Is "High Society" the modern woman's pornography?

  • 73 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for jasonr86
JasonR86

10468

Forum Posts

449

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 5

#51  Edited By JasonR86

@Harkat said:

@GiveUpNed said:

Women like porn as well. It's societal expectations that made women "not like sex". Women like to get off just as much as guys do.

Science disagrees. The OP pretty much explained why this is not the case. Men gravitating more towards porn than women is not a societal construct, it's rooted in our physiology and evolution:

If men spread their seed in a woman of poor genes, they can impregnate 2 new women the next day. Banging often and without many restrictions is for men an evolutionary advantage, as there is virtually no physical consequence for them. Thus, men have higher libidos, and are attracted to porn because it stimulates the sex parts of the brain.

Women are different. If they procreate with a man they are dissatisfied with, they do not get another shot for 9 months. This has made having a lower libido and being more selective an evolutionary advantage for women, as the consequence of sex is greater.

...that response was kind of gross dude. I have a feeling you're pretty much set in your belief that men gravitate more towards porn then women and that it is due to our physiology and nothing will likely change your mind. That's fine too.

BUT, I get this feeling that you have this idea that one's genotype (one's genetic makeup) is set in stone and will, without a doubt, determine one's phenotype (observable traits). That isn't really the case. Phenotype can, in essence, effect genotype. "Selection acts on phenotypes because differential reproduction and survivorship depend on phenotype. If the phenotype affecting reproduction or survivorship is genetically based, then selection can winnow out genotypes indirectly by winnowing out phenotypes." Plus, one's expressed behaviors (largely dictated by core beliefs) can effect the brain and the chemicals it released thus, in turn, effecting further behaviors.

So, if it has become a more socially accepted practice for women to like porn (and it has recently as per this poll; http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/article2355510.ece) then it would be safe to assume that the female phenotype could, inevitably, change dramatically. Further, and more immediately, more women are outwardly expressing the behavior "watching porn" and thus their brains, through neuroplasticity (or "The brain's natural ability to form new connections in order to compensate for injury or changes in the environment. The ability of the brain to reorganize pathways between neurons as a result of new experiences.), are adapting and changing due to the newly expressed behavior that is becoming more and more socially accepted for their gender (thus more often practiced).

sources:

http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BIO48/5.Geno.Pheno.HTML

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/article2355510.ece

http://www.hdsa.org/research/glossary/index.html

Avatar image for eodtech
EODTech

99

Forum Posts

43

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52  Edited By EODTech

@pixieface said:

The real problem with this magazine garbage is not that they might lower the chances of some dudes in the dating world, but that they help destroy the self-confidence of many, many, many young girls and grown women. These magazines, along with certain television shows, commercials, movies, comic books, billboards, etc, were part of the reason why every day during lunch hour in my high school, girls were forming lines that stretched outside of the bathroom to throw up their lunches, while simultaneously chit-chatting about denying their dinners when they got home because they were too fat and needed to diet. It's why I exercised off twice the amount of calories I took in every day all throughout my teenage years - because I thought this was okay and the norm and totally not a disease. It's why my ballet mentor was told that, while she was a brilliant dancer, she was just too fat when she auditioned for a New York professional troupe - even though she was about 90lbs. It's the reason why many of my college peers have already fucking resorted to botox.

This is the problem. This is what you should be upset about.

I don't buy this "porn/magazines/media hurt women by giving them a false body image to compare themselves to" crap. If porn, media, movies, models, whatever, if those things are so influential and convincing, why are American women, to quote Lewis Black, "the fattest group of f*cks on the planet?" Not saying American men are any thinner, but we're talking women here.

Walk around any business, office, church, restaurant, movie theater, mall, etc. in the country and all you see are fat slobs everywhere.

Something like a third of our population is medically obese, and another third are overweight. This is from the CDC's website.

I had a conversation with a military recruiter a few months ago who said Army Recruiting Command did a study recently that said almost eighty percent of American youths are so fat that RECRUITERS ARE TOLD NOT TO EVEN BOTHER.

