The only people I know who think like you and use terms like "dolled up" are from the boondocks.
I find it fascinating that you know writers living in the boondocks who are fond of borrowing phrases from incredible films like "Miller's Crossing", set during Prohibition when terms like "dames" and "dolls" were all the rage. I guess these writers in the boondocks must have access to the internet, hence, why they are so impressively cultured...
At any rate, I'm not the first person who came up with this rebuttal to that argument, but in the words of my favorite internet meme:
"Girls wear make up to impress boys"
Retort: You think I own 78 MAC lipsticks to impress some douche who can't tell the difference between Myth and Snob? lol no.
That meme doesn't make sense. Sorry. Not only that, anyone who thinks the term "myth" means "fallacy" doesn't understand myth, as it's a form of poetry (as elucidated by Graves) designed to symbolically convey cultural information (ala Santillana and von Dechend).
Girls wear make up because it's fun, because WE think we look pretty in it, because we want to look pretty for ourselves and to compete with other females--not for a guy, but for life. The fact is, life is easier when you're pretty... you get jobs and girlfriends.
If that was the primary reason, then guys would use make up the same amount as women, and obviously that's not the case. Regardless, I agree with you that there are other reasons for wearing makeup, however, that still doesn't discount/disprove the primary reason: sexual attraction.
A study was done on 20/20 that proved even children react better to pretty people.
I agree, but that doesn't disprove my point.
It's NOT necessarily sexual, there are countless motivations for a woman to want to look polished that have nothing to do with your approval.
My approval has nothing to do with anything. But regardless, the motivation for the majority of women wearing make-up is for sexual attraction, whether consciously or unconscious conditioning, and a few exceptions still don't disprove that general rule.
The only people who think the world rises and falls on your d-k is you men.
Not all men think so. In fact, many guys, like me, hate guys who think like that.
Once again, you can't see past your own schnoz.
What? When was the first time? Or are you using "schnoz" as a metaphor for d!ck? If so, yes, I can see past my own d!ck. It's hard, difficult I mean, lol, but I can if I really strain my neck;)
Once again, you can't see past your own schnoz. Sexually mature males are a mere fraction of the viewing public. There are children, women and gay guys too. So..no.. not every woman on screen is or should be there to give a man a boner. There are stories, good stories to be told which require a non-sexualized woman. Shocking, I know.
Correct, but unfortunately, the bean-counters running corporate Hollywood can't figure out the super-failproof-magic formula to get any of those other people in theater seats, unlike young straight guys surging with testosterone and more than willing to part with their allowance money to see the next Megan Fox look-alike lick her fake lips while being ogled by the camera. Sex sells and there isn't another competitive formula for other demographics. I sympathize, BTW, I'm not condoning it, I'm just calling a spade a spade. (Hope that's not TOO "boondock" for you...)
Not irrelevant.
Quite relevant.
Well, not to corporate Hollywood. Case in point: The Martian. That said, I agree that it should be relevant to them, but anyway...
The internet proves nothing.
Yes, it does. The percent of male-oriented porn, online and otherwise (video/magazine/etc) vastly dwarfs the percent of female-oriented porn. And that's not even debatable. And it's common knowledge.
It's a completely unscientific gauge, as it's authenticity is sabotaged by 13 year old gamers and jaded, biased rednecks like yourself.
Jaded? Definitely. Biased? I try not to be. Redneck? LOL! Nice guess, not! But anyway, we can be civil, can't we?
Also, your take on biology leaves a lot to be desired.
Not quite as much as your completely biology-free/science-free retort. Just saying...
Haha, typical misogynist's retort.
Usually I get called a "feminist", but I guess there's a first time for everything...
"You just don't understand it." I understand what you're trying to prove, I'm just that fly in the ointment telling you that you've failed miserably at proving it... and condescendingly reiterating that your stance is factual, I just don't understand, my points are irrelevant..isn't proving anything but your lack of valid points.
