The Negative Thread

Who makes you feel like you have to be a size 2. Seems like most of the men have varying likes as far as physical appearance.

 

Because there is not one man that I know, in real-life, that doesn't make comments about women they see with tiny waists, etc. If you already have low self-esteem, hearing those men say that about those types of women, can get to a person.

That's all I'm saying. Obviously, there are men who go for the not size 2 women. Otherwise, there would be a whole lotta single women out there, but when it comes to pure physical attraction, men seem to prefer women with negative waists. LOL.

 

If you actually dated some brothas you'd find that to be false my friend lol. I was with a girl who was around that range but I sure as hell noticed a lot of what appeared to be size 6 to 10s my friend. We aren't that limited in our attraction men LOVE variety.

 

Men objectify female bodies because we are trying to determine their fertility. We are hardwired for this and there is nothing that can be done about it.

Pout all you want, but that is the nature of things.

 

I'm waiting for someone to push the "media warps your mind" defense lol

 

Ahhhh...it all comes down to media and how it warps your mind

 

I disagree because I don't chase down blondes in fact I've always likes a more middle eastern look (think Sloan from Entourage). I love a pretty face and healthy average body. Anywhere from a size 6 to 10 is ideal to me (10 to 14 for you Aussies lol). I just want to love my woman's body. Is that a bad thing?

 

Fair eough, I'm just saying it's a 2-way street. Perhaps I could have worded it better, I think it's no secret that I'm no fan of the celeb / model oggling from either side.

 

I may be wrong, but I've always felt that women go that extra mile because of other women and not because of men. How often is it that women complain about men not noticing that new pair of shoes, or asking the man "do I look fat in this" to find that the man frankly doesn't even care. Only to have other female friends who say "Girl, did you get new shoes?" "Did you get your hair cut?" "Are you losing weight?". You're appealing to each other, don't put that on us!

 

Well put my friend

 

Not going to say that, I'm going to say that sounds a bit like evo-psych, and evo-psych is demonstrably bullshit.

Next someone is bound to jump in that women are "hard wired" to go after men with Rolexes and big wallets. Which of course havent existed for long, but that doesnt stop the evo-psych folks from claiming it's "true"

 

I think most men, in reality, want something different than the media image, but there's so much baggage attached to the image that women actually believe men want a size double zero. As I said in another thread, what the hell is that, less than nothing?

 

You should delineate evolutionary biology and genetics, both of which are demonstrably true, from the background assumptions of evolutionary psychology. In addition I would be careful about the wholesale dismissal of any approach to human psychology, as one may lose sight of truths in the midst of questionable methodologies and conclusions.

That said, one need not even reference the human experience to witness the importance of fitness in other species. One of the more prominent examples being the tail of the peacock, an existential liability as it prevents flight from predators but a vital sexual characteristic. The young and supple body of a female between 18 and 25 rarely plays any differently in the male heterosexual mind.

Not necessarily "Rolexes and big wallets" (straw man), but definitely resources that ensure shelter and steady meals.

 

Those are just wealth indicators and would you deny that wealth is attractive?

 

I don't think that way. But I know many women are in competition with each other, more so than trying to impress men.

Wealth really isn't attractive to me because most of the men attached to that wealth are huge assholes. I have no desire to be with an asshole no matter how wealthy he is (or thinks he is).

 

Well said Bookie!

 

Well that's you specifically but would you deny that women in general are attracted to wealth?

 

To me, it's a wash.

As for evo psych and delineation, that's why I said evo-psych and not evolutionary biology. Evo-pysch is demonstrable bs, and finding that out is a simple matter of googling.

 

Agreed. Our tastes in partners are defined very distinctly. This whole matter of fitness is a relatively new phenomena, and at a time when the country as a whole is a far cry from living up to fitness standards of men or women posed by the media. If our tastes were hardwired, we would never see have seen Rubenesque figures defined as the ideal or femininity and fertility. I'm sure that if you look at Playboy magazines from the beginning of the publication until now you will find a tremendous difference in what has been considered the "ideal" through the decades.

Obviously, everyone has ranges of desires regarding body types, attractiveness acceptable educational levels and many more characteristics important to the individual. But, as usual, the conversation seems to be focused on the extremes, which isn't unproductive in any meaningful discussion.

 

You're confusing physical fitness with genetic fitness via natural selection. Two things that bear some relationship to each other, but are not quite the same.