• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

woman's fashion's effect on society.

On the topic, I'd have thought that fashion has worse crimes to answer for than 'sexualisation', whatever strange puritan concept that is. The havoc it wreaks on women's' body image is appalling. Fashion, along with advertising and the media, creates a nearly impossible ideal for women to look up to, and its message is constantly forced down your throat. That's why we have ridiculous nonsense like the Kiera Knightley photoshop incident, where the image of an already conventionally-attractive woman was altered to meet 'higher' standards of beauty. On a more serious note, it's also why 1.1 million people in the UK have eating disorders.

It also affects men, though to a lesser extent. At least a man can keep his television career once he gains a few grey hairs, unlike the majority of women. :(

Pathos said:
There is no such thing as reverse sexism.



You can stereotype men, which is harmful, but sexism, racism, homophobia, all bigotry is power + privilege. There has never been any prejudice or power against men for being men.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say that it's discrimination by any means. Of course the unequal power balance means that the hypothetical woman in this situation isn't asserting privilege, so the man isn't being discriminated against. Thus, a man objectifying a woman is worse than a woman objectifying a man. However, in this situation wouldn't it be better to lead by example and not to stereotype at all? The crimes aren't equal, but they're both crimes nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
goldenquagsire said:
I wouldn't say that it's discrimination by any means. Of course the unequal power balance means that the hypothetical woman in this situation isn't asserting privilege, so the man isn't being discriminated against. Thus, a man objectifying a woman is worse than a woman objectifying a man. However, in this situation wouldn't it be better to lead by example and not to stereotype at all? The crimes aren't equal, but they're both crimes nonetheless.
Click to expand...

Of course it's preferable, and the right thing to not stereotype at all. There is no question about that at all and I don't want to send any other message. I do, however, want to make it clear that it is not equal; both things should be dealt with but they can't be dealt with unless we recognize the difference between them.
 
Pathos said:
Of course it's preferable, and the right thing to not stereotype at all. There is no question about that at all and I don't want to send any other message. I do, however, want to make it clear that it is not equal; both things should be dealt with but they can't be dealt with unless we recognize the difference between them.
Click to expand...
That's fair enough. I think we're reading from the same hymnal in that respect. :)
 
enekoiru said:
What does 'dress as sluts' mean? How do you judge if someone has been more sexually promiscuous than you would prefer them to be based on what they are wearing that day? Does the number of people she's had sex with go down if she's wearing sweatpants and a jacket?

'Disregarded' isn't the word you want. That implies there is some way I could dress where men would reliably give a damn about what I have to say on subjects I know more than them on. There's no way to win; I might as well wear what I want to wear.Everything she wears is ridiculous. It's kind of awesome. But yes she does wear things that cover less than those outfits so there is some semblance of a point; why the fuck would you make moral judgments on someone for what they're wearing that day?

Quick note: very tempted to infract anyone referring to people as 'sluts' after this point. Let's not go there.
Click to expand...

took me about two days to reply to this post because i was honestly confused about what in the hell you were saying. finally figured it out five minutes ago as i was taking a shower that we're not even arguing about the same point. you're saying that it's bad for women who dress immodestly to be written off as a "slut," where i'm saying that it's bad for women who dress modestly to be written off as an "ugly dumb chick." like, if an argument is supposed to be something like ->*<- with the two arrows representing clashing viewpoints, we're sort of being like <- -> and don't know where the hell the viewpoint even is.
 
Pwnemon said:
took me about two days to reply to this post because i was honestly confused about what in the hell you were saying. finally figured it out five minutes ago as i was taking a shower that we're not even arguing about the same point. you're saying that it's bad for women who dress immodestly to be written off as a "slut," where i'm saying that it's bad for women who dress modestly to be written off as an "ugly dumb chick." like, if an argument is supposed to be something like ->*<- with the two arrows representing clashing viewpoints, we're sort of being like <- -> and don't know where the hell the viewpoint even is.
Click to expand...

No, the point is that you cannot judge someone's clothing as 'modest' or 'immodest' and make further conclusions based on that. It is two sides of the same coin and if you would stop judging people at all that would be cool.
 
I think you still missed the point of the second paragraph; there is no way to not be written off.
 
sakura said:
is it just me, but is modern fashion making woman and even girls seem more like sex objects? a lot of these clothes leave nothing to the imagination.
Click to expand...

The idea that women should be 'imagined' naked (modern fashions or no) is sorta turning them into sex objects, ne?

(also seconding everything GQ said)
 
Lady Gaga doesn't limit herself. I think that's what Pwnemon meant.