I can easily type up a page worth of scientific data off the top of my head, so just let me know if you need me to explain something in further detail, I'm quite well-read on this subject. That said, you still have to deal with the XX/XY example, as it's well-accepted in science that male birds (who have XX sex chromosomes) have the bright plumage to attract mates, this being the complete opposite of how it works in mammals, humans being a mammal, obviously, which is why it's accepted as human behavior too. Because simply saying something about being a fly in the ointment isn't the same as making a scientific example illustrating your assertions. And no, 20/20 doesn't count as "scientific evidence"...
There are gay guys and women who love looking at Channing Tatum and Chris Hemsworth. That doesn't mean that every role calls for a man to look like that.
I agree. That said, it's irrelevant.
I get what you're saying..that sex makes the world go round and women are the decorations etc..I'm not offended by that, I just think it's absurdly stupid because that belief is predicated on the notion that men are all that matters. Again, there's gay men, women and children too... several other voices in the mix. Plus straight men who are attracted to thick or even fat women! So again, you adult straight males who find skinny women attractive are not the only ones out there or the only ones who matter.
Although a tiny percentage of men are attracted to fat women, there's also men attracted to bowling-balls, but regardless, a few exceptions don't disprove a general rule. Biology has proven that fertile females prefer attractive, healthy, and fit mates. Period.
That said, the key term here is "fit" and "healthy" and I personally would argue that what Hollywood (and the corporate media) consider "attractive" is hardly "fit" or "healthy". Quite the opposite, their tiny sliver of the spectrum only ranges from heroin chic to skinny b!tches with fake t!ts and no @ss. Even worse, as I'm sure you know, those women starve themselves to look like that, mainly because a 2D image puts 10/15 lbs on a model, hence, they look like elongated shirt hangars half the time, malnourished and bony, something which isn't healthy, mentally or physically. Nor is it normal. On the other hand, I myself prefer fuller, more curvy and more voluptuous women, not fat, but not skinny either. Fit and full, would be the best description. Not that it matters, FYI, but just so you don't have to keep making wild guesses here...
reply
share
Jupiter555555
8 years ago
That meme doesn't make sense
It made perfect sense, it just went over your head. Just because you didn't get something doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. Again, you can't see past your own self.
Not only that, anyone who thinks the term "myth" means "fallacy" doesn't understand myth, as it's a form of poetry (as elucidated by Graves) designed to symbolically convey cultural information (ala Santillana and von Dechend).
Actually, Myth, within the context of the meme, refers to a brand of cosmetics. I didn't know about this line either, but was able to gather the connotation based on context, as would any person of reasonable intelligence.
If that was the primary reason, then guys would use make up the same amount as women, and obviously that's not the case.
Incorrect. Guys do OTHER things to attract the opposite sex. Why would they do the exact same thing? Guys and girls are different, fyi.
that still doesn't discount/disprove the primary reason: sexual attraction.
Actually, I've heard several guys say they don't like make up on girls, that they prefer girls to not wear make up..and, believe it or not, plenty of girls/women (myself included when I was younger,) would still continue to wear it because it's what I wanted to do..and I didn't care that it impeded their attraction to me. I know this comes as a shock to you, but we're not just vessels desperately clamoring to become impregnated by your seed. That's the overly simplistic biological interpretation of all surviving species... the reality is that humans are a bit more complex as beings.
Correct, but unfortunately, the bean-counters running corporate Hollywood can't figure out the super-failproof-magic formula to get any of those other people in theater seats, unlike young straight guys surging with testosterone and more than willing to part with their allowance money to see the next Megan Fox look-alike lick her fake lips while being ogled by the camera.
I highly doubt that adolescent males are the only ones buying tickets to movies, and if so far they are the largest demographic, then I reckon we'd find ourselves stuck in an infinite loop debating if that's the cause or the effect. In other words, are films so catered to them that they're the only ones who feel compelled towards the box office? I know myself, as a woman, there's very few movies I'm drawn to see, because they're mostly male-centric stories with tertiary female characters. OR, as you would argue, does Hollywood have no choice but to cater to them because that's the only way to sell tickets? I doubt that.
