In much feminist theory, it is held that men are principally visual, whereas women are more tactile. Recent studies on the brain-stimulus patterns excited in men by pornography tend to bear this observation out, and as one who is susceptible to the extraordinary gravitational tug of the well-displayed decolletage, I must say that the idea has the ring of truth for me. This observation is combined with the idea of “hailing” into “subject positions” within the patriarchal order, to produce a theoretical construct in which women’s selfhood is warped by the impositions of the ”male gaze.”
So it is possible, for example, for feminists to insist that the insane practice of vulvaplasty is the result of male imposition on the idea of what pussy ought to look like. Likewise with push-up bras and clothes designed to accentuate the attributes that men, in slavish comparison with some idealized proportionality, cause women to adopt. Barbies and Bratz are men’s fault, as well, insofar as they are indices of how far women are compelled to assimilate the values imposed on them. High heels? Men like buttclenching postures and bound feet. Skirts? Women are naught but sheaths, after all. See how this works?
Left to their own natural preferences, of course, women would run things in a manner perfectly harmonious, without a trace of exploitation, in which each would receive his or her fair share, in which conflicts would be dealt with always in a mature and non-hostile way. Fortunately, some women are hoisting the rebellion against the scopophilic order onto their own shoulders.
Take that, you patriarchal bastards.
See, this is why marcotte and the gang hate you Dan. You’re what we used to call a shit-disturber.
That’s all the coherent typing I’ll be able to do for a while.
Back to the photo for more detailed sociological memorization and empathizing with this poor put-upon, stacked victim.
Clearly this topic requires a hands-on solution.
Sometimes I feel like the only man in the world who prefers “regular” sized breasts. Say, B cup, C at the most. I guess I’m just cursed to be so abnormal.
T.W. opened24 Because of the anonymity of the internet I opened up to you in ways I can’t around my friends.
Funny story:
It used to be pretty easy to get Errol Flynn to do something stupid after lunch, if you know what I mean. Hell, it used to be pretty easy after breakfast.
Well, one day on the set of Santa Fe Trail,, a couple of pranksters told Flynn there was a no starlet on the set, trying to ingratiate herself by letting stars and execs cop a feel.
Well, Flynn reared up off his chair, lurched over, honked—and Maureen O’Hara flattened him with one punch.
Moral: ya can’t always believe what you read…
No matter to what level such ‘scopophallic’ reactions are over-analyzed, it remains fact that our primary male, human, therefore animal, responses to extraordinary female ‘idealized proportionality’ are going to be an intitial surge of glandular hormones. Those reactions remain Purely Biological, the determinate of the largest number of Earth’s human population’s reactions to such excellence in stimuli. These reactions are normal, and until we are rid of everything that makes us human (or until our peckers fall off) such reactions are nothing to be shamed by.
I submit that it is fact that if too many intellectuals gather with white papers, extreme analysis, and too little exposure to ‘idealized proportionality’ you will find a collection of papers and essay such as these, finding their way into our Liberal Arts studies on too-frequent a basis. Then they are Marcottiscized into surrounding, otherwise healthy Barbies, and these often become rebellious and aloof. Unfortunate, that.
Now, to check up on the latest ‘Marketing’ News (#97 in the link, above…)
horse52 wouldn’t doubt some one analyzed those, too…maybe in relation to #78?
Nah, you’re not the only one.
More than a mouthful…
Honestly, it’s not that. It’s just that I’ve noticed large-breasted women are attracted to me.
Q: What do Lesbians like most of all in the appearance of a lover?
A: A pretty face, a nice body, and a nice rack.
Ergo, a nice rack, as Kant would have said, is a ‘Ding an sich’, a whole, a totality, a thing in itself which cannot, for some reason be reduced to constituent parts. In feminist parlance, it cannot be deconstructed.
A nice rack produces, in almost all of the males and females who love women, an evoked response that seems to be directly linked to perception. It bypasses the higher brain centers entirely, and the response, whether we deny it or not, is just there.
