OK, before I start the process of replying to your post, I want to repeat for I don't even know how many times, I do not have a fucking problem with women wanting to look good.
Infact, something you say has pissed me off, so look out for the reply.
Well I can only speak personally, from having a hair straightener, blow dryer, moisturizing lotions, lip balms ... men do it to look good, and have confidence, style and character. Yes - for us men too, we feel good to wear and dress good. And hence why the metrosexual term has come about. Hence why pink shirts are so common at the work place. I literally keep count of the number of men with pink shirts and some days (e.g. a Friday) it can be about 25% of them, including myself. Oxford pink is very nice. I suppose my point is when there are cultural shifts (including looks) in Western society, it can happen. Beckham and Brad Pitt have most definitely raised the bar for metrosexualism.
Men also try to "beautify" themselves via building muscles. If I have evolved to feel better when in good shape, and seem to be able to attract women in the processes, what is wrong with that? If there isn't they I'd apply the same moderation to girls/women who like to show some beauty. Btw, I know many guys who at Brad Pitt's peak would say, "Man I wish I had muscles like him". Women like some muscle I think - and I really do think there is an obvious evolutionary past to that one (though yes I agree there is social bias in the form of mass media).
You keep saying we have 'evolved' this trait, I mean what is this, the X-Men of fashion for fucking? please.
Ok, I'm going to bring in another angle for you to consider.
If you were to deprive a female of any womanly, or indeed HUMAN influences would she still feel the need to beautify herself to fit in to society?
No, infact she wouldn't be aware that she needed to do any of those things, her language and socialisation skills would be completely damanged. Just read up about
Genie, or other feral children found after experiencing complete privation of any social influences and you can see that NONE of this beautifying yourself is a natural evolved state, it is a social conditioned trait.
Of course this is an extreme example of it, but I really think it best highlights how crucial social conditioning is in shaping people.
Isn't natural something that needs to be displayed when social conditioning is absent?
The meterosexual look would have got the LOL factor when survival mattered, but now that the media and society is extolling the wonders of make up, cream, waxing etc, for men, men are being socially conditioned to over preen themselves.
Not because this = natural mate selection, but because it = socially expected mate selection.
If beauty was a fixed thing, never changing, that what was once considered beauty still remains so, how is it that beauty changes? figure desirability changes, skin colour requirements change, it always changes because what is attractive aside from XX, and XY, are social constructs.
It is like allat says, even as recent as the 70's pubes in porn were a regular thing, shaved pussys were not a requirement, and yet now, a woman is NOT sexy if she stays natural.
What does a shaved pussy denote in terms of attraction? healthier? I mean make up is meant to mimic health, so fair enough, but shaving a pussy? it doesn't even equate to signs of fertility since no pubes = no puberty. So where has this come from?
You know for the most part I really don't know what I am disagreeing with your or allat with. The only thing I feel is evolutionary is the natural instincts of desirability. I've research on the "Sex at Dawn" book and I find nothing that suggests to the contrary that women are attracted to muscle or that men are attracted to beauty which implies fertility. I understand the social shift that you decribe and I agree it can be a problem though (more on that below).
Ok, 'researching' the book isn't the same as reading the book so I will take allat's word here. I will also grab it when my kindle arrives.
Sure, okay.
So basically.....'in one ear and out the other'
This is where I think balance comes into play. Nail varnish at 7 ... I can't see what is too bad about that. Yes indeed culture now comes into play. But looking at it consequentially - if she likes to varnish her nails for style, then good. As you say she's obviously not fertile yet. Whether this is a slippery slope towards being pressured ... I'm not so sure.
Where did I say this was a problem for me? when I paint my daughters nails I do rainbows and she does mine in rainbows. It is a socially provided means of having fun with my little girl, but is it necessary?
Is it a natural evolved thing or something I have taught her to enjoy?
Okay I see your point here.
Well I think in the West here as much as there is peer pressure, there is the freedom for individuality. Bullying is rife unfortunately and is a part of growing up. I do think if he wants to wear one - go for it.
Yes there is freedom, no one denied that, but to take that freedom you have to be prepared to be blasted for it.
Would kids bully other kids about hair length if socially they had not already had the rules about hair lengths drummed into them?
I never asked you to point out the freedom aspect, we are arguing about whether this are social constructs or not.
Okay.
