« Reunion review: a note on memory, myopia, and grace | Main | Quick note about nepotism »

October 24, 2005



They are showing off to men they think are desireable while trying to intimidate men they feel are weaker.

Weaker than the woman or weaker than the other men? This sentence doesn't make a lot of sense.


As the author of the blog Reflections on Playboy, I have to speak up here. I don't appreciate the conclusions you jump to about why I love Playboy. Although Beggan and Allison defend Playboy as ardently as you condemn it, the three of you seem to agree that I'm a passive receptacle for images of gender in the media rather than a media consumer with a mind of his own. I find this notion not only personally insulting but politically misguided, as I've explained in this post:
Don't worry, Hugo; it's totally safe for work, all words and no pictures.


Don't ask me why my above comment is italicized from beginning to end.


Brian, I've got a ton of topics to wade through. I'll get to ya.


No problem. I'll wait.


Perhaps coming from a younger angle I could shed some light on the "women dressing provocatively for men" thing.

Most females as I know dress for fashion, titilating men doesn't come in to the decision making for what to wear that day (unless it's on a night out). As most know fashion changes like the weather. Fads come and go. And when a young woman is wearing clothing considered sexually provocative eg. midriffs, hipster jeans it's more likely to be because that's what's in fashion magazines and what her friends are wearing. It's also what she's seen being considered feminine and womanlike (I don't need to give examples, just look anywhere and you'll see them). She may or may not be aware men consider the outfit attractive. As it has been mentioned here, preteens who've yet to even complete puberty often find dressing that way as method of "trying on womanhood" as this is what those type of clothes represent to them. I'm not saying this is a good thing, I think it completely fails at trying to separate a female's identity from a her ability to be sexually attractive (as in: it is dependent on it). Notice how many girls as soon as they hit puperty drop the hobbies born from sexless childhood for make-up and bimbo fashion? And as that consumes the next 7 years of their adolescence, what are they left with at the end of it? Eating disorders and poor self-esteem* (as I've witnessed).

*admitedly simplistic answer, but sadly often quite true.


For your needs --
biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]biagra[/url]

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004