And encouraging girls to lose weight is "the problem?" No. The problem is that we are all too fat. If you want to call it unhealthy body image that is on you. Don't blame society or pornography or the media for laziness and apathy.

Avatar image for jerr
Jerr

536

Forum Posts

54

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#53  Edited By Jerr

@JasonR86: You make an excellent scientific argument for why women watch porn, although I believe it's probably a bit more of a sociologically complex phenomenon than simple genetics can explain. But can't that same argument be used to explain why women are attracted to these tabloid magazines? Perhaps the emerging phenotype of modern women is more drawn to sensational journalism? Also, I find it funny you used a poll from a popular british tabloid magazine to prove your point. I'm not discrediting it; it's just ironic.

Avatar image for harkat
Harkat

1171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54  Edited By Harkat

@JasonR86 said:

@Harkat said:

@GiveUpNed said:

Women like porn as well. It's societal expectations that made women "not like sex". Women like to get off just as much as guys do.

Science disagrees. The OP pretty much explained why this is not the case. Men gravitating more towards porn than women is not a societal construct, it's rooted in our physiology and evolution:

If men spread their seed in a woman of poor genes, they can impregnate 2 new women the next day. Banging often and without many restrictions is for men an evolutionary advantage, as there is virtually no physical consequence for them. Thus, men have higher libidos, and are attracted to porn because it stimulates the sex parts of the brain.

Women are different. If they procreate with a man they are dissatisfied with, they do not get another shot for 9 months. This has made having a lower libido and being more selective an evolutionary advantage for women, as the consequence of sex is greater.

...that response was kind of gross dude. I have a feeling you're pretty much set in your belief that men gravitate more towards porn then women and that it is due to our physiology and nothing will likely change your mind. That's fine too.

BUT, I get this feeling that you have this idea that one's genotype (one's genetic makeup) is set in stone and will, without a doubt, determine one's phenotype (observable traits). That isn't really the case. Phenotype can, in essence, effect genotype. "Selection acts on phenotypes because differential reproduction and survivorship depend on phenotype. If the phenotype affecting reproduction or survivorship is genetically based, then selection can winnow out genotypes indirectly by winnowing out phenotypes." Plus, one's expressed behaviors (largely dictated by core beliefs) can effect the brain and the chemicals it released thus, in turn, effecting further behaviors.

So, if it has become a more socially accepted practice for women to like porn (and it has recently as per this poll; http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/article2355510.ece) then it would be safe to assume that the female phenotype could, inevitably, change dramatically. Further, and more immediately, more women are outwardly expressing the behavior "watching porn" and thus their brains, through neuroplasticity (or "The brain's natural ability to form new connections in order to compensate for injury or changes in the environment. The ability of the brain to reorganize pathways between neurons as a result of new experiences.), are adapting and changing due to the newly expressed behavior that is becoming more and more socially accepted for their gender (thus more often practiced).

sources:

http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BIO48/5.Geno.Pheno.HTML

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/article2355510.ece

http://www.hdsa.org/research/glossary/index.html

Oh, certainly. Nurture is a very powerful force that can sometimes override nature.

And I don't believe in having dogmatic attitudes that women should not watch porn. But claiming that men watching more porn is overwhelmingly a social construct having nothing to do with biology is ignorant.

Avatar image for harkat
Harkat

1171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55  Edited By Harkat

@EODTech said:

@pixieface said:

The real problem with this magazine garbage is not that they might lower the chances of some dudes in the dating world, but that they help destroy the self-confidence of many, many, many young girls and grown women. These magazines, along with certain television shows, commercials, movies, comic books, billboards, etc, were part of the reason why every day during lunch hour in my high school, girls were forming lines that stretched outside of the bathroom to throw up their lunches, while simultaneously chit-chatting about denying their dinners when they got home because they were too fat and needed to diet. It's why I exercised off twice the amount of calories I took in every day all throughout my teenage years - because I thought this was okay and the norm and totally not a disease. It's why my ballet mentor was told that, while she was a brilliant dancer, she was just too fat when she auditioned for a New York professional troupe - even though she was about 90lbs. It's the reason why many of my college peers have already fucking resorted to botox.