Well I didn't say men don't and as written above I agree with the whole changing attitudes towards men wearing pink shirts, being metrosexual and even ending their texts or emails with kisses (men to other men that is).
ok
I wouldn't put it so crudely though that "women like make up and beautifying themselves". What I mean to say is - if women feel good about looking good more than men - then it explains why women might like to show a bit of flesh, be ore selective with their clothes, and in general mostly take looks more importantly than most men.
You know I have noticed it is the converse affect, women who feel good about themselves, and LOVE themselves and accept themselves do not feel the need to show 'a little bit of flesh' (I swear sometimes the way you put things I feel like I am talking to a carry on laughing character) or wear as much make up.
The most happiest people I know are those who aren't caught up in this loop in which how they look = hows they are able to feel about themselves.
Yes of course.
Possibly. I think this topic is tricky in nature though because there are underlying physical differences. E.g. men have more testosterone. This is then mixed in with social pressures.
Yea I agree, testosterone makes some differences, but not on dress sense, more like lack of empathy and other things attributed to testosterone.
To some men, you meterosexual guys lack testosterone. Do you?
Oh I see. Good point indeed.
Ummm .... well ... very good point. Not to put a spanner in the works here but just to look up yahoo answers for the question "What do lesbians find attractive in other women?"
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080105143738AAPVxqS.... so I suppose although that isn't a great sample - it does kind of suggest that there are lesbians are attracted to womanly qualities such as (e.g. the curves). Okay - bigger sample set needed. n
Ah ok, we are using yahoo answers?
Because my whole point is about natural urges that we have evolved to have whether this is chemistry or a guy wanting to catch a girl's attention or a girl wanting to catch the attention of a guy (and perhaps beautifying themselves in the process).
All due respect, you've written above that certain women on this forum who are pretty and then get attention of guys as if they should be guilty for doing this. While I agree that looks alone in a person isn't everything - I don't see what is so back about people wanting to come across desirable (in moderation) if it helps boost their confidence for example. I'm not having a pop at you here - just explaining why I asked those questions.
And this is the point in which you piss me off. Have I once said women should not fucking do it?
Do you feel guilt for being a shallow sleazebag? because if you do now don;t put that on me.
It is a very valid point, that the member who's pictures generate the cringe effect gets the least responses, or patience? yet the most beautiful will be responded to even when they say nothing of substance., or have zero personality. Not to say there aren't drop dead gorgeous girls on here who have killer minds and euphuimistic wit that can floor you, just that in all my 6yrs as a forum user this has stayed true and consistent.
I mean jesus I have seen a great ass take someone from being relatively unknown to instantly judged as 'trsutworthy' and given the keys to privacy, which actually is really wrong when you think about it. But yay for the halo effect, if you are beautiful you are automatically assumed to have excellent personality traits.
But let us get one thing clear once and for all, not once have I said women shouldn't post their pics, by all means this is a FREE world. I am simply saying looking at the things behind it.
But then I guess a debate on a muslim forum in which someone makes men feel guilty for beating women, means that topic or that comment should never be made. Guilt is a personal thing, if you feel it, or assume that others suddenly feel guilty just because I mentioned a phenomena, that is your drama not mine.
I agree. And this is what I said from the start - everything in moderation, including beautification (for guys or gals).
Okay - so moderation is needed. Mummy (as I'm sure you've done) has explained why it isn't appropriate for such young girls to be wearing one.
Of course moderation is needed as in anything in life, the whole point of this thread is not to argue about your minimal argument, in which you have reduced everything to simply 'beautifying', which encompasses even brushing your teeth, but rather that the EXTREME it has reached is not right anymore.
The only way for me to be socially accepted as atractive is to not be fat, to be fully shaved but have long thick hair on my head, to be paler than I am if I truly wish to open up the widest selection of mates possible for me since white girls sit at the top of the peak in attraction. Just look at the shades of skin beyonce is going through, and how less black her hair gets every moment. White is better, so white I must be. I must not burp or fart, or shave my head, I must not be too muscular, I must not be myself.
This is not because evolution has said tese traits are desirable, this is because society has said it.
I mean right now why is it that:
Men don’t write black women back. Or rather, they write them back far less often than they should. Black women reply the most, yet get by far the fewest replies. Essentially every race—including other blacks—singles them out for the cold shoulder. http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-race-affects-whether-people-write-you-back/Do you think there is something wrong with black women that makes them less desirable in the dating game? Perhaps you have some scientific reason for why this is so, other than just hundreds of years of racial hatred that made the world look at blacks like they were lesser somehow.
