Woah Woah Woah. Okay, let's talk about women for a second.

[JoesshittyOs]

My cynical side sort of wants to rear it's ugly head for a moment here.

No, of course being anorexic and bulimic doesn't mean that you are a bad person. But generally during the modeling business, that's usually a factor of women not thinking they're pretty enough to begin with because of the competition. So obviously, it's easy to see why people have a problem with that.

No, being pretty does not mean they lack a personality and all that nonsense. But being pretty kind of is their job. And, likewise, it's easy to see why people have a problem with that. When that's really the only requirement of their jobs, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to see exactly why the business is frowned upon. And getting pissed about people calling them glorified mannequins? Well... that's kind of what they are.

And really, I think you're really playing hard on the sexist angle here, when it generally applies to guy models just as well. The entire business is an ugly thing to me.

Girls showing too much skin? It's just as annoying when guys do it.

 

[asacatman]

I agree with all the other points, so don't get me wrong, but...'5)A thin woman isn't any less of a woman than a woman who has curves or is larger. All women are equal and all bodies are good bodies.'
No, being too fat or too thin is medically unhealthy, it's gonna make you less happy, live shorter, and is avoidable (not easily avoidable, for sure, but you can at least try.)
Hell, if I was anorexcally thin, I'd have a whale of a time. Eating fry ups all the time, constantly having chocolate and sweets...that'd be awesome!
That last sentence was a joke by the way.

 

[T3hSource]

Sorry for ranting, I just had a lot of feelings.

Have you considered making a topic about girls and "how emotional they are"?
Because I believe that I've locked my emotions away and very few things can trigger emotional responses from me.I'm sure you're heard the common word "women are more susceptible to emotions",is that a good or a bad assumption.Of course I don't believe it completely,because otherwise businesswomen wouldn't exist.

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

Maybe if he'd been getting laid he wouldn't have to try to work out his issues with women. Then again if he were a decent human being he wouldn't have issues with women and therefore getting laid.

This shows me that you do not have an adequate understanding of how women choose people to have sex with... you can be a "decent person" and die a virgin, it's nothing to do with whether you're a raging asshole or not, it's how you present yourself, whether you take special care of certain things such as how you stand, how you speak and how you dress, how you smell is also important. If you have a glandular dissorder that makes you reek, you can be the greatest guy in the world and never get any, you could be shy, due to being brought up in a family that kept you relatively secluded, and "sheltered" you from group activities and social interaction as a child, which could lead you to being less forward and less assertive and thus lead women to see you as undesirable... so yeah, he may have been acting out, but you have no idea what's caused him to go so far, he could have been a completely decent guy who just got pushed over the edge.

To go with the topic at hand to a degree, don't judge people because you see them at their worst either. I've been in a position where I was starting to go positively mental because I couldn't get any, and I'm not exactly a horrible person, I'm kind, considerate, generous and a bit shy by my upbringing, which means, I'm not loud, I tend to put others first and I generally don't just "take what I want", thing is, that's like poison for your sex life, women see you as weak, hell I had to change a lot of my behavioural patterns change how I acted/reacted to situations and alter my posture, my style, and my scent(rather than just being really clean I started using cologne as well), in order to even get a woman to go out with me multiple times, I finally lost my virginity at the age of 24 because I learned that in order to get a woman to want you, you hafta be a "Man" not a "nice guy".

Gratz for you if you had a social life and a father when you were young to automatically teach you how to be around women, but a suprizingly large number of guys... Didn't.

 

[TheVioletBandit]

I love women, and I'm an egalitarian. Just because I'm not into modeling doesn't mean I hate women. In fact, one of the reasons I'm not into modeling is because I think it hurts women. My best friend is a woman, my girlfriend is a woman (obviously), and my cat is a wonderful lady as well, so I think women are awesome. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they hate women, and I think it's kind of a cop-out to assume so.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Ethnic slur? It wouldn?t be reasonable because it?s an entirely different set of definitions. ?Oh man, she?s slept with like 100 dudes in one night, she?s such a spic.? Nope, doesn?t really work. I might as well call this thread a slut.

That's not what he's asking. He's asking if it's okay to call "a spic a spic", since it's "just a label".

I don?t think I could have asked for a better response than this. Should I point out the difference between name calling and using definitions?

That you continue to cling to the assertion that "slut" is a definition, free of prejudice and 100% neutral without intent, would make any discussion with you on the "difference between name calling and using definitions" pointless in the extreme. And to be honest, I don't even think YOU believe this. I think you've just taken a position, arbitrarily.

