Women being "Dragged Along"

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
21

I’m going on British figures that I got from the National Office for Statistics. I don’t know whether the same story could be told of other similar nations like yours.

It’s just the way that I see it women still do the majority of childrearing just as men still do the majority of wage-earning. So most kids have an established bond with at least one female (usually more than one) as well as viable female role models to teach them about the more feminine aspects of life. However their father is almost invariably someone they don’t know as well, other male relatives are likewise going to be working and therefore won’t have the time that aunts and cousins and grandmothers have to spend with the kids. Given that (at least in the UK) over 7 out of 10 primary school teachers and other staff are female I’m wondering what male (or at least masculine) role models kids have these days apart from music/sports stars and action heroes, most of which are stupid, intolerant, obsessed with violence, needlessly aggressive, generally disparaging towards everyone else (in particular any woman with a brain or spirit) and as such are dreadful role models anyway…

This of course may explain (in part) why girls do so much better than boys in school (because they have easily identifiable intellectual role models) despite not having any inherently greater ability. Of course in higher education in this country you have the opposite problem where entire departments are basically staffed entirely by men. But that’s not so problematic, I feel, because the bias affects fewer people.

Another point which I perhaps failed to make in my response to Shyster’s post is that I feel that the sort of feminism which seeks to make victims of women (e.g. the argument that because women see no glamour in scientific endeavour and seek glamour as part of their femininity because they are victims of a superficial, male-driven society) is actually pretty disrespectful to women. Personally I’d rather assume that women are capable of making decisions then criticise them if they make them for superficial reasons than patronisingly believe that they can’t make decisions then excuse them when they make decisions for superficial reasons. Some women are stupid, vainglorious creatures who only have themselves to blame, just like some men are. They shouldn’t have prefabricated excuses for their behaviour…

22

I see your point, but you may have missed mine. I was discussing human brain size. Many mentally retarded individuals have oversized brains. Just because, woman generally have a smaller brain than a male does not make the intellectually inferior. Einstein had a smaller brain than most males and females. Again, I refer to Gould’s claims regarding the issue. Hum, remember Hitler was big into brain size denote intellect.

LOL, yes! I attended a Karate tournament (when my son was 10 or so) and a very diminuative Japanese woman cleaned several kick boxers clocks. I mean, these guys were the big, buff military guys. It was hilarious.

I see what you mean. The point is the Cheetah, and many critters will eat us if they are hungry, and this includes, insects. Again, we eat insects when trying to survive. Actually, chocolate covered ants are considered a delicacy in many areas.

Also, think for a moment. Do critters think regarding art, beauty, right or wrong? Some may, but most probably do not. Generally they act on instinct. We do too, but not to the same degree.

Yes, they do have sweet eyes. Again, I am an ominvore and love great steaks. Would there even be so many cows if not for our consumption of beef.

Regardless, what have cows contributed the critical thought. Many argue that we have critical thought because we left the savannah, had to find food someplace, hence we started killing critters for food. Hence, the protein led to our development.

We have cuspids, we are build to eat critters. Do not misunderstand, I am a big time supporter of the Humane Society, and care for critters. All my pets have come from shelters or rescue societies. But, again, critters, especially dogs and cats are carnivores too.

The difference is that a cow will look a your dead body and go on grazing, a dog or cat will how or cry for you when you are gone. I know. They do miss their humans.

It has been remarked, that instead of our erecting radio beacons to alert other possible civilizations of our presence, we ought instead, to be hell-bent on building camouflage. For pity the day humanity is discovered by a more intelligent, alien civilization; if, that is, higher intelligence automatically treats lesser intelligence the way we’ve treated the other animal species here on earth.

Just my two-cents,
Michael
[/quote]
:smiley:

LOL, yeah, we are rather barbaric aren’t we all.

With regards and my two cents too.

Smiles,

aspacia

Time for a nice bubble bath and a glass of Merlot.

23

Well I’m glad you all had a good time arguing :smiley: to tell you all the truth I’m not a hundred percent convinced of my own arguement. never the less, if there is a dimorphism in the analytical capability it is slight for the most part, and there are other explanations for women not being as predominant in the sciences, and maths. I still really like blackmores theory, but the selection could go both ways. Anyways peace ladies I luv ya all :wink:

24

Hi Aspacia,

Thank you for your reply.