You said in another post that babies have been found to like looking at beautiful things lol so what you are saying is that what? based on what society tells us, a baby will naturally be drawn to stare at the stranger super model sitting next to its ugly mum?
Give me a break, babies have been found to be drawn to their mother, or sole care provider. Part of their fixed patern actions of survival mean that they will be drawn almost exclusively to their mothers since this is the face they see, but what, if she is ugly her baby will find looking at her unpleasant?
I think not.
My little girl tells me I am beautiful, but I tell her not to say it cos its not true, but that I love her anyway. My friends tell me that I am wrong to do this since beauty is subjective, are my friends right or are you?
is she lying to me and instead finding it hard to look in my face cos I;m ugly?
Or is beauty so subjective that such a finding on babies sounds ludicrous at best?
At the crux of our disagreement I think is here. Women in Islamic countries I think have more than social conditions, they are also under mind indoctrinated religious pressure and are economically and politically conditioned too.
While I agree there is social conditioning, there are several reasons why I think to compare the social pressures of Western women to that of the pressures of Muslim women in Islamic countries is relativism.
The full piece (which allat referenced) by Martha Nussbaum has holes in it. Not to get too political but she is on the left and I don't think she understands how backwards cultures are getting in through a conduit of liberalism, the burka being one of them in my opinion. But anyway, points to put across why women in the west have real individual choices if they want to beautify or not beautify themselves:
- They are becoming (and in some countries like the US, already are) more women in the work force than men. This gives them economic power and confidence. So if they really don't want to beautify themselves, if it is just a social pressure on them, then they don't have to.
- There is much more cultural autonomy in the West. Whether it is food, fashion or music, tastes; memplexes can born, evolve or die out a lot quicker thanks to the foundations of the media/internet and democratic living. As such, the rise of pink shirts and metrosexuality in recent years is evidence. While I've seen certain trends in less-feminism such as women wearing trousers instead of skirts, I've not seen anything as compelling as those pink or pastel colour shirts men have started wearing the last 10 years in the UK (I think).
- The religions in the West are less and less involved in the influence of a woman's choices in life. As a result I don't see women in the West as indoctrinated by religion to be a certain way.
- The West strives of equality before the law, in business and politics. Since more women can have these opportunities, they have a much better grounding for voicing their opinions.
All that said - yes - there is still societal pressure on women. But to compare it to the pressures of Muslim women I think is being highly disingenuous to the West as if women have no option or hope or choice. They do - all you women do - far more than any Muslim country. To say that patriarchy is as bad in Islamic countries as it is here in the West I think is also disingenuous.
I am saying that the EXTREME is just as bad, sorry but I do think so. I know you have spent almost all of your walls of text tryint to twist what I am saying to a condemnation of all beautifying aspects but the sad truth of it is not once have I claimed that brushing your hair, washing your body, cleaning your teeth, dressing how you want, or anything done freely is a bad thing.
You keep exaggerating my intention here and quite frankly its annoying having to repeat the same thing over and over again.
To me a woman going through repeated surgery to try to be accepted as a woman is not really that different from a woman wearing a scarf to fit into her society.
Again, this is the EXTREME of both sides, not the balance in between so if you feel an urge to reply once again saying I am against normal beautfying of oneself, then please just spare your fingers the work and my mind the task of listening to it.
I know this woman at work. She works and her husband is looking for work for over a year. While she doesn't wear inch thick make up, she definitely wears dresses and outfits that accentuates her curves and beauty. She exercises regularly. She walks and talks very confidently. My point being, if such moderate amounts of beauty is in display (and if it helps her to be confident because she naturally feels good about herself - and as I think she evolved to feel good about showing some beauty) what is so bad? There is another bloke at work, every talks about how defined his muscles are. If it gives him confidence (and he evolved to feel that confidence) - what is so bad? If there is nothing bad then I would say you agree with that beauty, in moderation, is not a bad thing. I guess I can't convince you both that these are natural urges more than societal ones - but heyho - guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
I return to my first post about examples of when societal pressures are completely absent in a growing young girl, and tell me this desire to beautfy oneself is natural again.
Genie barely learnt how to put on regular clothes, let alone developed her 'natural desire; to look good for a man.
Btw - thank you for your time
Berbs and
allat - I appreciate a nice discussion and get some interesting ideas.
So do, but I don;t appreciate having everything I said dismissed because you have already decied I am saying it is ALL wrong.
Topic: Hijab, self esteem and the culture of beauty