As an existentialist would say, reality cannot be denied.
If reality can’t be denied, then what are socialism and the Democratic Party for?
As an existentialist would say, reality cannot be defined.
By anyone but me, of course.
If the signifier is tits, the signified is tits and a referent would be… tits.
De Sausser’s theory is the shit, yo.
Bourdieu would argue that the fascination with tits is not due to a codified set of rules, nor can the fascination be thwarted or modified by any such formal system. Rather, it is a holistic response stemming from the interplay between the subject’s internalized dispositions, or habitus and his social milieu, or field.
In other words: we can’t help but look.
Sorry, ladies.
One is left to conclude that either feminists are utterly unaware of their own gender, or lie outrageously for the purposes of political gain. Anyone with the slightest experience with women knows the dress and buy fashions to please and impress other women, not men.
So which is it, feminazis? Which would you rather be, a moron or a deliberately deceptive, crass political manipulator? Cause the only door number 3 available is “both.”
I think that a lot of them are trying to impress men, as well. I mean, I have to admit being impressed sometimes. And I don’t think they mind my saying so, by and large.
Ok. I don’t comment here often, but I read regularly. Having extremely large bosoms, bestowed upon me naturally by the Great Intellect in the sky, I just want to say that I capitalize on the patriarchy and have come to the conclusion that it serves me damn well and may God bless it.
Oh, and since I’m mostly heterosexual, I dress for men.
You’re mostly heterosexual? Do tell us about the other part.
Some days I feel bad that something in my childhood short-circuited my ability to be outraged at the phallocracy.
The rest of the time, I’m driving my male friends nuts by folding my arms underneath my bosom.
We will need visual aids, of course.
Us being men and all.
Pellegri
Catholic school, 1987. Young nun in her late 50s. Yardstick. Clouds of chalkdust.
Remind me never to post comments after an evening of heavy drinking.
That friendly fire video at your place is hilarious, Zelda.
In the (approximate) words of the late Dudley Moore: “Men ‘forcing women into brassieres’? I’ve spent most of my time trying to get them out of the bloody things!”
Detachable penises highlight the conflicted nexus of chivalrous enthusiasm and philistine sentimentalism at the core of gender repression.
I’ll have my books for sale after this semester, if you want more of that.
I coulda gone all day and not seen that. A simple94 face shield could have prevent this tragic spooging.
It’s just punishment for deriving one’s livelihood from the Evil Capitalist Patriarchal Porn Machine.
That ranks right up there with hanging your purse strap right through the middle of the bosom, showing off the lucious shape of those supple curves.
Just sayin’
I think that a lot of them are trying to impress men, as well.
Sure, that’s part of the reason. But to be honest, most men don’t really notice what a woman is wearing. Ask them ten minutes later and they’ll mumble something about tight and showing off something and hot… but not what it was or why. And almost no men even are aware women have feet let alone what nifty shoes they happen to be wearing.
But the other women around? They all notice. And comment.
Men may not notice what women are wearing but they know when women look good. And when women look good, men want to marry them and give them babies. Or at least buy them a watered down margarita. It’s a scientific fact.
All I know is, I definitely notice what a woman is wearing when she isn’t wearing anything.
Does that count?
Z – That was quite funny, and kind of true.
We know what looks good, but be honest: if you wore a gunny sack and had no hair we’d still want some. Men adapt to what we have available, you can find 50 women in any crowd of 100 that will pick you apart for the slightest thing wrong or out of fashion you wear, but only 1 man in that crowd who cares if you wear high heels or that really uncomfortable outfit or not.
It ain’t the guys that are to blame for fashion and women’s really uncomfortable clothes. At least not the straight ones.
Yeah. You’d want some if that was all you were going to get. But if you could choose between a fashionable girl and a bald chick in a gunny sack, I think we know how that would end. And if you’re a decent looking chick in a room filled with gorgeous, easy blondes, you don’t bother trying to compete. You just try to be the first one drunk. At least that’s how I play it.