Men are scientifically more shallow.
I guess that’s why Jesus had to tell a man to stop looking and never a woman.
Note: face, beauty (not sex appeal) and attention (split seconds).
Men are scientifically more shallow.
I guess that’s why Jesus had to tell a man to stop looking and never a woman.
Note: face, beauty (not sex appeal) and attention (split seconds).
The sexual dimorphism for this metric is obviously lowest on Asians.
Evidence is presented showing that body fat distribution as measured by waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) is correlated with youthfulness, reproductive endocrinologic status, and long-term health risk in women. Three studies show that men judge women with low WHR as attractive. Study 1 documents that minor changes in WHRs of Miss America winners and Playboy playmates have occurred over the past 30-60 years. Study 2 shows that college-age men find female figures with low WHR more attractive, healthier, and of greater reproductive value than figures with a higher WHR. In Study 3, 25- to 85-year-old men were found to prefer female figures with lower WHR and assign them higher ratings of attractiveness and reproductive potential. It is suggested that WHR represents an important bodily feature associated with physical attractiveness as well as with health and reproductive potential. A hypothesis is proposed to explain how WHR influences female attractiveness and its role in mate selection.
Hello sexual selection, tied intimately to natural selection.
also connected to “desire and capability for having children” p7 or 299.
so K-type women may have better WHR.
Normal weight women have the most positive attributes associated.
Overweight category was universally unattractive.
It’d be nice to see a male study on this. I think Western women would want more children if fewer men were obese.
Why Asians are considered youthful but not sexy (they’d usually fall in the underweight group):
The variables of attractiveness, sexiness, and good health were located close to each other, suggesting that subjects perceived them to be closely related.
Attributes of desire and capability for having children were located close to each other in the solution space but farther from attractiveness, sexiness, and good health, implying that subjects did not perceive a great similarity between these two sets of attributes.
Finally, the attribute of youthfulness was located alone and away from both sets of other attributes. Thus, subjects apparently did not perceive youthfulness to be related to any other measured attributes of good health, sexiness, attractiveness, and desire and capability for having children.
So there’s that. Nobody’s jealous.
Figure N7 was located closer to attractiveness, sexiness, and good health as well as desire and capability for having children than any other Figure.
Normal weight for frame (and race) + most nubile WHR would make sense.
More of those genes survived.
Figure N9 was located closest to desire and capability for having children, whereas Figure N8 was located between Figure N7 and Figure N9. The figure N10 was grouped along with overweight figures, which were not perceived to be closely associated with any of the attributes under investigation. Underweight female figures, U7 and U8, were associated only with youthfulness. However, underweight figures with high WHR (U9 and U10) were perceived as neither youthful nor healthy, in spite of the fact that their depicted body weight was quite similar to figures with lower WHR.
Women with an atrocious WHR (boy hips, no waist) and under or overweight for their skeleton are objectively unattractive from an evolutionary standpoint. This would apply whether it’s a Jap, a Ruskie or an American.
Stop calling sexy science ‘racist’ because it doesn’t share your fetish.
This chart drags you harder than I ever could.
Your Asian girlfriend with the boy hips is approximately as attractive to the world as the average WHR white fat chick. That’s your level, accept it.
It’s also a fact we cannot accurately perceive attractiveness of the racial outgroup as well as our own, so an awareness of ingroup flaws changes nothing.
Most modern women straight up don’t look healthy, whether they’re American, European or, yes, Asian.
Stop trying to make boy hips = sexy happen. It’s not going to happen.
Look at the damn gradient on that underweight thing. The solution to fat women isn’t anorexia. That also suggests bad genes. In fact, at least the fat percentage on slightly overweight 0.7 WHR women suggests femininity and fertility.
“Overall, it seems that subjects inferred reproductive capability from body fat”
What does a foetus feed from?
