Topic: ATT: Social Justice Warriors
+Anonymous A — 9.8 years ago #45,718
Clearly, there is no such thing as an unattractive woman. "Beauty" is nothing more than a phallocentric construct perpetuated by the Patriarchy to keep all women in thrall.| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strongly agree. | - | 0% | |
| Strongly disagree. | - | 0% | |
| I'd poke the ginger. | - | 0% |
+Anonymous B — 9.8 years ago, 51 minutes later[T] [B] #498,796
What is wrong with the woman in the top-left?
+Anonymous C — 9.8 years ago, 33 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #498,798
·Anonymous A (OP) — 9.8 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #498,799
+chili dog !!heHjtrQ7i — 9.8 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #498,801
wat nobody says that
just that society does have certain beauty standards and your perception of what is beautiful is influenced by that
just that society does have certain beauty standards and your perception of what is beautiful is influenced by that
+ducky !MwWb.dJjRc — 9.8 years ago, 2 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[T] [B] #498,802
@previous (chili dog !!heHjtrQ7i)
But perhaps there is a universally accepted standard of ugly to some degree
But perhaps there is a universally accepted standard of ugly to some degree
·chili dog !!heHjtrQ7i — 9.8 years ago, 7 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[T] [B] #498,812
@previous (ducky !MwWb.dJjRc)
how would we know
all we know really is that different societies have sometimes different beauty standards
how would we know
all we know really is that different societies have sometimes different beauty standards
·ducky !MwWb.dJjRc — 9.8 years ago, 1 hour later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #498,813
+Anonymous F — 9.8 years ago, 6 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[T] [B] #498,823
@498,812 (chili dog !!heHjtrQ7i)
Hi, Trip. I understand the point you're making, and I don't dispute that standards of beauty are - to some degree - culturally relevant constructs. However, I'd also argue that certain reactions are hard-wired into the human brain: for example, we tend to avoid sexual contact with those born with gross physical deformities or severe congenital defects. I suspect that John Merrick would have been viewed as ugly (if not outright hideous) in any society, regardless of their notions of conventional beauty. We know from various historical sources that the "Elephant Man" was intelligent, kind and gentle, but no woman (of that time) wanted to risk having misshapen children by him. From an evolutionary viewpoint, it makes sense for both males and females to choose genetically viable partners over potentially terminal mutations.
Hi, Trip. I understand the point you're making, and I don't dispute that standards of beauty are - to some degree - culturally relevant constructs. However, I'd also argue that certain reactions are hard-wired into the human brain: for example, we tend to avoid sexual contact with those born with gross physical deformities or severe congenital defects. I suspect that John Merrick would have been viewed as ugly (if not outright hideous) in any society, regardless of their notions of conventional beauty. We know from various historical sources that the "Elephant Man" was intelligent, kind and gentle, but no woman (of that time) wanted to risk having misshapen children by him. From an evolutionary viewpoint, it makes sense for both males and females to choose genetically viable partners over potentially terminal mutations.
+Anti !M6R0eWkIpk — 9.8 years ago, 1 hour later, 22 hours after the original post[T] [B] #498,826
@498,796 (B)
@498,798 (C)
@498,799 (A)
Obviously she suffers from FND.
@previous (F)
See 'Interviews with Hideous OPs' by David Foster Wallace.
@498,798 (C)
@498,799 (A)
Obviously she suffers from FND.
@previous (F)
See 'Interviews with Hideous OPs' by David Foster Wallace.
Start a new topic to continue this conversation.
Or browse the latest topics.