This is the problem. This is what you should be upset about.

I don't buy this "porn/magazines/media hurt women by giving them a false body image to compare themselves to" crap. If porn, media, movies, models, whatever, if those things are so influential and convincing, why are American women, to quote Lewis Black, "the fattest group of f*cks on the planet?" Not saying American men are any thinner, but we're talking women here.

Walk around any business, office, church, restaurant, movie theater, mall, etc. in the country and all you see are fat slobs everywhere.

Something like a third of our population is medically obese, and another third are overweight. This is from the CDC's website.

I had a conversation with a military recruiter a few months ago who said Army Recruiting Command did a study recently that said almost eighty percent of American youths are so fat that RECRUITERS ARE TOLD NOT TO EVEN BOTHER.

And encouraging girls to lose weight is "the problem?" No. The problem is that we are all too fat. If you want to call it unhealthy body image that is on you. Don't blame society or pornography or the media for laziness and apathy.

Yeah, I don't really buy that either. I hate it when people blame videogames/books/movies/magazines for their own problems and insecurities. Those magazines are there because of supply and demand, not because a mustache-twirling, malevolent fat cat has placed them there to corrupt your sense of self.

Avatar image for medacris
medacris

738

Forum Posts

5351

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#56  Edited By medacris

I'm female and I can't stand the celebrity obsession, honestly- I tend to not follow what anyone famous is doing unless they're an actor I feel is very talented and I want to see more of what they're doing. Plenty of women I know love porn, too. I personally can't get into a lot of it, but I'm the kind of person who really only gets interested in sex at all after I've known someone for awhile and I've become completely smitten with both their personality and their looks.

But then again, I don't think most Americans are fat, or even chubby. A lot of people I see just walking around are of average weight, they just think they're fat because they're not grossly underweight. Which makes me really sad, honestly. It might have to do with which area of America one lives in, though.

Avatar image for truthtellah
TruthTellah

9840

Forum Posts

423

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#57  Edited By TruthTellah

I think there's an unfortunate fallacy in suggesting that behavioral conjecture based off of evolutionary theory somehow explains the everyday actions of human beings. A great deal of human thought and action is completely contrary to evolutionary development. We may develop theories about modern actions and trends in human activity, but we should not assume that human beings are inherently predictable or efficient creatures. At a certain point in our development, human beings have abandoned natural selection and focused more on personal selection. The individual identity has become far more impacting to a human being's actions than their natural instincts. We can suggest that women may have advantages to acting a certain way from an evolutionary perspective, but it doesn't mean that women have or continue to take that assumedly advantageous route. We can suggest that men may have reason to have certain common traits from an evolutionary standpoint, but it doesn't mean that men have or continue to be significantly influenced by these theorized motivations.

Human beings are more than the flesh, and that is represented time and time again in our haphazard development as a species and a society. We are first and foremost human, not first and foremost male or female. And as human beings, personal identity and thought supplanted pure instinct quite some time ago. How we mold people has more to do with how they act than the preferences of their genes. In my life, I have found little inherent difference in men and women outside of the observably physical. The most striking differences are focused solely on conditioned responses to stimuli in their lives. Nature may tweak the edges, but the picture people paint is their own.

Women may appreciate the same level of sexual lust as men. Or, they may not. I have seen both. A woman is not broken or unnatural to be more like the male stereotype, just as men are not broken or unnatural to be more like the female stereotype. We are most beholden to the human stereotype. We are more alike as human beings than men and women are alike with their respective gender.

Our ever-young understanding of human biology and human evolutionary theory should not trump the individual motivations of today's modern men and women. I have seen more to lead me to believe that women and men are inherently alike than seen reason to believe that conjecture based on evolutionary theory should dictate what is normal for a man or woman. Small factors may still be factors in the long run, but I will take the word of a woman on her own motivations before I look to scientists to explain how a woman should think and act.

Avatar image for truthtellah
TruthTellah

9840

Forum Posts

423

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#58  Edited By TruthTellah

@Harkat said:

@JasonR86 said:

@Harkat said:

@GiveUpNed said:

Women like porn as well. It's societal expectations that made women "not like sex". Women like to get off just as much as guys do.