Remember as well that Hitler believed 2+2=4. Which is to say, the truth of a factual matter is independent of the truthholder. Still, we seem to be on the same page about brain size. I’d certainly never advocate for digging-out those giant head-calipers again. It wasn’t so long ago I read that some anthopologist’s believe that since at least Neanderthal times, evolutionary processes appear to be selecting for smaller head size. You’re probably aware (even moreso as a mother) of the delicate balance between human head size and the maximum viable dimension of a woman’s pelvis.

Nor would there have been as many Roman slaves had their masters not seen fit to breed them. :wink:

Yes, I’ve heard. What’s more, integrated across the span of human existence the average lifespan is said to have been roughly 18 years. It has, therefore, been critically important for human survival that young males, charged with testosterone, have raped just about anything having a vagina that was vaguely human. Had the males of our species (or females - it might not have mattered which - as long as someone got busy) been less aggressive we’d almost surely not be here to remark on the fact. As I’ve remarked in an earlier thread, “They raped, therefore I am.” And yet I doubt anyone would argue the case for modern-day rape on the merit that it once was crucial for our survival. The same could be said for carnivorism. The world has changed a great deal since we first scurried across the savannah.

Admittedly, Aspacia, I suspect that I’m well past the point where I could be argued back into keeping pets or imbibing blood meals. There’s a nice quote by Augustine (a man I quote part-time and despise full-time) that I think might sum it up for both of us

“Dilige et quod vis fac.”
“Love, and do as you will.”

Enjoy the Merlot.

Cheers,
Michael

25

God(ot) wrote:

I hear what you’re saying you snuggly little cuddle cake :smiley: :smiley: I don’t think it is men that are the driving force behind making women “vainglorious creatures”, it is the consumerist Western society.

from:http://www.healthyplace.com/communities/Eating_Disorders/body_image_advertising.asp
[i]
Some researchers believe that advertisers purposely normalize unrealistically thin bodies, in order to create an unattainable desire that can drive product consumption. “The media markets desire. And by reproducing ideals that are absurdly out of line with what real bodies really do look like…the media perpetuates a market for frustration and disappointment. Its customers will never disappear,” writes Paul Hamburg, an assistant professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School.

The average woman sees 400 to 600 advertisements per day, and by the time she is 17 years old, she has received over 250,000 commercial messages through the media. Only 9% of commercials have a direct statement about beauty, but many more implicitly emphasize the importance of beauty–particularly those that target women and girls. One study of Saturday morning toy commercials found that 50% of commercials aimed at girls spoke about physical attractiveness, while none of the commercials aimed at boys referred to appearance. Other studies found 50% of advertisements in teen girl magazines and 56% of television commercials aimed at female viewers used beauty as a product appeal. This constant exposure to female-oriented advertisements may influence girls to become self-conscious about their bodies and to obsess over their physical appearance as a measure of their worth.

69% of girls in one study said that magazine models influence their idea of the perfect body shape, and the pervasive acceptance of this unrealistic body type creates an impractical standard for the majority of women.
[/i]

Now they’re doing it to boys and men as well. Gotta go, my battery is dying.

26

Hi Shyster,

It’s an interesting point you make. This idea of accepting nothing, save an arbitrary image of “perfection,” has by now thoughly permeated our culture. The female bodyshape we’ve come to worship (massive breasts coupled with a narrow waist) is naturally owned by only a few freaks here and there. I heard recently on NPR that the high-school graduation gift most often asked for by young women is…are you ready for this? A boob-job. My wife hadn’t heard the story, but when I asked her what did she think young women most ask for as a graduation gift, she replied, “breast implants” without even skipping a beat. :confused:

As I’ve said, this intolerance for accepting nothing but “the best” pervades our culture. Think, for example, of the obscure fact that most families used to own a piano or some other musical instrument. Family and friends would often join together and sing for the simple pleasure of hearing their combined voices. Up this way, it was more common to have a fiddle. Neighbors would gather in someone’s (usually the largest) kitchen for what was known as a “kitchen junket.” They’d move the tables against the wall to dance their asses off, sing (everyone knew the words to all the popular songs) and pass the hootch around.