“Thus, it seems that although WHR is related to health and attractiveness, body weight is perceived to be related to reproductive capability”
“As a group, underweight figures were assigned the lowest reproductive capability, followed by overweight figures and then normal weight figures.”
Suck on that, soyboys.
You actually tend to downgrade. That’s why the Democrat-voting soyboys all want an Asian girlfriend and expressly don’t want kids with it.
“Overall, it appears that both fatness and thinness are perceived as unattractive, and such figures are not perceived as having especially high reproductive potential. “
Not womanly. Remember that word? This:
Not girly, not sexy, not cute, not hot. Womanly.
You can’t discuss women in a reproductive, evolutionary context without it.
Thus, consistent with the present findings, men did not find thin or underweight figures attractive.
If you only care for other male opinions.
There is some evidence that suggests that being extremely underweight or overweight can have adverse effects on female reproductive functions.
Ya don’t say?
A critical body mass has been shown to be significantly related to the onset of menstrual cycle and its maintenance (Frisch & McCarthur, 1974), although recent evidence (DeRidder et al., 1990) suggests that it is the body fat distribution, rather than body fat mass or body weight, that is related to early pubertal development.
Distribution varies by race.
Africans are the most pronounced in women then Europeans shapely but delicate then Asians last – no shape, very yang flesh (broad but flat or full in the middle like cortisol fat) and almost nothing to distribute.
Am I imagining all of this?
Underweight females (15% below ideal body weight) have been reported to have a higher incidence of oligomenorrhea (menses 35 days or more apart) and amenorrhea and to have a higher prevalence of ovu-latory infertility than normal weight females (Green, Weiss, & Daling, 1986).
Underweight women also give birth to infants who are small and growth delayed, and such infants often have permanently impaired intellectual and physical development (Supy, Steer, McCusker, Steele, & Jacobs, 1988).
Menstrual dysfunction and ovulatory infertility also occur more often in females who are 20% above ideal body weight (Green et al., 1986). Morbid obesity in females with high WHR has been shown to increase the degree of androgenicity (increased percentage of free testosterone) and associated menstrual and ovulatory problems (Kirschner & Samojilik, 1991). Thus, the reproductive success of a woman may be low in spite of a high level of fat deposits if the regional distribution of fat is not appropriate, that is, gynoid.
Finally, the finding that underweight figures were assigned high rankings for youthfulness but not for attractiveness (or other attributes related to reproductive potential) is difficult to reconcile with some evolutionarily based mate selection hypotheses.
Normal men aren’t pedos.
Youthfulness and health have been proprosed as absolute criteria for female attractiveness (Symons, 1987).
Stick with health.
Health has good or bad, you have no negative way to assess youth e.g. immature.
Features of physical appearance associated with youth supposedly provide the strongest and most reliable cues for female reproductive potential. The present finding illustrates that the relationship of youthfulness and attractiveness is quite complex.
A woman who is judged to be attractive is also found to be youthful; however, youthfulness alone does not make a woman attractive. Apparently, youthfulness is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition, for determination of female physical attractiveness.
also, don’t try to chalk this up to taste:
“Furthermore, if the ideal of female attractiveness is arbitrary and ever changing, no evidence of transgenerational stability in the meaning of WHR should be found, as older men are more likely to be exposed to different ideals of attractiveness than are younger men.”
“Older men did not associate health with underweight figures, including those with lower WHR.”
TLDR: Pedos are wrong. Underweight, waistless wonders are not attractive.
Study 2, rubbing salt in that fact.
Secondary sexual characteristics convey information about reproductive potential. In the same way that facial symmetry and masculinity, and shoulder-to-hip ratio convey information about reproductive/genetic quality in males, waist-to-hip-ratio (WHR) is a phenotypic cue to fertility, fecundity, neurodevelopmental resources in offspring, and overall health, and is indicative of “good genes” in women. Here, using fMRI, we found that males show activation in brain reward centers in response to naked female bodies when surgically altered to express an optimal (∼0.7) WHR with redistributed body fat, but relatively unaffected body mass index (BMI). Relative to presurgical bodies, brain activation to postsurgical bodies was observed in bilateral orbital frontal cortex. While changes in BMI only revealed activation in visual brain substrates, changes in WHR revealed activation in the anterior cingulate cortex, an area associated with reward processing and decision-making. When regressing ratings of attractiveness on brain activation, we observed activation in forebrain substrates, notably the nucleus accumbens, a forebrain nucleus highly involved in reward processes.