Science disagrees. The OP pretty much explained why this is not the case. Men gravitating more towards porn than women is not a societal construct, it's rooted in our physiology and evolution:

If men spread their seed in a woman of poor genes, they can impregnate 2 new women the next day. Banging often and without many restrictions is for men an evolutionary advantage, as there is virtually no physical consequence for them. Thus, men have higher libidos, and are attracted to porn because it stimulates the sex parts of the brain.

Women are different. If they procreate with a man they are dissatisfied with, they do not get another shot for 9 months. This has made having a lower libido and being more selective an evolutionary advantage for women, as the consequence of sex is greater.

...that response was kind of gross dude. I have a feeling you're pretty much set in your belief that men gravitate more towards porn then women and that it is due to our physiology and nothing will likely change your mind. That's fine too.

BUT, I get this feeling that you have this idea that one's genotype (one's genetic makeup) is set in stone and will, without a doubt, determine one's phenotype (observable traits). That isn't really the case. Phenotype can, in essence, effect genotype. "Selection acts on phenotypes because differential reproduction and survivorship depend on phenotype. If the phenotype affecting reproduction or survivorship is genetically based, then selection can winnow out genotypes indirectly by winnowing out phenotypes." Plus, one's expressed behaviors (largely dictated by core beliefs) can effect the brain and the chemicals it released thus, in turn, effecting further behaviors.

So, if it has become a more socially accepted practice for women to like porn (and it has recently as per this poll; http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/article2355510.ece) then it would be safe to assume that the female phenotype could, inevitably, change dramatically. Further, and more immediately, more women are outwardly expressing the behavior "watching porn" and thus their brains, through neuroplasticity (or "The brain's natural ability to form new connections in order to compensate for injury or changes in the environment. The ability of the brain to reorganize pathways between neurons as a result of new experiences.), are adapting and changing due to the newly expressed behavior that is becoming more and more socially accepted for their gender (thus more often practiced).

sources:

http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BIO48/5.Geno.Pheno.HTML

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/article2355510.ece

http://www.hdsa.org/research/glossary/index.html

Oh, certainly. Nurture is a very powerful force that can sometimes override nature.

And I don't believe in having dogmatic attitudes that women should not watch porn. But claiming that men watching more porn is overwhelmingly a social construct having nothing to do with biology is ignorant.

Biology may play its part, but I would suggest that societal pressures and culture has a more significant impact on it than our genes do. To such an extent that bringing up assumptions regarding what may be more evolutionarily advantageous serves little purpose. Unless we are to suggest that human beings are still mostly instinct and less intellect, the way people are molded by those around them has far more influence over something like appreciation for pornography than what is conjectured as most evolutionarily advantageous.

It should also be noted that much of the media we are referring to(pornography) has for some time been targeted solely at men, further exacerbating the gap. Plus, with the balance of authority and buying power, women have for much of history been limited in their access in this department. The modern trend continues to show that women, when shown a society more accepting of their consumption of pornography, possibly given more female-targeted options, and having more of their own money and time to invest into it, are embracing pornography as part of their regular sexual lives. Greater access and public acceptance are the factors causing this ever-increasing embrace of pornography, not genetics.

Avatar image for jerr
Jerr

536

Forum Posts

54

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#59  Edited By Jerr

@TruthTellah: I agree with you on a certain level when you say that science can't account for every behaviour we have. But with so much overwhelming evidence suggesting the traditional roles of males and females in our ancestors, I find it hard to believe that our evolutionary background doesn't account for any of the makeup of our sex drives. Sex is such a basic, primal instinct. We humans are the ones who have built it into a social construct, but I don't think we have reached the threshold where sex is primarily influenced by culture and not our basic needs as homosapiens. We are, after all, just very socially advanced animals. Maybe women are embracing pornography more these days because of factors such as equality and self-identity, and maybe they view it as a form of empowerment. That's great. But I wouldn't guess for a second that they have the same attachment to it as men do. Perhaps they view it for other reasons than the pure visual stimulation, such as I just listed. That certainly leaves room for a more complex stimulation though a vicarious fantasy to drive their libidos, which has been my argument all along.