Contrast this with modern life, where we’ve come to listen to only a few “ideal” voices selected from the millions. We’ve come to be ashamed of our own voices. Why listen to our own gnarly voices when streaming from our earbuds are only the “best” of voices? Just about the only song most of us sing together is “Happy Birthday.” And that makes us cringe.

In fact, the best voices you’ll will ever hope to hear are owned by the people you love - including your own. Working in the forest with my axe and peavy, I sometimes stop for minutes at time just to sing. Given that I listen to the Hermit Thrush it’s only fair they should also listen to me. What’s more. I play with acoustic resonances and reverberations. Everyone knows to sing in the shower, but I had an idea from an ancient film, Agnes of God, wherein, a young Novice would lie on her back up in the bell tower and sing latin vespers into the open bell. These days, I sample the acoustics of building vestibules, subway tunnels…two summers past I replaced the waterpump in a 185 foot deep well-shaft out in my yard. I discovered that a certain bass aria from Bach’s, St. Matthew Passion sounded especially rich - gorgeous, I dare say - when sung into the open pipe-end.

Now, I don’t exect any of you will put away your MP3 players anytime soon. But perhaps once in a while, instead of popping your buds on in the morning, why not leave them off and resolve instead to listen to your own sweet voice, if just for that day? Better yet, go up to someone you love, look them dead in the eye, and start singing a song that you both know. Sing it as carefully and as beautifully as you can. Put your entire heart into it. You’ve my word on it that within a few bars they’ll rip off their own earbuds and be singing with you.

I’ll close with an anonymous quote about a woman’s beauty that has always intrigued me.

“You don’t love a woman beacause she is beautiful; she’s beautiful because you love her.”

Best,
Michael

27

This is amusing as I did get the name ‘someoneisatthedoor’ from a play by Samuel Beckett. I’d happily be Godot (i.e. the person who knocks at the door but never comes in, the phantom character) in the stage production of Ilovephilosophy.com

Of course this is true, though I always have certain problems with ‘western’. Saying that, I use it myself so I’m not going to criticise…

However, you did say:

Thus implying that it is a basic sexism that keeps women in general from pursuing technoscientific endeavours, rather than consumerist society (something much bigger and more general).

Anyhow, on with your comments:

As I’ve said a couple of times before I don’t think that there is an overriding association between being thin and being beautiful as a female. Look as Kylie’s ass, probably the most famous in the world. It’s actually slightly too big for the rest of her body and from what I remember bigger than it used to be. This may be age, but in the increased volume of her ass we haven’t seen any drooping which we’d expect, suggesting that the increase in volume isn’t due to increased fat deposits but due to cosmetic surgery. I suggest to you that Kylie actually made her ass look fatter so as to make it more beautiful (to the wolves and jackals of consumerist society).

More so I see a deliberate sending out of conflicting images about female beauty. Sometimes the adverts make out that the ideal female body shape is that of a titless ten year old. Other times they make out that unless you’ve got the broad hips, the curvy ass and bouncing boobs that you are a physical failure. Compare that to the two basic idols of male beauty (I recognise of course that male beauty consumerism is like that they give to 13 year old girls, i.e. basic, stupid and immature) - the pretty boy and the hunk, with no space for variation. To me this denotes that female consumerism is so much more advanced and subtle, managing to make even genetically beautiful women feel like they are ugly. If you are pretty and slender then you’ll feel like you need tits. If you have the tits but aren’t so slender (as most women with larger breasts aren’t) then you feel like you have to diet yourself back to being a stick insect.

Of course for most women dieting is the easiest means to achieving ‘looking better, feeling better’. Look at the cast of friends by the end. At the start they were healthy, fleshy young things full of energy. By the end they looked tired, starved, overworked, awkward, bony, uncomfortable. I used to quite fancy the actress who played Monica, but in the last couple of seasons before it finished she’d actually lost weight from when she started. I stopped fancying her.

This is unsurprising to me, physical beauty is blatantly something that is sold to females more than males, such stats only bear out what one could demonstrate in almost any given advert break during the day. Of course we’ve moved on somewhat from the early 20th century where the logic (for women) was ‘buy beauty products, get to be beautiful, get man to provide money and a home, continue to spend money on beauty products to maintain man’s giving of money and home’ and that was more or less the end of it. A lot of women have wised up, a lot of men aren’t so shallow (I’m overlooking deviations from heterosexuals for the sake of simplicity) but the advertisers have got a lot more cunning, or possibly just more vague.

