or otherwise trying to get some stupid attention, . And that's how it tends to work, really. The guys who just look are left alone, the guys who jeer and act like idiots are mocked and sent off to look like the morons that they are.

Another thing I would have to agree with him on is this natural tendency (by both male and female) to "look attractive," in some fasion. It's all part of the evolutionary process, and is not limited to western civilization and its consumerist fasion scene, you can find such things prevelant in even the most primitive of societies. Women decorating themselves to emphasize certain features, and men trying to win them over through whatever silly competitive games they play. (One of my most favorite is the "jumping" game an African tribe does, where the male who can jump the highest, straight up and down, has a better advantage over the others.)

So it would be somewhat silly for one to dress nice and then be offended by some passive attention, though dumb and moronic jeers or comments will definitely be fine to form a response to, and that's basically how it tends to work.

On a side note, I have always felt a little school boyish whenever I was going on these long night runs and cars full of moderately drunk girls would drive by and whistle and make noises. Always made my night whenever that would happen. We guys are always going to be more immature than the girls, I think that's just something we gotta accept.

And that reminds me, I was once staring at this girl after having been sleep deprived for some time, and she scowled at me, probably a feminist or someone who doesn't think people should look at them (or at least thought I looked depraved or something), and I laughed and apologized profusely because my brain was out of wack and must've reset to some primal mode where it focuses on the most attractive thing in its proximity. She smiled and didn't seem too offended. I felt like an idiot because, really, more than a few seconds of appreciating the beauty of that which is attractive to you can be a bit much (though there are obviously exceptions).

[Casualty]

i believe that the idea of consent and chivalry needs to be upheld in a respectable society...for this to take place, people (notably men) need to, like stated earlier, recognize when certain advances are just too far and when you're invading someone's personal space - it also seems that certain parts of a person have been deemed "sexually explicit" to mention in any sort of compliment such as breasts, genitals, and even legs - it's one thing to compliment a woman on her eyes or hair, but to go out and say things like that and expect a decent reaction is absurd

back to consent, you need to be at a place with someone where you can constantly ask whether it's "alright if i do this" or "did i cross the line?" - it may sound a bit cheesy and needless at times, but it's this sense of security that can make honest statements about one's appearance more subtle and acceptable...i was introduced to this idea of consent at a meeting i attended a few weeks back, and the concept makes a lot of sense seeing the absence of it is apparent in modern relationships among people

[xvxChrisxvx]

I know this is kinda late, but I still wanted post on the subject.

It seems that in our society and culture, women are made to feel that the only way to get men's attention is to dress by the men's standard of beauty even if the woman feels degraded by it. A lot of men don't see women as human beings with personalities, but instead of a piece of meat they can holler, stare, and spout rude comments at. I'm not saying that it is not natural to dress in a way that attracts people of the opposite sex, but it's different when people are only doing it because they feel pressured to. If a woman feels uncomfortable, violated, scared, etc from the stare or remarks of a man, she should be able to tell him to stop or go away. It's her body and not theirs to gawk at when it is not welcomed.

[|Y|]

For me it boils down to this, do we want to emphasize a culture of people who dislike people looking at them as part of the natural ritual of attraction or not? I think a culture that trends toward "don't look" is a repressed culture, and lacks any sort of feeling to it at all. I think that women have been oppressed for so long it's time they shed their veils and facades that the males have instituted upon all women all over the world.

Frankly I find the supposed debachry that women inact as a refreshing change of pace. Both women and men have the power of attraction (not in the vein of that stupid Google documentary). I think we should flaunt it and not be these repressed individuals who listen to the BS that has been handed down throughout the generations.

[xvxChrisxvx]

I agree with you, Y. But when women feel uncomfortable or violated by what a man is doing, she should express herself, whether that be telling him not to look at her or anything in that manner as long as she feels comfortable again. That goes with men too. If he feels that a woman is doing something that makes him uncomfortable, he should say something about it. But I don't propose a culture where everyone should divert their gaze from the attractive people in our society. There are ways to look at people you physically admire in a non threatening way.

[Mike/R]

I've been wondering how beauty standards emerge.

I don't have exact statistics, but something like 95% of western hetero women shave their legs; something like 20% of western hetero men prefer shaved legs, plus another 30% who will follow any beauty standard; something like 30% are indifferent, and something like 20% prefer mildly or moderately hairy legs.

That means that 95% of the hetero women are doing something to attract 50% of the hetero men, and 5% of the hetero women are not doing something to attract 25% of the hetero men.

As long as the vast majority of hetero women shave their legs, and any smaller majority of hetero men prefer shaved legs, hetero women would do better to not shave and compete for men who prefer mildly or moderately hairy legs than to shave and compete for men who like smooth and/or razor-nicked legs.

Assuming that the other costs and/or benefits of the two strategies (shaving and not shaving) are equal, the proportion of hetero women adopting each strategy should reach equilibrium at the proportion of hetero men preferring each strategy. However, this does not happen and even extreme and costly preferences (e.g. foot binding) can become cultural standards.

The same mathematical principles should apply to any opposite-sex strategy, but other concerns may apply to same-sex strategies.

[Yarrow]

slightly off topic, but a lesbian told me off recently for bringing sexuality into everything.

i said i couldn't help it, i'm an indoctrinated male. maybe we can make things different. i really am trying myself.

[Zazaban]

slightly off topic, but a lesbian told me off recently for bringing sexuality into everything.

i said i couldn't help it, i'm an indoctrinated male. maybe we can make things different. i really am trying myself.

Talking about sex just shows that one is a normal, healthy adult human being. Women talk about sex as much as men, in fact I wouldn't doubt if they talk about it more, they seem more comfortable with it.

[Yarrow]

good point. i might bring it into every conversation, but along with ethics, cultural relativity and a load of other filters. it's not all i talk about.

zaz, your posts make me... dear me, i was gonna type swell. maybe i do have a problem.

[|Y|]

Zazaban, you should doubt it, women are far more oppressed sexually than men ever thought about being. When girls I know talk about sex it is rather lacking in depth and a shocking number of females I have known had never had an orgasm (we're taling 20-25 year olds). I believe women have been oppressed into being objects rather than individuals, so they miss out on finding their sexuality.