I would love to see a poll that asked men and women whether they viewed pornography as essential in their lives. Would you care to venture a guess at what the results would be?

Avatar image for truthtellah
TruthTellah

9840

Forum Posts

423

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#60  Edited By TruthTellah

@Jerr said:

@TruthTellah: I agree with you on a certain level when you say that science can't account for every behaviour we have. But with so much overwhelming evidence suggesting the traditional roles of males and females in our ancestors, I find it hard to believe that our evolutionary background doesn't account for any of the makeup of our sex drives. Sex is such a basic, primal instinct. We humans are the ones who have built it into a social construct, but I don't think we have reached the threshold where sex is primarily influenced by culture and not our basic needs as homosapiens. We are, after all, just very socially advanced animals. Maybe women are embracing pornography more these days because of factors such as equality and self-identity, and maybe they view it as a form of empowerment. That's great. But I wouldn't guess for a second that they have the same attachment to it as men do. Perhaps they view it for other reasons than the pure visual stimulation, such as I just listed. That certainly leaves room for a more complex stimulation though a vicarious fantasy to drive their libidos, which has been my argument all along.

I would love to see a poll that asked men and women whether they viewed pornography as essential in their lives. Would you care to venture a guess at what the results would be?

I wouldn't exactly say that possible evolutionary developments in behavior don't have any influence on our lives today, but I would say it's much less than many give it credit, especially when discussing gender norms. Often, those gender norms directed at nature actually differ from culture to culture, making them ultimately cultural constructs. Many of these past influences still remain in us; of that I have no doubt. I am simply suggesting that they are more like the tailbone; a remnant of the past that human beings have mostly moved on from. The only thing truly keeping them alive and somehow relevant is cultural.

As I said, we can suggest these influences, but I am more inclined to side with an individual's own stated motivations than conjecture based on what we assume may be evolutionarily advantageous. These things may play a part in a more general sense, but there's more to derive from "being human" than from "being male" or "being female". Time may reveal that there are more inherent differences in basic sexuality, but from what I have seen and the people I have interacted with in this life, I can't help but see that things are far less cut and dry when it comes to sexuality than people often suggest.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9398c1300c7
deactivated-5f9398c1300c7

3570

Forum Posts

105

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jerr said:

@Tru3_Blu3 said:

@GiveUpNed said:

Women like porn as well. It's societal expectations that made women "not like sex". Women like to get off just as much as guys do.

This. Until our species finally gets it in their heads that we are not what we are based on biological endowment, women are going to be the "weird, picky" creatures we males know them as. Since parents think it's unnatural for women to be otherwise, women gotta be what or contemporary society thinks is natural and biological.

Where is the evidence that we are not what we are based on biological endowment? Doesn't evolution say otherwise?

Women weren't heavily emotional perfectionists when we were cavemen or triblets. Look at Polynesia; almost everyone there is fully nude and opposite sexes don't take ganders at each others' sex organs. It's all culture and influence on why we, as men, tend to give attention to revealing sexual assets and not the words they speak, and as women to be emotional perfectionists who focus more to be beautiful lovers and not scientists and problem solvers.

Avatar image for seriouslynow
SeriouslyNow

8504

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#62  Edited By SeriouslyNow

This thread excites my womanly aspect.

Avatar image for jerr
Jerr

536

Forum Posts

54

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#63  Edited By Jerr

@TruthTellah said:

I wouldn't exactly say that possible evolutionary developments in behavior don't have any influence on our lives today, but I would say it's much less than many give it credit, especially when discussing gender norms. Often, those gender norms directed at nature actually differ from culture to culture, making them ultimately cultural constructs. Many of these past influences still remain in us; of that I have no doubt. I am simply suggesting that they are more like the tailbone; a remnant of the past that human beings have mostly moved on from. The only thing truly keeping them alive and somehow relevant is cultural.