Sex sells
Sex sells, but it's not the only thing that sells. People want to see an intelligent piece, a heartfelt piece, a funny piece, a carefree piece, and many other types that don't call for a boob or a butt at all.
Yes, it does. The percent of male-oriented porn, online and otherwise (video/magazine/etc) vastly dwarfs the percent of female-oriented porn. And that's not even debatable. And it's common knowledge.
Women get off in different ways than men.. that doesn't mean we don't appreciate looking at a hunk of a man on screen. Who doesn't appreciate something that's aesthetically pleasing??? Whether it's a baked good, a piece of fine jewelry, art, or a human (man OR woman,) if it's good looking, we want to see it. Yes, this includes Chris Hemsworth. He sells tickets.
Not quite as much as your completely biology-free/science-free retort. Just saying...
I acknowledge biology to some degree, but you think sex completely runs the Earth. That's not the case, many more things go on in a day. You're one of those people that believes and argues humans are exactly like any other living organism. Keep in mind, some animals eat their own poo. The truth is, we're evolved.
as it's well-accepted in science that male birds
Shall I list in alphabetical order all the other differences between birds and humans? I'll do that as soon as I get finished flying around the rafters.
I agree. That said, it's irrelevant.
Not irrelevant.
Quite relevant.
reply
share
tcob44
8 years ago
It made perfect sense, it just went over your head.
Sorry, but there's difference between something going over someone's head and something not making sense because it's referring to obscure things that a vast majority of people don't know about. And in the case of that particular meme, it's referring to three obscure brands/products: "MAC", "Snob", and "Myth", hence, why it doesn't make sense to most people when they first read it, including yourself, BTW, as you admitted you were unaware of that brand. Especially considering their lame-brained branding includes "colors" that aren't colors, as well as words that have other connotations, and thus preventing anyone from figuring out the context easily.
Just because you didn't get something doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. Again, you can't see past your own self.
Well, at least I have trouble seeing past myself because of my "schnoz", what's your excuse? Not to mention, you're a woman. You're supposed to know about lipstick brands. And let me see if I got this straight: So instead of simply acknowledging that most women wear makeup for obvious biological reasons, now you're bragging about a few women who instead wear makeup for trivial social reasons which allow marginalized women to delude themselves into feeling superior to other members of their own sex for consumerist reasons, a hare-brained economic concept conceived by inept, narrow-minded simplistic pseudointellectual men? LOL! That's rich!
Actually, Myth, within the context of the meme, refers to a brand of cosmetics. I didn't know about this line either...
Don't worry, I don't mind that you can't see past your own self...
Incorrect. Guys do OTHER things to attract the opposite sex.
No offense, but if you don't know basic biology stuff, then perhaps you should just limit your posts to whining/complaining about fat-phobias (that have been going on since the dawn of time), instead of attempting to talk about biology and other things you obviously know nothing about. Because if you really need me to explain simple SexEd 101, and how females attract males, and how females pick the best mate, and how females test the males by pretending to flee the males advances, and how the male must give chase, etc, etc, then we're just wasting valuable time in which you could be watching the National Geographic channel and educating yourself about the birds and the bees, literally and figuratively...
Why would they do the exact same thing?
They would if it wasn't primarily for the same reason (aka sexual attraction). Sorry.
Guys and girls are different, fyi.
Exactly my point.
Actually, I've heard several guys say they don't like make up on girls, that they prefer girls to not wear make up..and, believe it or not, plenty of girls/women (myself included when I was younger,) would still continue to wear it because it's what I wanted to do..and I didn't care that it impeded their attraction to me.
That may be true, but again, it's irrelevant. Sorry.
I know this comes as a shock to you, but we're not just vessels desperately clamoring to become impregnated by your seed.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much...
That's the overly simplistic biological interpretation of all surviving species... the reality is that humans are a bit more complex as beings.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. But anyway, let me know when you can address my points about biology, XX chromosomes, etc. And BTW, if you'd like me to suggest a recommended reading list, just say the word and I'll be happy to further assist you in your online education.
