• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle

  • I wager the reason why people are not dueling each other, to solve their differences today, is that they simply have more options in how they go about it. I don’t think the survival rate of stab wounds factor in to the decision at all. We have a more accommodating legal system to turn to. One that serves more people than ever.

    On another note. If you have to pay for your own medical cost and you live in a place like the USA; then you would probably want to die. If you live in a more civilised pace, then your fellow citizens will pay for your treatment and then promptly lock you up for wasting taxpayer money and endangering yourself and others, like a crazy person.


  • I am not arguing that this happens everywhere, in the same way and is then set in stone forever. People in different places and times had different circumstances. Hence, they could have chosen to handled things differently. Cultural norms can also sometimes change over night. Look at the sexual revolution of the 60-70s for example.

    I was trying to answer the question where this norm comes from. Not why this norm isn’t universal.

    It seems obvious to me that a culture that have normalized breasts in everyday life, would also consider them less sexual in nature.


  • I agree. I think that is where we are heading. In societies with high quality of life and high standard of eduction, it is already an expectation. Unfortunately there are places today, that are still somewhat mediaeval.

    To clarify; the reason why males might have initially made these requests of their partners is, I reason, insecurity and perhaps fear. Imagine you live in a society where you can not expect protection from anyone except maybe your own family. You find yourself in that threatening situation. Your choices of what to do about it are limited. From the perspective of both the victim and her husband. If most peoples choice are the same, it might become a norm and part of the culture, eventually. You can imagine how the resulting behaviour would probably have been supported by both sexes. Because they feel safer. Because it’s practical and easy. With time it becomes pointless. But it’s culture. It’s tradition and somehow valued on that merit alone.

    If I were to find myself in that situation, today, I might have told my wife “let’s leave”. My choices in that moment are still limited. Of course I can report the incident to authorities and what not, after the fact. That sucks for me. It probably sucked even harder 12k years ago.

    I have never found myself in this situation, but I can imagine it. And I think my wife would cover up, not because she wants to, but because it makes her feel safe. That is not great. That is not an argument for bad behaviour. Thankfully we generally feel safe where we live.


  • Evolution doesn’t have a preconceived goal it goes for. There can be pressures of all different kinds. I did not intend to convey that sexual pressure was the sole factor on the evolution of breasts. Clearly they have other functions. I only make the observation that it is a sexual signal for males in the vast majority of mammals. I believe humans are the only mammal with breasts that doesn’t shrink when they are ready, as it were. But I am a proponent of the hypothesis that it was evolved as a trait of sexual secrecy, to confuse males, so the female can attract the favour of more males.

    It’s alright to disagree with the premise that there were sexual pressure on the evolution of breasts. You would probably be in the minority in the scientific community on that one though.

    For the record; I fancy myself an egalitarianist. I believe in women’s rights. I do not believe slavery is good for any kind of society. I really believe males and females are very similar. Small differences in our physiological makeup. That is all.


  • I’m sorry it came of that way. It was not my intention. The gold bar part is perhaps a bit unfortunate. I was trying to illustrate and emphasise to the reader that doing anything carries a risk and that people of different regions and cultures have made different choices to manage those perceived risks based on their circumstances.

    I believe people, more often than not, make choices out of practicality. Morals, religion, politics, fads, all come and go. “Hey, wife, those guys are staring, I know it’s not convenient, but can you cover up” has probably been said by males partners pretty consistently over the years.

    The word steal might have been a bad choice too, now that I think about it. Perhaps kidnap would have also worked.


  • Since we are all going; here is my take. Breasts were always sexual in nature. For most species they signal fertility and what part of the cycle the individual is in at the moment. At some point human females evolved to have perpetually inflated breasts. There are a few different theories as to why that happened, but it is beside the point for this discussion. So considering they were evolved to attract or dissuade males, I say they certainly have a sexual function. In addition to this, breasts play a big part in sexual pleasure for the wearer.

    Now consider people pairing up in monogamous couples. The male suspects that other males might be motivated to pursue his mate by the visage of his mates nice boobies. He asks his mate to cover them up so he feels more safe in his position. Now hundreds of years pass, and what do you know, it is in grained in the cultures. It’s not really too bad for the women, so they have lived with it, for the sake of peace. Sometimes it is even convenient to be covered. For example in cold weather. I bet there is a correlation between climate and a cultures willingness to have boobs in the open.

    Tribes have not only hidden their populations breasts, they have been known to hide their women all together, so the neighbouring tribes don’t steal them. I feel that this is a bit similar. Put a gold bar in a glass display long enough, and someone will try to take it. Everything carries risk. If your society isn’t good at maintaining law, then it’s a bad idea to display the gold bar. In some places it might not be an issue at all. All women could go around topless as well, but the risk that they are approached by an aspiring male will probably be slightly increased.

    So why do it now, in my amazing, functioning, egalitarian and lawful country? It is down to history and people being comfortable with what we have always done.

    My humble opinion is that we abolish any law that prevent any boob owner from showing them anywhere. But I’m lazy, so I won’t start a revolution over it.







  • Like many others here; I just can’t figure out what was asked. No matter how i read it; it’s a mess. It really needs to be rewritten in plain English.

    The premise seems to be that all feminists are ugly. The question seem to be asking if they are ugly because they choose not to be, as a result of their convictions or that they are attracted to the feminist cause because they were already ugly.

    If this is the question, I would begin by saying that the premise is wrong and probably rooted in selection bias. I’m certain there are loads of feminists that dress up and use makeup every day that would be considered conventionally attractive individiuals. Maybe the asker is underestimating the prevelance of feminists in general. It is of course a subjective thing. Perhaps the asker just finds women with opinions unattractive.

    So in summary; there are lots of women. The attractive ones are also feminists or subscribe to a subset of the feminist agenda. Or they might identify as egalitarianists. They just are not telling you.