Should I point out how my response can?t be considered an Ad Hominem because I specifically called it an experiment in illustrating the point I was trying to make?

I'm sorry, is this the "I'm not CALLING you an asshole, I'm just saying you look and talk and act just like an asshole" defense? Again, are we five here? What's next? He started it? I know you are but what am I? If you're going to make sneering commentary about someone's "mental capacity" because they disagree with you, then yes...you are engaging in ad hominem attacks.

I would agree (mostly). Now kindly point out where I ethically defend the notion.

Since you're fond of quotes; "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

Maybe that was another experiment. I can't say for sure. Like, maybe it was an experiment in which you used a quote to draw an absurd comparison between calling people names, and struggling to prevent the triumph of evil.

Right? because people haven?t been talking about weights and sexual proclivities in this thread since the OP? I?m the one ?writhing? between the two. Ta ta.

Do you see me putting forth "obese" as an insult? Whoops, I can scroll up the page and see me arguing otherwise. I'm not really concerned about what "people" are talking about. I'm not part of a collective here on the forums that all speak with the same voice.

Okay it's on the previous page now, but still.

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

Sorry for ranting, I just had a lot of feelings.

Have you considered making a topic about girls and "how emotional they are"?
Because I believe that I've locked my emotions away and very few things can trigger emotional responses from me.I'm sure you're heard the common word "women are more susceptible to emotions",is that a good or a bad assumption.Of course I don't believe it completely,because otherwise businesswomen wouldn't exist.

Business women are just better at covering them up... Trust me, I've known a few, quite personally.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Oh. Sorry I wasn't clear enough. A huge amount of prostitution also happens to be slavery. I'm obvouosly not saying prostitution == slavery, but I am saying that a huge part of the prostitution industry involves kidnapping and raping women for profit.

I'm aware of the issues with human trafficking, and I'm aware that human traffickers make heavy use of prostitution, so there are blurry lines of correlation between the two, but I don't think it's been demonstrated that prostitution is a direct casual factor in the rise of human trafficking.

If you're anti-trafficking, you and I can stand here all day pounding our bro-fists together, because obviously it's abhorrent. I'm not really with you on the "I saw some prostitutes, and it lead me to believe all women might be prostitutes" line of thinking though, nor do I think trading sex for money is inherently wicked. As a society, we could stand to de-mythologize sex. It's a biological function, like eating and sleeping.

 

[MomoElektra]

As a society, we could stand to de-mythologize sex. It's a biological function, like eating and sleeping.

I agree sex is a biological function, but it should not be likened to eating and sleeping since those are functions necessary for survival and to which an individual is entitled to in a society with basic human rights, while no one is or ever should be entitled to sex (since it has to involve another person).

I prefer to liken it to biological functions like cleaning/bathing. Important, but not life threatening if missed (well... risk of infection is of course there, but...).

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I agree sex is a biological function, but it should not be likened to eating and sleeping since those are functions necessary for survival and to which an individual is entitled to in a society with basic human rights, while no one is or ever should be entitled to sex (since it has to involve another person).

I prefer to liken it to biological functions like cleaning/bathing. Important, but not life threatening if missed.

It's extraordinarily life threatening, if you're looking at it from the perspective of the species, as opposed to individual units.

And while I don't think that ENTITLES anyone to sex, I'll never understand why we do so much hand-wringing and moralizing over it. We don't carry on about the ethical ramifications of our bowel movements.

 

[Coldster]

Seems like some good to know common sense material right there, except for one thing: body size. A women who is too thin or too heavy does not have a body as good as a women with healthy proportions. It is simply not true (mostly in terms of health).

Morals and ethics also change from person to person as well.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

some do... I had a friend who went to a private catholic school tell me they said that pooping made god ashamed of you because it was a disgusting act which is why it is done solely in private and should never ever be discussed

Well...I stand corrected. Gotta love those zany Catholic schools.

 

[MomoElektra]

I agree sex is a biological function, but it should not be likened to eating and sleeping since those are functions necessary for survival and to which an individual is entitled to in a society with basic human rights, while no one is or ever should be entitled to sex (since it has to involve another person).

I prefer to liken it to biological functions like cleaning/bathing. Important, but not life threatening if missed.

It's extraordinarily life threatening, if you're looking at it from the perspective of the species, as opposed to individual units.