This is somewhat simplistic as a psychological explanation, but a lot of people are psychologically simplistic, so maybe it’s accurate.

Going back to my earlier comment I’d say that there is more than one standard, there have to be SOME women who live to ‘the standard’ otherwise one would have no examples of that standard. However when you have lots of different, conflicting standards you can make even those who live up to some of them feel like they aren’t living up to others. And hence sell more products to them. Of course the connections between the ice-cream industry and the cosmetics industry are not well publicised, but anyone who cares to look can find out the relevant information. Not to mention the manufacturers of antidepressants and so forth…

Like I say, the beauty product advertising aimed at men is like that aimed at 13 year old girls. It’s silly, superficial, basic. And it seems that only haircare products have made a great impact, men haven’t taken to clothing fashion, facial make-up and cosmetic surgery to anything like the extent that women have, except conceivably in the latter case. I can’t remember the figures but the number of cosmetic operations in the UK last year was a massive increase on the year before and one of the main reasons cited was that more men were taking that route to ‘beauty’. I imagine most of those operations were tummy tucks and jowl reshapings, rather than anything involving the genitals. I could be wrong.

28

Michael,

My family would sing together all the time…“Joy to the World” and “American Pie” stand out in my memory the most. I come from a family of singers…Aunt was a pro Blues singer who opened for the likes of such people as Roy Orbison, I’m related to an Uber-famous legend I’ll call Mr.Lizard, and I have cousins and sisters who are good enough to make money off the craft. Alas, compared to them,my singing is crap. Still, I like to sing, and I’m the best dancer…so it’s something. It’s great that others carry on the singing family tradition. :smiley:

Someonegetthedamndoor,

The thing about the images of women in the media is that they are not real. They are the 7% of the population who meet the “beauty” criteria at any given time and have the benefit of pro make-up,hair,and the magic of Photoshop to make them perfect. Unattainable standards of beauty keep women and girls spending money,and that is the whole point.

If a girl/woman looked at models/actresses and thought “Hey,I’m just as pretty as her”, they may decide to save their money. Of course, to prevent this, the same ad agencies push ice cream,chocolate,and other pound-adding food products. These food products are flogged as self-rewards,substitutes for sex,replacements for shopping addictions,etc. etc. Moms get the additional pressure of high calorie foods marketed to their children and time-saving “instant” meals which are usually high-fat,high-carb choices. Then there’s the “gluttony as part of holiday celebrations” marketing ploy which tries to make women feel bad unless she prepares 2500+ calorie-a-meal feasts.

Then they bring on the megabucks weight loss industry to reinforce feelings of guilt and inadequacy.

This was written tongue-in-cheek, but the deeper meaning is that a woman who removes herself from gender pressures by being more man-like is often excused from meeting impossible standards of beauty. If I am directing,filming,filling admin functions,etc. (which is what I do 90% of the time I’m working) I usually dress “boyish”, (jeans,t-shirt,cap,runners or mannish suit and tie) because I am taken more seriously by both the men and women I work with when I do so. I call my Miss Pain gear my “monkey-suit” to further reinforce this gender-neutral image.

I find this interesting:

Most women are pear-shaped…so the real norm is having an ass and thighs which are “disproportionately” large. You are aware of the manipulation, yet you still see an ass that is “too big” for the rest of her body.

29

shyster wrote

Indeed shy!
Waist measurement to hip measurment is a rough idea of fertility, the proportions of breasts are secondary. I feel western media places more influence on breasts than other cultures.
note. When a woman does a sexy pose she generally twists her sholders in relation to her hips so as to present to the camera large hips - small waist dimensions. [ sometimes she uses her upper arms to press her breats together and up, wears skimpy clothing, show a lot of leg, navel and clevage… Im sorry what was I talking about…]
A few years ago ‘J.-the ass- Lo’ was voted the sexiest woman in the world…
…mmm J.Lo…

30

Ha :smiley:

Sure sure, but do you agree that there is no one monolithic version of this, that it is designed in a plural manner to try to capture as many different women as possible?