These findings suggest that an hourglass figure (i.e., an optimal WHR) activates brain centers that drive appetitive sociality/attention toward females that represent the highest-quality reproductive partners. This is the first description of a neural correlate implicating WHR as a putative honest biological signal of female reproductive viability and its effects on men’s neurological processing.
Men report stronger attraction to femininity in women’s faces when their testosterone levels are high
Many studies have shown that women’s judgments of men’s attractiveness are affected by changes in levels of sex hormones. However, no studies have tested for associations between changes in levels of sex hormones and men’s judgments of women’s attractiveness. To investigate this issue, we compared men’s attractiveness judgments of feminized and masculinized women’s and men’s faces in test sessions where salivary testosterone was high and test sessions where salivary testosterone was relatively low.
This is why we need studies on men too.
Men reported stronger attraction to femininity in women’s faces in test sessions where salivary testosterone was high than in test sessions where salivary testosterone was low. This effect was found to be specific to judgments of opposite-sex faces. The strength of men’s reported attraction to femininity in men’s faces did not differ between high and low testosterone test sessions, suggesting that the effect of testosterone that we observed for judgments of women’s faces was not due to a general response bias. Collectively, these findings suggest that changes in testosterone levels contribute to the strength of men’s reported attraction to femininity in women’s faces and complement previous findings showing that testosterone modulates men’s interest in sexual stimuli.
Beauty is in the eye of the plastic surgeon: Waist–hip ratio (WHR) and women’s attractiveness
Attractiveness conveys reliable information about a woman’s age, health, and fertility. Body fat distribution, as measured by waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), is a reliable cue to a woman’s age, health, and fertility, and affects judgment of women’s attractiveness. WHR is positively correlated with overall body weight or body mass index (BMI). Some researchers have argued that BMI, rather than WHR, affects judgments of female attractiveness. To evaluate the role of WHR, independent of BMI, we secured photographs of pre- and post-operative women who have undergone micro-fat grafting surgery. In this surgery, surgeons harvest fat tissue from the waist region and implant it on the buttocks. Post-operatively, all women have a lower WHR but some gain weight whereas others lose body weight. Results indicate that participants judge post-operative photographs as more attractive than pre-operative photographs, independent of post-operative changes in body weight or BMI. These results indicate that WHR is a key feature of women’s attractiveness.
Let’s look historically. Study 5
Trends in waist-to-hip ratio and its determinants in adults in Finland from 1987 to 1997
Background: Although abdominal obesity has been shown to be an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and a variety of other diseases, secular changes in fat distribution in populations have rarely been documented.
Objective: Our objective was to assess trends in waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) in the Finnish population during a 10-y period. In addition, we investigated the associations of WHR with body mass index (BMI), age, education, and lifestyle factors.
Design: Three independent cross-sectional surveys were carried out at 5-y intervals between 1987 and 1997. Altogether, 15096 randomly selected men and women aged 25–64 y participated in these surveys.
Results: The WHR increased in both men and women during the 10-y period (P< 0.0001). In men, the strongest upward trend took place in the first 5-y period and then seemed to plateau; in women, the WHR continued to increase into the 1990s. In both sexes, the most prominent increase was observed in subjects aged ≥45 y. The WHR increased in all education-level groups, the lowest WHR being among those with the highest education. Age (18% in men, 12% in women) and BMI (33% in men, 25% in women) accounted for most of the variation in WHR, whereas only 3% was explained by education and lifestyle factors.