As I said, we can suggest these influences, but I am more inclined to side with an individual's own stated motivations than conjecture based on what we assume may be evolutionarily advantageous. These things may play a part in a more general sense, but there's more to derive from "being human" than from "being male" or "being female". Time may reveal that there are more inherent differences in basic sexuality, but from what I have seen and the people I have interacted with in this life, I can't help but see that things are far less cut and dry when it comes to sexuality than people often suggest.

I think you'll find in most cultures, in the past, women in general have been subjugated and treated as lower class citizens and nuturers of the young, while men made the large political decisions. There are exceptions obviously, as there are to anything, but I would argue there is somewhat of a universal understanding of gender norms, at least retrospectively.

I also think that what we know about the male and female sex drives historically isn't "assumed" to be evolutionarily advantageous, it is more or less known at this point. What other reason would a male have to produce an endless supply of gametes, while a female is done for 9 months after an impregnation, if not to facilitate the rapid expansion of a race of organisms while simultaneously having mothers to nurture them and ensure they survive? How can you not then, attribute this to the notion that males will procreate as much as possible, while females act as the nurturers of the young, and are therefore the more discerning and cerebral partners? This, of course, then influences libido.

When was the period in history when we grew out of this? I would say that we still haven't; we have just twisted it so it fits into our modern, egalitarian society. This society is very young in a historical context, certainly not old enough to warrant a evolutionary change in the basic ways that men and women tick sexually. The interpretations of the old world "roles" are different, but they are still there. Your personal testimony is intriguing, but I wouldn't hold it up as evidence against evolutionary theory. We make sex complicated from a sociological standpoint, but it only serves one evolutionary purpose, which is to procreate.

Which is all a big longwinded way to say that men don't think about why they're horny, while women get horny by thinking. Reason? We always have, and there hasn't been enough time to grow out of it as a species.

Avatar image for jerr
Jerr

536

Forum Posts

54

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#64  Edited By Jerr

@Tru3_Blu3 said:

@Jerr said:

@Tru3_Blu3 said:

@GiveUpNed said:

Women like porn as well. It's societal expectations that made women "not like sex". Women like to get off just as much as guys do.

This. Until our species finally gets it in their heads that we are not what we are based on biological endowment, women are going to be the "weird, picky" creatures we males know them as. Since parents think it's unnatural for women to be otherwise, women gotta be what or contemporary society thinks is natural and biological.

Where is the evidence that we are not what we are based on biological endowment? Doesn't evolution say otherwise?

Women weren't heavily emotional perfectionists when we were cavemen or triblets. Look at Polynesia; almost everyone there is fully nude and opposite sexes don't take ganders at each others' sex organs. It's all culture and influence on why we, as men, tend to give attention to revealing sexual assets and not the words they speak, and as women to be emotional perfectionists who focus more to be beautiful lovers and not scientists and problem solvers.

But they still have sex to procreate in Polynesia, and I would be willing to bet that the women go through some sort of a selective process on who they allow to mount them. So aren't women still "picky" in that context?

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9398c1300c7
deactivated-5f9398c1300c7

3570

Forum Posts

105

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jerr said:

@Tru3_Blu3 said:

@Jerr said:

@Tru3_Blu3 said:

@GiveUpNed said:

Women like porn as well. It's societal expectations that made women "not like sex". Women like to get off just as much as guys do.

This. Until our species finally gets it in their heads that we are not what we are based on biological endowment, women are going to be the "weird, picky" creatures we males know them as. Since parents think it's unnatural for women to be otherwise, women gotta be what or contemporary society thinks is natural and biological.

Where is the evidence that we are not what we are based on biological endowment? Doesn't evolution say otherwise?

Women weren't heavily emotional perfectionists when we were cavemen or triblets. Look at Polynesia; almost everyone there is fully nude and opposite sexes don't take ganders at each others' sex organs. It's all culture and influence on why we, as men, tend to give attention to revealing sexual assets and not the words they speak, and as women to be emotional perfectionists who focus more to be beautiful lovers and not scientists and problem solvers.

But they still have sex to procreate in Polynesia, and I would be willing to bet that the women go through some sort of a selective process on who they allow to mount them. So aren't women still "picky" in that context?

