Why females aren't taken seriously

Post Reply New Topic

you have no evidence that it supposedly occurs more with women. perhaps that is just what you happen to notice.

I know... That's why I said "at least by my observation..."

I think hyperlexian's point was that if you has two girls, one who was dressed in revealing clothes, and one who was dressed conservatively, more boys would go for the girl dressed in revealing clothes, regardless of the personality. Is there an equivalent revealing mode of dress for these boys you are talking about, that makes girls choose a boy by their clothes?

proteins are very precious for animals. The proteins in the wild are on legs, and are smart enough to run away when you approach them, and even defend them selves. I don't think that you can seriously ignore that source of food. The plants we eat today where selectively breed over thousands of year, in the wild version, there weren't much to eat. For example, wild apples, have the size of a cherry.

Ok. Why men are build more toughly, bones and muscle? Just to oppress the women?

And why the majority of hunters today are men? And why the majority of video gamers are men? Just social?

In the past you had no machines. Only rudimentary tools. You needed physical strength, and things could get dangerous. Have you seen the teeth of a saber tooth tiger?

There are instinctive drives in our heads. In the same way we are different from the out side, we are different from the inside. Gender is a huge external difference, they are corresponding internal differences. You know, something like sexual orientation is wired inside. Personality is something largely genetic. That was checked with twins separated at birth. Sorry, but everything is not "just" a social construct. We are more animal then you think.

maybe you are extrapolating too much from your self?

and Flintstone was a traditional salary man.

I suspect they are, actually, responsible for initially domesticating animals. Slightly more succesful method than chasing them around with spears.

I'm don't think you had that in mind.

an example
http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/p/m/f0695/

Yep, they had to be doing that to initiate domestication. Take the babies from the wild and raise them, without their mothers. Chances are that this was a woman's idea. And now we don't have to chase dinner through the bush with a pointy stick anymore.

OK, I feel a bit like I'm splitting hairs, but early humans probably got a great deal of protein by foraging for bugs and grubs, bird's eggs, crabs and bivalves, and by fishing, and trapping small animals. Those protein sources are much more reliable than a migrating herd of megafauna.

I do think that some men might give more attention to a girl who they deem dressed in a "sexual" way.

But I think this is more of a psychological/social thing, as some men might see dress as a social cue for being available for courtship. That doesn't mean that young girls are dressing with the thought of those men in mind.

If a lesbian dresses in a way that is commonly thought of as feminine and "sexy," does that mean she is trying to attract the male gaze or attract men for courtship? I doubt it.

Quantum_Immortal, 'flintstonization' is a term frequently used by critics of Evolutionary Psychology, and it refers to the modern biases perpetuated by a highly sexist and inaccurate methodology. you may want to read Sex at Dawn & Delusions of Gender. back to the topic, you have not shown any link between your skewed view of prehistory and modern women wearing revealing clothing.

Then, why even bother with something as dangerous as a mammoth?

Yong girls follow there instincts. And the instincts are there for a purpose. I thought, that women felt good being dressed up like that (you are the women, maybe you are a bit masculinized aspie women?). In sexually oppressive societies, they have to go out of there way in order to force women not to dress like that.

Why every body tries to deny the fact we have instincts? Sexual orientation is so big that you can't deny it. Other stuff are instinctive too. We ARE animals. Everything is not just social.

Lesbians are a bit too anomalous for this discussion.

More like, too sensible.

I'll take what you said as a compliment.

The thing is, women are all different. We all dress for different and complicated reasons.

I dress based on comfort, what I consider to be feminine and beautiful, and my choices are informed by my socialization as a child. When I was 6 years old I was drawing hearts with high heels and big eyelashes--that's because I learned as a child that those were indications of feminine gender in my culture.

I knew that Minnie Mouse, the female mouse, had eyeshadow, long eyelashes, high heels, and a short skirt. I knew that Betty Boop wore a form fitting red dress and lipstick. I internalized these dress elements as being part of the female gender---but I was not reacting on some kind of mating instinct, just the ingrained instinct to fit in and find my place (and others places) in my society, according to what my society suggested was appropriate for my sex.

It's interesting that you bring up societies which restrict clothing choices for women. Those women have to react to explicit pressure to dress a certain way. But women in post-industrial western societies also react to social pressure. If all women had the urge to dress in Western fashion instinctively, then wouldn't other societies across the globe have adopted the same fashion (edit--before social contact with western culture)? Women in oppressive countries aren't reacting to Western fashion in a vacuum, purely off of instinct....they wouldn't instinctively want to dress in Western styles without being exposed to Western culture.

Humans are animals, but we have giant brains and we take over a decade to mature physically and mentally. We rely very heavily on socialization, more so than any other animal, maybe.

Last edited by Zinia on 18 Jun 2012, 12:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't really read the critics, it must be it. I bet you'll fix that.

I haven't read sex at dawn. I think its main thing was group mariage in prehistory (i'm simplifying). I don't dispute what i know about what the book say.

Links: I think you just referred to evolutionary psychology.

Look. We are physically different. From when we are fetuses different hormones baith in our brains. That alone doesn't do anything? A whole chromosome is different. In a bunch of animals, females and males behave differently, thats a social construct too?

We are more animal then you would like, and we have our insticts.

the second book disputes that gender behaviour differences can be assumed to be a direct result of genetics or brain differences. you may want to read it as it is quite enlightening.

Yea, well my English isn't perfect.

I meant its out of subject.

Yes, there is. It's called a suit/tuxedo. It's also called driving a porsche. Men don't have the same sex appeal that women do. We have no equivalent of breasts to show off to get things handed to us and get out of trouble, but we're expected to dress up in a suit to impress women who want you for your money. Also, the suit does increase your likelihood of not getting in trouble, or so it seems, but I think that has more to do with who you know, and it just so happens a lot of people in suits have connections...

And before anybody comes along with "oh, well men make us wear high heels and dresses and stuff," No we don't. Out of all the men I've ever spoken with about this, maybe 1 or 2(out of at least 150), actually consider high heels "sexy." Most don't give a crap what's on your feet and think you're not too bright for hurting yourself by wearing them.