Conclusions: Abdominal obesity is a growing problem in Finland, especially in persons aged ≥45 y. These adverse changes in body shape continued to take place, particularly in women, in the 1990s.
Something in the food?
More history, prehistoric. Study 6
Preferred Women’s Waist-to-Hip Ratio Variation over the Last 2,500 Years
The ratio between the body circumference at the waist and the hips (or WHR) is a secondary sexual trait that is unique to humans and is well known to influence men’s mate preferences. Because a woman’s WHR also provides information about her age, health and fertility, men’s preference concerning this physical feature may possibly be a cognitive adaptation selected in the human lineage. However, it is unclear whether the preferred WHR in western countries reflects a universal ideal, as geographic variation in non-western areas has been found, and discordances about its temporal consistency remain in the literature. We analyzed the WHR of women considered as ideally beautiful who were depicted in western artworks from 500 BCE to the present. These vestiges of the past feminine ideal were then compared to more recent symbols of beauty: Playboy models and winners of several Miss pageants from 1920 to 2014. We found that the ideal WHR has changed over time in western societies: it was constant during almost a millennium in antiquity (from 500 BCE to 400 CE) and has decreased from the 15th century to the present. Then, based on Playboy models and Miss pageants winners, this decrease appears to slow down or even reverse during the second half of the 20th century. The universality of an ideal WHR is thus challenged, and historical changes in western societies could have caused these variations in men’s preferences. The potential adaptive explanations for these results are discussed.
Should’ve controlled for race.
Why not look at male WHR? Plus sperm health? Found:
- The volume of ejaculate decreases in a linear fashion with increasing BMI (suggesting an inverse relationship).
- The sperm quality and viability declines with increasing waist circumference.
- Investigators also discovered that quality of semen decreases (such as sperm viability, motility, semen volume) with increasing body size; however, no relationship was observed between sperm DNA fragmentation index and physical activity or obesity.
Latter requires time.
Various research and clinical studies suggests that subfertility in men is multifactorial i.e. several factors can impact the quality of reproductive health.
- Abnormal sperm production: Study conducted by Jensen and associates (2) suggested that abnormal BMI is very strongly linked to impaired sperm production. One of the many reasons is, abnormal metabolism of testosterone (which plays a key role in the production of healthy and viable sperms).
- Abdominal obesity and risk of metabolic disorders: According to a new study reported in the Human Reproduction (3), investigators provided statistical evidence that abnormal BMI and abdominal obesity is very strongly linked to a number of health issues (such as cardiovascular dysfunction, atherosclerosis, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and others). Needless to say that these health issues have a deleterious effect on the sexual health regardless of the body-mass index (or BMI).
- Obesity, physical activity and testosterone: Testosterone levels tends to decline in males who have a sedentary lifestyle. Various research and clinical studies indicates that aerobic activity or exercise can improve testosterone metabolism in males significantly.
1. Eisenberg, M. L., Kim, S., Chen, Z., Sundaram, R., Schisterman, E. F., & Louis, G. M. B. (2014). The relationship between male BMI and waist circumference on semen quality: data from the LIFE study. Human Reproduction, 29(2), 193-200.
2. Jensen, T. K., Andersson, A. M., Jørgensen, N., Andersen, A. G., Carlsen, E., & Skakkebæk, N. E. (2004). Body mass index in relation to semen quality and reproductive hormones among 1,558 Danish men. Fertility and sterility, 82(4), 863-870.
3. Hammiche, F., Laven, J. S., Twigt, J. M., Boellaard, W. P., Steegers, E. A., & Steegers-Theunissen, R. P. (2012). Body mass index and central adiposity are associated with sperm quality in men of subfertile couples. Human reproduction, 27(8), 2365-2372.
Yet they don’t tell men this information.
Back to women
Cross-cultural variation in men’s preference for sexual dimorphism in women’s faces.