But that's a different sort of survival. I thought we were talking about the individual?

And while I don't think that ENTITLES anyone to sex, I'll never understand why we do so much hand-wringing and moralizing over it. We don't carry on about the ethical ramifications of our bowel movements.

Who's hand-wringing or moralizing?

It is a fact that if I have no money to pay for it myself I can get food and shelter in my country. I am entitled to that. If you (generic you) liken sex into that category "necessary for survival", entitlement to sex is a natural conclusion.

I'm only pushing this because I know people who want to cash in on this entitlement (i.e. sex is a biological function necessary for survival) and make sex work mandatory services from health care providers, without caring much who's to do the actual providing. Yeah, they are rare, but they do exist.

 

[axlryder]

I agree with some of the OP, but others have already pointed out the potential flaws and contradictions in it.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Well, thanks for considering my post. My line of work deals quite a lot with those issues so I can tell you most human trafficking is related to prostitution and/or stealing organs. It's pretty simple really. Uneducated, third world women who can't speak anything but their native language only have one use in the eyes of gangsters.

I could argue my belief that women who prostitute their bodies by choice are effectively reinforcing and condoning a culture that sees women as objects with a price tag and therefore that it's perfectly alright to strip a woman of her rights and sell (or rent as it may be) her body for money. I won't argue it because obviously I can't give any numbers.

I do think however that selling sex for money is terrible. I think it's a crime and I think it's absolutely immoral. I understand that a lot of people don't share that view with me. Love is the founding principle of my personality or something like that. I think love is the most important thing in human culture. Maybe I'm just being a religious fanatic or something but the idea of putting a price on love-making strikes me as sacriligious.

Well, I think if we could stop moralizing about prostitution, legalize it, and regulate it, you'd close off a lot of avenues for human traffickers. Just as the war on drugs and prohibition demonstrated, these moral crusades usually result in an ERUPTION of crime, not a cessation of it.

I also think that a lot of people end up in prostitution due to need, and not by choice, and I 100% support outreach and assistance in terms of getting people out of that lifestyle if it's not something they're comfortable with. I'm not suggesting we open "Prostitute University" and start offering scholarships or anything. But it would be nice if these women (and men) could enjoy safe working conditions and health care instead of being driven into the margins of society. I live in a city where over 50 women were murdered by serial killer before someone finally looked into it, because they were prostitutes, and it took over 20 years to get the police to take it seriously. That's a serious fucking problem.

As for the love thing, I hear you, but love =/= sex. They often go hand in hand, like ice cream and cones, but they are not the same thing. Whether we like admitting it or not, sex is a basic a priori biological drive, and people are going to have a compulsion to engage in it that is completely and entirely separate from love.

Who's hand-wringing or moralizing?

I didn't mean to imply you were, specifically. I was speaking in general terms.

But that's a different sort of survival. I thought we were talking about the individual?

I'm only pushing this because I know people who want to cash in on this entitlement (i.e. sex is a biological function necessary for survival) and make sex work mandatory services from health care providers, without caring much who's to do the actual providing. Yeah, they are rare, but they do exist.

I think we can both agree those people are ludicrous. We can properly acknowledge sex is a biological function that people have a compulsion to perform without skidding down a slippery slope and making sex work a mandatory part of health care.

 

[Guffe]

Well the one point I hoped that OP would take up was the one with amount of sex.
Because usually we see
Man fucks a lot = Hero
Girl fucks a lot = Slut
Both genders can and shall enjoy sex as they want to, it then differs from person to person, not based on gender.

 

[ToxicOranges]

OP, whilst I agree with many of the points you make -

Also, while we are on the topic of women, I would like to say that people need to stop slut shaming. Like, it's a problem. People seem to think that how much skin a woman chooses to show is directly proportional to how much self respect they have. )

This is, unfortunately, where we mus disagree. Slut-shaming doesn't happen enough, in my opinion. I am sick of people dressing whorishly and then trying to defend it on grounds of "independent woman" or "I don't have to fit your stereotype". No, ladies, you do not. What you do have to do, hoever, is have some damn dignity and realise how damaging this kind of behaviour will be, not just now, but later in life, when you lie ridden with STI's, or with the baby you didn't want, or having not developed a personality because the boys preferred your boobs.

Slut-shaming needs to start, and increase, until we don't have to be embarrassed about our own generation. I'm 17, and I fucking hate teenagers today.