The Philosophical Aesthetics of Bouncing Breasts

Social Forums Non-Philosophical Chat
1

The Philosophical Aesthetics of Bouncing Breasts
I had a conversation the other day with Arcturus Descending about the aesthetic value of a GIF. displaying a voluptuous set of knockers bouncing up and down. AD contended that the GIF. objectified women. I begged to differ, of course, claiming that the GIF. was a sublime display of natural beauty, and that the perception of it being raunchy, or objectifying to women was based in a corrupted view of human sexuality.

Arcturus, in my opinion, is basing her reasoning out of feministic ideology. As many of you, probably, know - feminists, in general, are anti-nature, that is to say, they resent the evolutionary nature of gender dynamics, e.g., men evolved to hunt/go to war - women evolved to nurture. In their resentment, they imagine that the male gender has been conspiring to oppress them since the dawn of time, and that gender and gender roles are mere social constructs with no basis whatsoever in biology/evolution. Getting more to the point, Arcturus doesn’t realize, or desire to accept that men are attracted to busty females, because it’s a natural indicator of feminine fertility/virility.

As prior mentioned, I don’t view the bouncing breasts as objectifying, but rather inspiring; they inspire me with an unfathomable appreciation for cosmic duality, or symmetry.

Thoughts?

2

You cut off the head, which indicates that you are more interested in the two fatty sacks than the woman.

3

I didn’t make the GIF. But even if I did, that wouldn’t support your claim; the things being focused on in this thread are the breasts.

4

You selected the gif. You could have picked another.

If you focus on the breasts, then you admit to focusing on objects. And thus objectifying the woman.

5

Not neccsarily. A better path would be to just re-invent a past that suits their own disposition. Kind of exactly what you just did.

That past dont exist. It just a story we tell ourselves.

6

It seems like you are erroneously conflating two different meanings of the word; sure, boobs are objects, but that doesn’t mean they somehow degrade women, if you focus upon them, just like it wouldn’t be degrading to focus on the six-pack abs of a male.

7

If you focus on the abs of the males, then you are objectifying him.

The problem with objectification comes when a person wants to be treated as a individual but the habit of objectificstion is so ingrained that she(or he) isn’t treated that way. You can’t think of her/him as anything more than boobs/abs.

8

I think “objectification” is a misnomer in this context. A more apt word would be “appreciation”; I don’t view the female as lessor, but greater due to her voluptuousness.

9

Why would voluptuousness make her greater?

Who she (or he) is… Makes her great… Not what hangs off of her.

Anyways.
It’s not a question of lessor or greater, but how you interact with someone.

10

Come on, what he’s really hoping for is that, even though it’s just a gif, maybe, just maybe, if he stares at it long enough those boobs will pop out and he will actually get to see her…

[size=200]…NIPPLES![/size]

For most men like this, what is objectified [or ossified if you prefer] is their brain.

11

If he had simply shown a pair of naked breasts, then he could argue that is a display of aesthetic beauty and therefore is not an objectification of women. The breast is reduced to form, line, color and thus becomes pure art.

12

From personal experience, most large breasted girls don’t mind others looking. Considering how she’s shaking them for the camera, I think that not only she doesn’t mind, she enjoys the attention.

Without too much sugarcoating, I suspect the girls who object to it are simply flat and jealous to the bone.

So he is allowed to appreciate the breast but not the rest of the body? And what does them being naked or not have to do with anything?

Let’s be honest, the only girls who are truly afraid of being objectified are those that can’t offer anything else but their body, which is exactly why they are objectified.

13

And the men who support them are white knights.

14

l

15

If he reduces it to ‘form’ then he could avoid arguments about objectification. It would become a legitimate ‘art object’ .

People are objectified and it doesn’t depend on what they have to offer.

16

And with a bra on they don’t have a form? :laughing: . He could easily argue that according to his artistic tastes, breasts are much more beautiful with a bra on.

The girls who can offer more than just a body wouldn’t be afraid of it though, since they could keep the man (or woman) interested with their charming personality.

17

Oh, and I almost forgot, those who aren’t even physically attractive are the ones who are butthurt the most cause they can’t even get the one night stands that the hot but dumb objectified girl gets. They always get ignored and forgotten :frowning:

18

You don’t like bouncing breasts? Don’t look at them. And let the ones who love to bounce their breasts bounce them. And let the people who like to watch others bounce their breasts watch in peace.

Freedom for all, no?

19

You got it all wrong. See that be where it originates. Feminists (ugly) not wanting standards of quality to not be based on beauty.

Your version is retarded.

20

She already has a bra in the gif. My point was that he could have posted a picture of a naked breast and he would have had better claim for aesthetic appreciation.

Maybe they are not afraid. Maybe they don’t want to deal with the bullshit that comes with it.