Both attractiveness judgements and mate preferences vary considerably cross-culturally.
We investigated whether men’s preference for femininity in women’s faces varies between 28 countries with diverse health conditions by analysing responses of 1972 heterosexual participants. Although men in all countries preferred feminized over masculinized female faces, we found substantial differences between countries in the magnitude of men’s preferences. Using an average femininity preference for each country, we found men’s facial femininity preferences correlated positively with the health of the nation, which explained 50.4% of the variation among countries. The weakest preferences for femininity were found in Nepal and strongest in Japan. As high femininity in women is associated with lower success in competition for resources and lower dominance, it is possible that in harsher environments, men prefer cues to resource holding potential over high fecundity.
Asia is weird for dimorphism studies.
Hence the focus on health.
While the economy is bad, it isn’t surprising men prefer manly looking women.
It’s temporary. There’ll be a flood of divorces as the economy improves. Men will suddenly see how mannish the wife has been and be repulsed. Menopause also makes women look more mannish, including higher WHR. So much for a youth argument there.
Factors Underlying the Temporal Increase in Maternal Mortality in the United States
They don’t say more non-white mothers or more mixed race babies, so it’s wrong. They guess.
It’s like the male height preference but in women, it’s an indicator of genetic health.
It’s also class based. Upper class women have longer legs, if you studied it.
It’s culturally well-known here, and you can often spot a woman’s breeding by her legs.
Mini-skirts weren’t showing off the legs or skin, it was all about the bloodline.
Better parentage (father’s side usually), better legs. Lower class women miss this entirely. They show more skin – of stubby male-looking legs. It doesn’t work. There’s also a good way to spot men dressed as women since cellulite is a secondary sexual characteristic of women only. Smooth muscular legs are the preference of homosexual men.
I’d be interested to see a study of short female legs and female ugliness and also short female legs and fertility issues e.g. IVF use. Logically, there should be a connection.
Empty, soulless man-made crap.
Where is the elegance?
The form that isn’t functional!!!
Globalist culture is no culture.
If you want a scientist on the matter:
“If this does not appeal to you sufficiently to recognize in me a discoverer of principles, do me, at least, the justice of calling me an “inventor of some beautiful pieces of electrical apparatus.” – Nikola Tesla, 1907
I’m sick of atheist Bible-thumpers.
You fornicate, you’re exactly like them.
No special appeal to male exception.
And beauty is divine, nothing to be ashamed of.
They’re trying to imply there’s something innately wrong with the female form.
Oh, but men are attacked, are you sure?
When are you saying Men’s Health covers should be banned like Page 3?
Sex itself is nothing to be ashamed of (and prude isn’t an insult, it’s a virtue) but fornication is the thing you’re all too cowardly to mention because the real reason – your shame – is down to how you still do it. So you blame women as Lilith the succubus for tempting you.
Jesus said the man is responsible for his own eyes and his own hands and his own manhood. No woman can ruin your manhood, you sin against yourself.
Who’s got hypoagency on sexual matters?
Sex isn’t a sport or a hobby. Babymaking is serious.
What’s next, Muh Darwin? So high-T women are excused and low-T men aren’t?
They hate female sexual pleasure and resent it, even in married, chaste women. Chastity is physical self-control. That’s all. It’s self-control according to your station. You’re encouraged to have sex with your spouse if married. These “men” want to cuck others to deprive husbands the pleasure of their own wives!
For a man to be bad in bed is deliberate. Not listening to basic instructions on small changes is spite, it’s wrath. Studies show ONS women orgasm less. Women are avoiding bad lovers (casually or as husbands) and they are angry about this. They want to feel superior to women by getting their pleasure and sadistically depriving additional pleasure, over masturbation, for depriving her. This includes cruel comparisons to other women.
Christians must talk about this.
There are husbands who do this and wonder why their wife leaves. She held up her end of the conjugal bargain, a husband has a duty to perform too. He has a duty to give her carnal pleasure they agreed not to seek elsewhere.