Pathos said:
Here, I have a question. Why can't women go topless, but men can?
Click to expand...
Men can't just about as much as women can't, women's nipples are only considered more gross than men's nipples on TV.

Seriously. What kind of douchebag goes to work without a shirt.

Let's not try to imply that a woman only considering a man for his physical appearance is equivalent to the other way around.
Click to expand...
I'm not pretending. I'm just young. Please, inform me on how it's different.

Pathos said:
Power
Click to expand...
Power is good, prejudice is bad. What's so difficult to understand about that?
 
Username said:
Men can't just about as much as women can't, women's nipples are only considered more gross than men's nipples on TV.

Seriously. What kind of douchebag goes to work without a shirt.
Click to expand...

It's illegal for women to be topless. It isn't illegal for men.
 
Oh, I kind of understand how one crime can be worse than the other, but I still don't understand how men objectifying is worse than women objectifying. Power doesn't mean anything unless it is demonstrated. What power does the (hypothetical, not Flower Doll's person) male have? Is there a law that states that men are not allow to use x ray vision but women are? Hopefully it's not a law since it's none of your damn business stop reading my mind you pervert out out

Pathos said:
It's illegal for women to be topless. It isn't illegal for men.
Click to expand...
no naked females ever? gosh, i am appalled.

I don't have a problem with allowing women to go topless since, like men, I expect for them to keep themselves covered most of the time. Yes, this contradicts what I said before.
 
Last edited:
Username said:
I'm not pretending. I'm just young. Please, inform me on how it's different.

Power is good, prejudice is bad. What's so difficult to understand about that?
Click to expand...
Pathos's post covered it, mostly.

... What?


Please do not use 'females' as a noun to refer to people as people!
 
Well, given that you've refrained from mentioning, I suppose that makes you something.


Using 'females' for people doesn't necessarily read as male; I used to do that because I objected to 'woman' and 'girl', and 'lady' is usually insulting. It's still not a good thing to be doing.
 
enekoiru said:
Well, given that you've refrained from mentioning, I suppose that makes you something.


Using 'females' for people doesn't necessarily read as male; I used to do that because I objected to 'woman' and 'girl', and 'lady' is usually insulting. It's still not a good thing to be doing.
Click to expand...

But I didn't do it on purpose. O_o You're Floop, right? Hi Floop. I recognized you by your pronouns, your uwaa and your moderator powers. Your avatar through me off a little, but it's fine.

You already have a gender in mind for me, don't you? I bet my pronoun is "she" to you since I used "females" instead of "chicks." Well, good job.

EDIT: OMG it says surskitty in your dragons why
 
Last edited:
I'm surskitty, yes (stick with surskitty or enekoiru or daikonpan or possibly James, please). I'm not sure what the point of your post is, though.
 
Can I just say I find the "popular" clothing annoying?


Baggy jeans and a fucking Doctor Who t-shirt all the way. I don't give a fuck about fashion, and never will.

That will be all.
 
Phantom said:
Can I just say I find the "popular" clothing annoying?


Baggy jeans and a fucking Doctor Who t-shirt all the way. I don't give a fuck about fashion, and never will.

That will be all.
Click to expand...

I know a guy at school who wears that every day (various Doctor Who t-shirts on rotation with jeans) so what you just described strikes me as fairly popular. I wear a variation of that myself! So... uhm... well, actually, jeans themselves (though not baggy) are incredibly popular, and for pretty good reason...
Sorry to pick on word choice and all, but it just makes me wonder what exactly you meant by "popular" clothing...
 
.... I don't know about where you live but here women wear tight ass jeans, and the more skin the more "in" you are.
 
Username said:
Just a wild guess, but maybe because you objectified him too? I mean, it's not as if you found his character attractive.

Really, though, do you have an answer for that rhetorical question?
Click to expand...

Well see, I met him...three days before he asked me out? Maybe it was part objectification on my part, but I think a major reason was because I didn't really know him and he actually seemed like a decent guy until about two weeks into the relationship. [/totally didn't see this until two seconds ago]

Actually even my best friend, who's known the moron practically since birth, didn't realize he was like that, so...
 
I'm with Phantom here, wear some comfortable clothes allah dammit. (David Tennant starring as Dr.Who <3 <3 <3 <3) shirt is not required. Anyway yea, but its always been that way since history (see: corsets, lead makeup etc.). But it sure doesn't make it right though, we just notice it more because of t.v. and internet and other bullshit. But theres also another side to this (now, I can't say this for all women) but when some of then dress "nice" god allah dammit they're not doing it for guys, they're doing it because they want to look nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom