Women objectify women too

[United Marxist Nations]

This is the position your arguing against, if you agree with it you are on the wrong side.

No it's not. You are continuing to see what you want to see.

I'm not even paying attention to that discussion anymore.

[Cannot think of a name]

No it's not. You are continuing to see what you want to see.

I'm not even paying attention to that discussion anymore.

Congratulations?

[United Marxist Nations]

I'm not even paying attention to that discussion anymore.

Congratulations?

Yes, I get a trophy now.

[Des-Bal]

No it's not. You are continuing to see what you want to see.

That's what I'm saying. A man can assume that a woman is wearing clothes because she desires to be looked at.

[Cannot think of a name]

No it's not. You are continuing to see what you want to see.

That's what I'm saying. A man can assume that a woman is wearing clothes because she desires to be looked at.

You are wrong.

[Des-Bal]

You are wrong.

Which part do you disagree with, that women sometimes wear clothes because they want to be looked at or that you can assume the reasons behind why someone is dressed how they are?

[Dempublicents1]

You can't honestly say that if I go out in public in my bra and panties, that someone will think I'm wearing a consealing outfit and that if I go outside wrapped up from head to toe like a Saudi, that someone will think it's a reavealing outfit. People's opinions of what's revealing isn't that broad.

There are cultures where it is not unusual for a woman to be bare-breasted. There are cultures where a woman who picks up the hem of her garment to step over something and you catch sight of her ankle is being "revealing." So yes, people's opinions absolutely are that broad.

And honestly, why should it matter? I should not feel the need to analyze all the possible ways people might think of my outfit before I go outside. I should be able to dress in the manner I want without thinking that someone is going to bother me about it.

Yeah there's a difference between spying on people and observing them when they go into public.

And there is a difference between observing someone and ogling them or making inappropriate comments at them.

If women feel "intimidated" by going out in revealing clothing you can only be saying that wearing revealing clothing invites crime or that women need to toughen up.

Women feel intimidated by the actions of others, not by the clothing they are wearing.

[Cannot think of a name]

You are wrong.

Which part do you disagree with, that women sometimes wear clothes because they want to be looked at or that you can assume the reasons behind why someone is dressed how they are?

You are insufferable. You don't even see the contradiction in your own statement while you try to twist around an argument you clearly do not understand.

Look up the word "sometimes" and you might start to see how you've undermined your own admittedly feeble argument.

[Liriena]

Woohoo! Another tu quoque thread by what my first hypothesis would be a butthurt conservative who is trying to justify chauvinism.

[Des-Bal]

You are insufferable. You don't even see the contradiction in your own statement while you try to twist around an argument you clearly do not understand.

Look up the word "sometimes" and you might start to see how you've undermined your own admittedly feeble argument.

Look up the word can. You can survive being shot in the face, this doesn't mean you can't die from being shot in the face.

[Cameroi]

objectification of women, AND men, has its place, as something for each to fap to. it doesn't have any place else though.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Woohoo! Another tu quoque thread by what my first hypothesis would be a butthurt conservative who is trying to justify chauvinism.

Chauvinism doesn't need justifying.

And even if it did, I doubt you dames would be smart enough to understand the LOGIC needed to justify it.
The above is entirely satirical in nature and not meant to be serious.

[Cannot think of a name]

You are insufferable. You don't even see the contradiction in your own statement while you try to twist around an argument you clearly do not understand.

Look up the word "sometimes" and you might start to see how you've undermined your own admittedly feeble argument.

Look up the word can. You can survive being shot in the face, this doesn't mean you can't die from being shot in the face.

Moving on...

[Des-Bal]

=
Moving on...

A man can sometimes assume that a woman is wearing clothes because she desires to be looked at.

Yes or no.

[Agymnum]

objectification of women, AND men, has its place, as something for each to fap to. it doesn't have any place else though.

Ah, fapping. One of man's glorious pastimes!

*fap fap fap*

Oh, right, the rest of your post. I'm sure there's something correct in there as well. All I read was fap.

[Dempublicents1]

What, do you want woman kind to respond to some anecdotal shit that happened to you in a club?

He wanted a response to the phenomonae of glitter sprinkled breasts. If a woman takes a special effort to cover her breasts in glitter what purpose does that serve except for drawing attention.

I think glitter is fun. And can look good.