“to love and to cherish” isn’t limited to cuddles
Immodest men for male chastity? I don’t think so. Then how is no slutting possible when you only remove half the sexual equation? You’re being hypocritical and irrational. Lust is a vice whoever you are but simply wearing a bikini doesn’t mean anything about a person’s behaviour.
Adam was a slut because he walked around completely naked.
Men walk around shirtless all the time in this heatwave and as a woman I know they want to keep cool – the same reason women strip off! Boobs get hot! Thighs heat up! Mini-skirts are ventilation! Women medically have a higher body fat percentage for our size! All things being equal, we must show more skin proportionately or get heat stroke and possibly die!
You don’t see men heating up their hands between their thighs.
It’s stupid to equate nudity with sex.
Porn has brainwashed you. They don’t even want to ban it.
If society is too hypersexualised (it is), you would.
Ah, but hypersexualisation means seeing all nudity as sexual and all attractive people as promiscuous. It changes your perceptions.
Attractive women are least promiscuous, they don’t need to be.
Ironically, the biggest prostitutes do it for ego. That’s right, by their actions, the men who criticize all women as whores are simply projecting. You’re jealous of the hookers who can charge while you prostitute yourselves (read your Bible) for free.
It is a sin against their own body so you have no right to care personally. The things strangers do has nothing to do with you.
It’s defamation to call a stranger a slut when you don’t know if that’s true but hey, they don’t care. They don’t care if it’s true. They know it’s a lie. It’s a lie intended to coddle their feelings.
Witch finder generals. Just as bad as the SJW Nazi hunters who see them in toast. I despise the slutty Republican pretending to be Christian over the hooker he’s visiting and threatening. There is less honour in faking good than being openly bad.
Chastity is an act, not an item of clothing.
Most sluts actually cover up so you have trouble spotting them. Audrey Hepburn, attempted homewrecker. She hated heels.
How do you expect the Marilyns to cover up? Can’t hide their silhouette, their walk and their feminine energy. Women like looking feminine, nothing shameful in that.
Do we shame men wearing suits?
No, it’s hatred of something pure. Something you aren’t allowed to touch or corrupt.
Everyone believes in degeneracy but it isn’t the nude body, it isn’t healthy sex and it isn’t erotica. They don’t own those sacred things (plenty of Papal art is erotica).
“I don’t think there is necessarily a connection between admiration of the female form and sluts, one can be a beauty model without being promiscuous.”
Judging by appearances is stupid.
Non sequitur after non sequitur after non sequitur.
Don’t “behavioral change” argument me.
Where’s the incentive not to fornicate if you’ll be slandered as one anyway?
These men don’t shame real sluts in their life. They treat them like ladies to get a leg over.
Why didn’t you shame the sluts who wanted to sleep with you?
That’s the real problem. They only object to sluts who aren’t slutty enough.
A virgin and a whore look the same.
I wrote about reproaches to men but women were also asked to be mindful that the conditions of youth aren’t the only beauty and you need character, like men do too.
Literally the only good part of this book.
>Women look like women, normally.
>Harassment and stalking, male superficiality and baseness.
Nobody thinks you really want the number or a chat.
There’s only one type of woman that gets solicited in the street, everyone knows it’s an insult.
Anything less than full androgyny is not hooker attire.
Looking female =/= sexual? The most matronly women have worn skirt, dress or heels. It’s a cultural norm.
Not just etiquette for kids!
It is still weird to solicit (actual word meaning) strangers in the street for any purpose, whatever American comedians tell you. Some of us are raised better. Instant bad impression, whoever you are.
She missed out the schizo verbal abuse when you try to politely, passively avoid the pervert interrupting your day.
Imagine if someone at a bus stop called you a bastard for not talking to them. Multiple times a day.
Men would be horrified. Oh, and you can’t physically defend yourself or pepper spray them, and their revolting hands might grope you…
Because they liked your “outfit”.
