Talk

Advanced search

To feel a bit bereft now that the Reasonable Feminism thread is full?

(42 Posts)

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SigmundFraude Fri 05-Jul-13 11:49:02

'Ya don't see articles discussing how much nippleage or bulge it is "appropriate" to see in males in the public eye, now do you? 'cause they are judged primarily on what they do and say not what they wear or what their bodies look like.'

I'm sure these articles exist somewhere if went dredging around for them. I'm guessing you missed the pics of Thom Evans doing the rounds recently! The comments underneath the pics were very enlightening. Almost all from women, many stating that they wished their DH's looked like that, quite crude. How many people do you think came on and told them to stop objectifying Thom Evan's?

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SigmundFraude Fri 05-Jul-13 12:03:53

Hello Buffy smile

Please don't think I'm being evasive but I have 10 minutes before I have to go out. I will attempt to find such an article in the course of the day..

Thom Evans apparently models as well as rugbies, so his attractiveness in pants is pre-requisite, I'd have thought. I'd imagine his fitness levels had a bearing on his ability to play, but that women's reaction to his physical attractiveness didn't, no. However, women's reaction to his ability to model a pair of pants would have a bearing on his ability to model.

SigmundFraude Fri 05-Jul-13 12:14:12

I will say this though. Re. attractiveness. Women seem to have a somewhat eclectic taste when it comes to age related attractiveness. Men seem to prefer younger women (although I'm sure there are some men who prefer older). Is that some kind of instinctual thing in response to fertility? Just musing, I could well be completely wrong. I do feel sometimes that a lot of feminists expect us to completely renounce our biology, as I mentioned before.

When did it become OK to 'objectify' men, but not women.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Technotropic Fri 05-Jul-13 13:21:59

Interesting here:

A glimpse at the magazine rack in any supermarket checkout line will tell you that women are frequently the focus of sexual objectification. Now, new research finds that the brain actually processes images of women differently than those of men, contributing to this trend.

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/25/women-and-objectification_n_1701275.html

On the flip side though, do women not measure a man based on utility, what he can do and what he has?

I appreciate not all women are like this i.e. gold diggaz, but I have a friend that is currently single. She has just started seeing a man and all she can talk about is how much he earns, what car he drives and how big his house is. Never about his moral qualities or what a great character he has. She is incredibly shallow but is there an evolutionary link to this kind of behaviour?

We are decended from primates after all and many have societies where the female chooses to mate with higher status males. This is a trend that is also exhibited in most animals/species.

Thus women marry up/men marry down as they say and if you are looking for a suitable mate then maybe being objectified by a male increases one's chances of bagging the man with the right attributes. After all, is the point of evolution not to ensure the strongest gene pool?

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FasterStronger Fri 05-Jul-13 13:47:05

techno ^ She has just started seeing a man and all she can talk about is how much he earns, what car he drives and how big his house is. Never about his moral qualities or what a great character he has.^

but surely survival of offspring is related to the choice of both parents to care for them? a man with lots of resources who dumps you is of little value in offspring survival terms.

particularly for such a slow developing species. if we were deer, the stags genes would be most important as we need to run in the first few hours/days.

Technotropic Fri 05-Jul-13 13:57:28

Buffy

But that's the big question IMHO, whether women look for a mate with status because of what he can offer (protection, security, strong genes etc) and whether men look for looks, youth, child rearing ability etc.

How much of this is biological and how much is constructed?

Technotropic Fri 05-Jul-13 13:59:47

FasterStronger

Indeed, but his relative wealth is a good starting point. I very much doubt he would even get a look-in if he was a road sweeper - irrespective of how charismatic he is.

FasterStronger Fri 05-Jul-13 14:02:12

but arent men are attracted to women with money because of their money?

isn't the problem that men have most of the money....

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now