There's still decisions on their part on what type of person they want to mate with; it is the most free society after all. Their reason to procreate doesn't exactly resort to sexual attractiveness, it more so resorts to friendship transforming into, well, love. And also personal skills that have developed throughout childhood.

In our large, industrial societies, we "pretend" to befriend our sexes. We "know how to talk to da ladieeeees" and "get laaaaaid". Most relationships start having sex in less than a year, and such relationships that later develop into marriage only last for a measly ten years. We know nothing of love compared to the humans out there in third-world counties. As much as democrats can barely communicate with republicans, the men and women in their society can't even get a probable solution without a segregating fight.

Avatar image for bravestar
Bravestar

390

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66  Edited By Bravestar

so you are saying:

women buy celebrity magazines, because it's their form of sexual fantasies, which is a problem, because they spend too much time with it and it makes their expectations of men unreasonably high. while men enjoy their form of sexual fantasies, men understand that their form of sexual is not real life.

hahaha holy shit

Avatar image for jadeskye
Jadeskye

4392

Forum Posts

2125

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#67  Edited By Jadeskye

This is a weird ass thread.

Avatar image for pixieface
pixieface

122

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68  Edited By pixieface

@wordfalling: Thank you for understanding.

@EODTech said:

@pixieface said:

The real problem with this magazine garbage is not that they might lower the chances of some dudes in the dating world, but that they help destroy the self-confidence of many, many, many young girls and grown women. These magazines, along with certain television shows, commercials, movies, comic books, billboards, etc, were part of the reason why every day during lunch hour in my high school, girls were forming lines that stretched outside of the bathroom to throw up their lunches, while simultaneously chit-chatting about denying their dinners when they got home because they were too fat and needed to diet. It's why I exercised off twice the amount of calories I took in every day all throughout my teenage years - because I thought this was okay and the norm and totally not a disease. It's why my ballet mentor was told that, while she was a brilliant dancer, she was just too fat when she auditioned for a New York professional troupe - even though she was about 90lbs. It's the reason why many of my college peers have already fucking resorted to botox.

This is the problem. This is what you should be upset about.

I don't buy this "porn/magazines/media hurt women by giving them a false body image to compare themselves to" crap. If porn, media, movies, models, whatever, if those things are so influential and convincing, why are American women, to quote Lewis Black, "the fattest group of f*cks on the planet?" Not saying American men are any thinner, but we're talking women here.

Walk around any business, office, church, restaurant, movie theater, mall, etc. in the country and all you see are fat slobs everywhere.

Something like a third of our population is medically obese, and another third are overweight. This is from the CDC's website.

I had a conversation with a military recruiter a few months ago who said Army Recruiting Command did a study recently that said almost eighty percent of American youths are so fat that RECRUITERS ARE TOLD NOT TO EVEN BOTHER.

And encouraging girls to lose weight is "the problem?" No. The problem is that we are all too fat. If you want to call it unhealthy body image that is on you. Don't blame society or pornography or the media for laziness and apathy.

I... Wait, what?

I never said that all people in North America are skinny and underweight, or even that the majority are thin. We clearly live in a culture of excess, where food is both cheap and delicious and physical exertion is not exactly necessary to go about an average daily life. I never even denied that obesity was a problem, because any dummy could see that it is. I was talking about anorexia and bulimia in particular because that's what I personally lived through. I'm really not sure why you're bringing this up against me, to be honest with you.

You will also note that I purposefully left porn out of avenues of media that I believe have hurt women in the past. I don't think porn is inherently bad. It can be pretty silly but it has its place. The only thing that is purely bad for everyone are snuff films, but that is a completely different beast. I also never said that ALL magazines hurt women. Certain ad campaigns, certain characters in television shows, certain movies, certain video games, and certain comic books do not project healthy messages to women. Not all. Some. I am not blaming any one person or demographic. I am not blaming men. It's just the culture we're living in. You can say that this is a dumb excuse because Lewis Black said so and he is funny and you like him. Okay. Fine. Yet, in much the same way that we live in a culture that actively encourages people to gorge much and exercise little, we also live in a culture that commonly juxtaposes this with an unattainable vision of beauty upon women. These are conflicting messages, and conflicting messages often lead to Bad Things.