Why are you so stuck on glittered breasts specifically anyway? I've covered my arms in glitter before. I've put glitter in my hair. I use glitter eyeshadow sometimes. I've even contemplated getting glitter lipstick. The last time I wore glitter, it was white glittery stuff that a bunch of us put on because we were going somewhere with UV lights and glow-in-the-dark stuff and we thought it might look cool (it actually did nothing, but my black and white converse looked awesome!)
I do it because it's fun and I like the way it looks (although the hair thing is a pain in the ass to clean up after).

[Des-Bal]

[

I think glitter is fun. And can look good.

Why are you so stuck on glittered breasts specifically anyway? I've covered my arms in glitter before. I've put glitter in my hair. I use glitter eyeshadow sometimes. I've even contemplated getting glitter lipstick. The last time I wore glitter, it was white glittery stuff that a bunch of us put on because we were going somewhere with UV lights and glow-in-the-dark stuff and we thought it might look cool (it actually did nothing, but my black and white converse looked awesome!)
I do it because it's fun and I like the way it looks (although the hair thing is a pain in the ass to clean up after).

Because when you make your breasts sparkle you can't really complain when someone looks at them.

[Cannot think of a name]

=
Moving on...

A man can sometimes assume that a woman is wearing clothes because she desires to be looked at.

Yes or no.

Not this bullshit again.

I'm not dancing around with you on this. Because I already addressed this and you've again only saw what you wanted to see. If you need answers, read the posts I've already made. If you want to debate what the definition of 'is' is, find someone else to circle jerk with.

[Les Quebecoise]

Hmmm....
I have to say, as a gay man, this whole conversation (especially the part about "tits" and how supposedly suddenly "everyone", including hetero girls, "love tits") is just extremely confusing to me. Lol

Personally, I would have to say that, sexually speaking, I am quite repulsed by them;
No matter how much I try, I always end up regarding them as just 2 rolls of fat that hang off one's chest. I guess it's all about personal tastes and preferences!

See what you've done?! (I'm talking to the "tit-talk" instigators). I ended up posting a comment about women's "tits" on a forum about the "objectification of women", and I don't even LIKE them (tits, that is)! Wtf?!
HALP! They're taking over the world I tell ya! One cup at a time!.....

[Des-Bal]

Not this bullshit again.

I'm not dancing around with you on this. Because I already addressed this and you've again only saw what you wanted to see. If you need answers, read the posts I've already made. If you want to debate what the definition of 'is' is, find someone else to circle jerk with.

This isn't a dance, this is my position. It is made of two ideas. Do you agree with it yes or no. If you disagree which part do you disagree with.

[Cannot think of a name]

Not this bullshit again.

I'm not dancing around with you on this. Because I already addressed this and you've again only saw what you wanted to see. If you need answers, read the posts I've already made. If you want to debate what the definition of 'is' is, find someone else to circle jerk with.

This isn't a dance, this is my position. It is made of two ideas. Do you agree with it yes or no. If you disagree which part do you disagree with.

Please to be consulting posts already made addressing this very line of thought, or explain why you think it does not apply. I am not here to validate you.

[Dempublicents1]

What the monkey fuck are you talking about?

You asked me if we could assume Sarah Palin and Jessica Mills were wearing their clothes for the same reason, doesn't that imply we can determine why they are wearing what they're wearing? You conceded that somethings were worn to invite attention. Combine those two ideas. You can assume that some women are wearing what they are to invite attention.

You can reasonably state that some people choose their mode of dress to attract attention. You cannot reasonably assume that any given person has dressed the way they have to attract attention.

[Des-Bal]

Please to be consulting posts already made addressing this very line of thought, or explain why you think it does not apply. I am not here to validate you.

I'm not seeking validation I'm telling you that for this to continue you're either going to have to agree with me or disagree with me you've chosen to ignore and dissect the question. You were confused by ambiguities which have now been clarified, answer the question please.

[Cannot think of a name]

Please to be consulting posts already made addressing this very line of thought, or explain why you think it does not apply. I am not here to validate you.

I'm not seeking validation I'm telling you that for this to continue you're either going to have to agree with me or disagree with me you've chosen to ignore and dissect the question. You were confused by ambiguities which have now been clarified, answer the question please.

Tell you what, why don't you answer my question...what do you think a yes or no answer is going to prove? Why do you think that idea matters in the slightest?

[Des-Bal]

Tell you what, why don't you answer my question...what do you think a yes or no answer is going to prove? Why do you think that idea matters in the slightest?

Because if you agree with me there's not much point in arguing with you? There is literally no reason for you to refuse to take a side like this.