Fair enough

I’m perfectly aware of this but I stand by my claim. Even adjusting for the natural pear shape (my own female of choice has a considerably larger figure than Kylie) I maintain that Kylie’s ass is disproportionately large. If you asked me my opinion on most celebs I’d say that their ass was disproportionately small because I have a pretty ‘natural’ view of what women look like. Take Jordan (Katie Price) for example, who obviously has fake breasts - her ass doesn’t have anything like the right degree of protrusion given its overall mass and volume.

I think that I’m perhaps revealing a little too much about the terms in which I view the world so I’ll stop there before I really embarass myself.

31

mescalinespiritguide wrote:

Of course.

That’s awesome, you’re smarter and more open-minded than the average bear.

You’re alright,mate! A good guy all around.

32

Mescaline? Never tried it…

33

The younger generations of females are filling the niches in tech fields quite fast. Perhaps because they were not given just Barbies and little ovens to play with. Moms my age and younger bought tech toys for our daughters and nieces more so then dolls and ovens. Move over G.I Joe and make room for G.I Jane. I am still waiting for Barbie to own a stealth Bomber or a tank. I know they gave her a Lab one year.

34

No offence but I don’t buy the ‘give em toys, watch em become type X person’ explanation at all. I don’t think that it is relevant at all…

35

Yes and no. It helps establish childhood fantasies/dreams which lead to goal setting later in life. If you are raised thinking that Housewifery is awesome, you are more likely to become a housewife. Is it the be-all-end-all? Certainly not, but it de-stigmatizes those goals.

36

I baked a really wonderful loaf of french bread and then a few days later made a chocolate Babka. The experience was much better than my ability to install computer parts.

37

I was given dolls, tea sets, dresses, etc. My brothers G.I Joe and cars. They stopped giving me dolls when I and My dolls started fighting G.I Joe in the dirt with my brothers. The dresses were replaced with bluejeans when they realized I would not stop climbing trees, walls, and playing football with my brothers. The tea sets went out the door when I started experimenting with chemicals around the house and using the tea sets to mix the stuff. (By the way a magnifying glass can melt little plastic cups pretty easy and it can also cause a pretty neat explosion with household chemicals in the cups.)
Brothers worked outside doing repairs and yard work I cleaned dishes and toilets.
You know sometimes things just backfire on you. I did on my parents.
My older sister on the otherhand totally girlie fem. It worked on her. My oldest brother can cook, likes to keep a clean house and work on cars. The other brother totally manly man. Womens work is never done by him. Interesting how things work out ain’t it.
50/50 Giving strict Gender things really does not work out all the time but, it does a significant amount of time work out the way it is supposed to. Perhaps it means no matter how you are raised you will follow your own genes and instincts.

38

Wow, I’ve read some of this threat and am not shocked at the silliness of it. Keep it real, please.

Breasts, real ones, feel great and look great moving around, and that’s why they’re enjoyed. On a fairly trim body a pair of large breasts are on stage. It’s all breast and none of the action can be attributed to fat.

I feel sorry for women with small breasts , because there’s nothing that you can do to make them grow. Men, other than the penis issue, can work out to improve the external look of their body. Any guy can make muscle if they eat and work out correctly. So, there is a “cosmic unfairness” to the whole female breast issue, and that’s what drives the breast implant craze. The sad thing about it is that a person could die in such surgery.

Meanwhile, fake breasts had to have been invented by people that simply thought that size was the issue, thus I question their nature. Many such breasts have no sag and wiggle, are hard, or the most scary, make sounds!

I won’t provide details, but I once dated this extremely attractive German girl that had exceptionally perfect looking breasts that I didn’t even mildly suspect. Then, during an intimate moment, they “glunked” like the sound made when you replace a giant water cooler bottle. Still they were a nine out of ten, but for real, I got a little scared and it made me sad.

So, that was just a glimpse at my philosophy of breasts.

39

As a woman with small ones I would not trade them for any larger size. Have you seen what women look like with large breasts when they are old? Some need a Red Rider to keep them from dragging. I imagine having silicone flopping around inside would stretch that old skin painfully. And the back pain, no thanks. If you don’t like me the way I am, you are not good enough for me.

40

So what do you guys think about these generalisations?

  • Women tend to enjoy anticipation more than men
  • Women tend to prefer talking about something where men prefer to go and do it.
  • Women tend to prefer imagining something taking place where men do not derive as much enjoyment from imagining - they tend to get frustrated with not actually being able to go and do it.