Gee, why do so many women dress like shit, wear huge coats in public, avoid men or get fat?
Maybe…. men’s behaviour had something, some tiny, little, fleeting influence on that?
Ask yourself: is this something ghetto trash would do?
If so, never ever do it!
You know, if a woman likes you, she can talk to you first?
Or a hey if she didn’t notice you and you’re in the same place for a while?
Avoid the circle of personal space. She can close the gap.
If she keeps it short, move along. A minimal response is basic politeness, savoir vivre.
You never see men’s mags say “15 signs she isn’t interested”.
Subtitle: and how to make a classy exit.
This would be useful.
It explains the entirety of the problem, forcing a reaction (abuse). Kinda like putting your job interviewer in a headlock. One step down from kidnapping.
So what you really have in most cases are men with no idea how an adult is supposed to behave, think you can “tease” people like in school, and worst of all, that think you can talk someone into fancying them.
The fat girls can’t do it, neither can you. Nice guy = great personality. No.
Men over-estimate their attractiveness, excessively. Not fancying you isn’t a personality flaw, it should be expected (most humans don’t fancy most humans), especially when you’re enraged about it. Doesn’t strike the casual observer as sane.
Whether someone is single doesn’t matter. Maybe, just maybe, they aren’t a slut?
Look at the statistics, young people are sleeping around less than their elders.
Those elders (Boomers, Gen X, some Y) and the young vibrants that think porn is real constantly being lecherous at them might have something to do with it. Women do not work like men. Random compliments make us feel worse. We weren’t thinking about how we looked and suddenly this sleaze has an opinion, feels entitled to tell me and thinks I should respond to it?
Like a literal magic word? (how stupid do they think women are?)
Like insincere compliments are hard to get?
Bad compliments are insults.
They make a heap of degrading assumptions.
For instance, women wear “woman” clothes because actually, they’re physically practical! A low neckline ventilates a hot bust! A breezy skirt prevents thighs from chafing (even in thin, non-anorexic women). Do I have to explain the sweat benefits of sleeveless?
Women already know this, ask women you know about the practical reasons for wearing clothes. It has nothing to do with men and entirely what we like. Not melting in summer is among them. Women probably stopped fainting because we could get some sweet, sweet breeze circulation!
If you had two globules of fat on your chest overheating your core body temperature, like a heat pad on your heart , you’d want low-cut tops as well. In the Victorian era, this was understood to be the only part you could bare – for practical reasons! Nothing to do with showing off or sex. You’re a perv.
Lingerie ads tell men what we wear has anything to do with them. Not really.
Some women try to dress to avoid male attention and need to wear deodorant under the boobs. Some women with large ones, all over. All over the boob. Sexy, right?
Most women hate compliments because most are from strangers, shallow, rude and poorly thought out.
Street harassment is totally okay if we’re allowed to pepper spray or shoot them.
Since women are the physically weaker sex and a random guy walking up to anyone, m/f, is threatening. Whoever they are. When they seem interested in taking things, willing or not, suspicions are confirmed.
It’s like lending a mugger your wallet. No, we don’t want to “talk”/give a #/”go out”.
We want to walk down a public street, in public, as an unmolested member of the public.
Huge ask, I know.
Walking down a street isn’t an invitation to impose yourself on anyone – man/woman/child.
Think how weird it would be to a man or child. No less weird to a woman.
This used to be standard protocol throughout the entire First World until the 20th century.
I think a lot of you would be shocked by how polite I am IRL. Self restraint is important.
If you compare the way schoolboys harass and intimidate one another, it’s exactly the same with street creeps.
Invasion of personal space, cutting off avenue of escape, forced conversation, rude comments, stupid questions, illegal touching, acting like you’re the one with the problem.
 do that experiment, internet! Men could not last more than an hour.
The irritating fact of boob ownership is in winter, you lose heat from them.
WHO DESIGNED THIS?