I highly doubt that adolescent males are the only ones buying tickets to movies, and if so far they are the largest demographic, then I reckon we'd find ourselves stuck in an infinite loop debating if that's the cause or the effect. In other words, are films so catered to them that they're the only ones who feel compelled towards the box office?
No, the cause and the effect are all pretty obvious in that example.
I know myself, as a woman, there's very few movies I'm drawn to see, because they're mostly male-centric stories with tertiary female characters.
Again, thanks for pointing out the obvious... And BTW- Welcome to Earth! When did you arrive here? How do you like it so far? Are you staying long?
OR, as you would argue, does Hollywood have no choice but to cater to them because that's the only way to sell tickets? I doubt that.
Sorry, I never said they had no choice. It's just a simple case of "If it ain't broke, then why try to fix it?"
Sex sells, but it's not the only thing that sells. People want to see an intelligent piece, a heartfelt piece, a funny piece, a carefree piece, and many other types that don't call for a boob or a butt at all.
I imagine that when the worldwide obesity epidemic gets to the point where everybody is so ashamed of their own fatness that they can't stand seeing healthy/attractive body parts in a film, then Hollywood MIGHT start to follow your advice, but until then, I wouldn't hold your breath...
Women get off in different ways than men.. that doesn't mean we don't appreciate looking at a hunk of a man on screen. Who doesn't appreciate something that's aesthetically pleasing??? Whether it's a baked good, a piece of fine jewelry, art, or a human (man OR woman,) if it's good looking, we want to see it. Yes, this includes Chris Hemsworth. He sells tickets.
Yes, men and women are different, again, thanks for pointing out the obvious. Regardless, testosterone is the primary variable here, and it makes men behave differently than women, in all the numerous ways I already elucidated and plenty more. Men commit more violence because of testosterone, it increases muscularity, increases aggressive behavior, literally drives men to pursue women in the first place, etc, etc, and everything you've said so far amounts to a few random and pointless exceptions to a general rule, because you seem incapable of acknowledging the fact that basic biological differences are the real reason your "alleged" fat-phobia is occurring in Hollywood, not some prejudice/"racism" against fat women by Hollywood. Sorry.
I acknowledge biology to some degree, but you think sex completely runs the Earth. That's not the case, many more things go on in a day.
Everybody knows that, but unfortunately for your (so-called) "argument", other things going on in the day doesn't negate all the biological things going on.
You're one of those people that believes and argues humans are exactly like any other living organism. Keep in mind, some animals eat their own poo. The truth is, we're evolved.
Every animal is "evolved", perfectly evolved for their own niches, in fact. Hence, you don't have a point AND you don't understand evolution (in addition to basic biology). And plenty of humans eat their own poo, and unlike many dogs, they're not doing so because of malnutrition (and/or because of the smell of addictive chemicals added to dog food).
Shall I list in alphabetical order all the other differences between birds and humans? I'll do that as soon as I get finished flying around the rafters.
LOL! Listen, I get that you want to vent, I sometimes like to do that online too, but let's not pretend that there's actually some kind of debate going on here between us. You *still* can't refute my points, but yet, you still want to argue (apparently just for argument's sake or you need some attention, I don't know...) So either just continue calling me names and we can act like infantile teenagers or actually make a scientific counterpoint/rebuttal and please stop wasting my time. Thanks in advance.
reply
share
Jupiter555555
8 years ago
Well, at least I have trouble seeing past myself because of my "schnoz", what's your excuse? Not to mention, you're a woman. You're supposed to know about lipstick brands
As a woman then I've failed, because I didn't know "snob" or "myth." However, again I picked up that they were cosmetic brands by the context.
let me see if I got this straight: So instead of simply acknowledging that most women wear makeup for obvious biological reasons, now you're bragging about a few women who instead wear makeup for trivial social reasons which allow marginalized women to delude themselves into feeling superior to other members of their own sex for consumerist reasons, a hare-brained economic concept conceived by inept, narrow-minded simplistic pseudointellectual men? LOL! That's rich!