And eating disorders are a problem. This includes compulsive eating and comfort eating, which leads to obesity. The real terrible thing about eating disorders is that the weight gain, the weight loss, and the struggle to look good are all just symptoms of a more sinister problem. Eating disorders don't stem from just hunger or lust for food. They stem from self-hatred. From depression. From feeling a loss of control and thereby needing to control anything in your life, even if all you can control is how little you eat. Laziness and apathy can lead to obesity, of course, but eating disorders, like any psychological disorder, are not so simple as to be packed away into a neat little box of understanding. A lot of different people suffer from them for many different reasons.

Young girls especially are susceptible to anorexia and bulimia because they want to fit in, to be accepted, and feel like they're not worthless. They want to look like the accepted standard of beauty that is displayed in magazines, in movies, in television - you get the point. This issue in particular makes me furious because I have lived through anorexia and bulimia. I remember all those times I felt like I didn't amount to anything because I didn't look like one of these smiling models, and I just never want anyone else to go through what I went through ever again. It's awful. Even after getting help, the disease still dogs my steps. It's not something I can tell to just go away, similar to how a clinically depressed person can't just "cheer up" if someone tells them to.

Seeing this shit does not encourage girls to lose weight. When this and things like it are what you see over and over and over again since the day you were born, you understandably think that this is the norm, that this is how you look beautiful and therefore acceptable to society, and that this is what men desire. If you don't look like this, you are not good enough. No one will want you. You are worthless. You are a good for nothing. The body you were born with is something to be ashamed of.

In sum, obesity is a problem - a fact which I neither denied nor touched upon in the first place. Eating disorders are also a problem, but "eating disorder" is just a blanket term for many, many different diseases. Young girls are exposed to unrealistic bodies that they compare themselves to via many media outlets. For some, this results in body issues that may haunt them for life. For others, this can result in an eating disorder that may or may not result in actual body weight changes. In the vast majority of cases, the most important thing to consider is the mental anguish that it causes and not just the physical changes. However, the body can get so damaged by the physical duress that medical help is required. If a girl throws up her food too much, her teeth will eventually rot out from the stomach acid. If a girl starves herself too much, her heart might stop. If a girl eats too much, she risks diabetes and a plethora of other problems.

If you want to combat obesity you're going to have to do a LOT more than just say "stop being lazy", because obesity is just a symptom of a much larger problem with the culture. Please take some time to understand disorders before you condemn everyone afflicted with them.

Avatar image for ravenlight
Ravenlight

8057

Forum Posts

12306

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#69  Edited By Ravenlight

@Doctorchimp said:

I came in here just because pornography was in your title.

I can not express how ashamed I am with myself because I was disappointed with the amount of words in your post...

If you unfocus your eyes and look at the blank space between the text, you can totally see a boob.

@Animasta said:

GUYS ARE LIKE THIS, AND WOMEN ARE LIKE THIS

BIOTRUTHS IN THIS BITCH, YUP ALL WOMEN AND ONLY WOMEN BUY PEOPLE THAT'S TOTALLY ACCURATE

I thought only retarded people bought People. By extrapolating, we can see that all women are retarded. #SCIENCE #also sarcasm

Avatar image for truthtellah
TruthTellah

9840

Forum Posts

423

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#70  Edited By TruthTellah

@Jerr: I suppose that's just where we'll have to disagree. This is coming down to a basic modern difference in philosophy on the development of humankind.

On that, though, I am off to go celebrate the day with my family. Merry Christmas, Jerr.

Avatar image for jerr
Jerr

536

Forum Posts

54

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#71  Edited By Jerr

@TruthTellah: I'll take that. I'm off to do the same. Merry Christmas to you too sir.

Avatar image for everyones_a_critic
Everyones_A_Critic

6500

Forum Posts

834

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

Girls don't masturbate though, dude. Or poop for that matter.

Avatar image for shadowskill11
ShadowSkill11

1877

Forum Posts

48

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#74  Edited By ShadowSkill11

No, I'm pretty sure porn is the modern woman's pornography... that and vibrators.