You're reading a bit too much into it. Make up can be an artistic-type form of expression. It's fun for a variety of reasons that, believe it or not (hope you're sitting down,) have
nothing to do with you or your pants snake. It's like guys being into video games, guns or whatever. It's a hobby. Who are you to judge why women indulge in in this particular category of consumerism? Is it not consumerism to buy a videogame? Stimulating the economy is a good thing, by the way. Take an Economics class. It creates jobs and fiscal stability. Is it not also mindless? I'm really just unsure as to why you're spending so much time analyzing and criticizing the ways in which some women choose to spend their past times. I think you're just angry because you just found out that in many cases it has nothing to do with you.
No offense, but if you don't know basic biology stuff, then perhaps you should just limit your posts to whining/complaining about fat-phobias (that have been going on since the dawn of time), instead of attempting to talk about biology and other things you obviously know nothing about. Because if you really need me to explain simple SexEd 101, and how females attract males, and how females pick the best mate, and how females test the males by pretending to flee the males advances, and how the male must give chase, etc, etc, then we're just wasting valuable time in which you could be watching the National Geographic channel and educating yourself about the birds and the bees, literally and figuratively...
No offense taken, but only because you prefaced it by discouraging me from taking offense even though you're going to be extremely condescending in the sentences to follow. Again your overview of the selection process is extremely limited. That's one way mates are selected, but there's more than one way couples get together. Most of the time a woman "pretending to flee" is her genuinely wanting nothing to do with you and instead of "giving chase" you should just leave her alone. Prisons are full of guys who didn't think she meant it when she said NO.
That may be true, but again, it's irrelevant. Sorry.
How is it irrelevant when you claim women wear make up to attract men?? I accept your insincere, out of place apology though.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much...
How is one line in direct response to your allegations "too much"? Of course, anything that is against your opinion is "too much." You're obviously someone who believes every woman not only wants his d!k but is putting effort into attaining it! And if a woman says "no" well you have a retort for that, don't you.. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." I guess you think Shakespeare was a rapist apologist?
It's just a simple case of "If it ain't broke, then why try to fix it?"
Because Hollywood producers know there is a whole market they weren't tapping into until very recently. Thankfully, as illustrated by Mad Max, the new Ghostbusters and Amy Schumer flicks it's obvious they're finally starting to catch on that women buy tickets too.
I imagine that when the worldwide obesity epidemic gets to the point where everybody is so ashamed of their own fatness that they can't stand seeing healthy/attractive body parts in a film, then Hollywood MIGHT start to follow your advice, but until then, I wouldn't hold your breath...
Surely you know that what's attractive is widely subjective and what's healthy is vaster than the one-size-fits-all women featured in most films, right?
you seem incapable of acknowledging the fact that basic biological differences are the real reason your "alleged" fat-phobia is occurring in Hollywood, not some prejudice/"racism" against fat women by Hollywood. Sorry.
Biological differences necessitate men to put women in featured roles only if they are a size 2? That makes no sense considering a woman can get pregnant and deliver a healthy baby well up to size 12, and I'm actually being conservative. If it's about biology, I take that to mean mating. Also, surely even men like you realize that they won't be mating with every woman on screen... You do take a break from your ravenous sex drive
occasionally, right? So you're honestly incapable of enjoying the presence of a woman in the film if she doesn't do something for your nether regions? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound??
but unfortunately for your (so-called) "argument", other things going on in the day doesn't negate all the biological things going on.
It doesn't have to negate biology. I believe that most men have a higher tolerance for imperfect women than you seem to think.
Every animal is "evolved", perfectly evolved for their own niches, in fact. Hence, you don't have a point AND you don't understand evolution (in addition to basic biology). And plenty of humans eat their own poo, and unlike many dogs, they're not doing so because of malnutrition (and/or because of the smell of addictive chemicals added to dog food).
Um. 
reply
share