dreamlady
Posts: 737
Joined: 9/13/2007
From: Western MD
Status: offline
|
You do know, crumpets, that posting in the Dungeon is traditionally the all-bets-are-off zone. 
Btw, male athletes wear skintight outfits which happen to accentuate their rippling muscles, the outline of their crotch (or jockstrap/crotchguard) and of their firm buttocks, including the very same male football players whom you seem to find modestly garbed by your standards. Just look at any male ballet dancer prancing about the stage in leotards.
quote:
ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
* Complimenting a woman in a manner respectful of the social class she deems herself to belong to, and/or is attempting to date into is important. Women who deem themselves of a high(er) social class will not take well to low(er) class language when being complimented, sexually or not.
This is primarily because women date 'up' and thus, giving a woman a compliment in a colloquialism not in line with the social class she is (attempting to be) part of is taken as an insult, because you are telling her that she isn't good enough to achieve the social standing she desires.
However, the faux pas isn't in the sexualisation of the compliment itself (assuming it's a "panty in your face" type woman) but rather in insulting her social desirability by implying that she's of a lower class herself.
This is causing the discrepancy you're seeing in the hooter girl's interviews. It's not that they object to being sexualized, it is that they are very often girls putting themselves through college, and thus consider themselves to be part of, or aspiring to be middle class or higher.
Hooter patrons on the other hand are often blue collar workers, and thus give compliments to these girls in a manner not in line with the social standing the girls see themselves as having, which results in frustration.
In turn the girls themselves aren't introspective enough to realize that it's not so much the sexualized compliments that bother them, but rather the way in which they are phrased, because they don't really categorize sexualized compliments that are appropriate to their class as "sexual", instead seeing those comments as merely "flattering".
It's natural for them to have this inconsistency btw, because every class considers the language used by the classes below them as more vulgar than their own, even if the sentiment being expressed is exactly the same, and taken the same by each respective class.
Hence the disconnect of hooter waitresses complaining about being treated as sex objects, while at the same time obviously deliberately provoking being viewed as such.
Giving a woman a compliment in a language of a class she considers beneath herself will almost always result in you being considered vulgar and offensive by her, regardless of whether or not she enjoys being sexualized by strangers.
quote:
ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
quote:
ORIGINAL: crumpets
LadyPact brought up the perfectly valid topic that most of my examples were of YOUNG women, and how THEY act, whereas, I'll wager that almost all, if not all, the women on this thread are NOT in that category of women.
The women responding here are older, more mature, than the women depicted in the images purposefully selected to show the hypocrisy in how THEY (the younger women) act, versus the perceived (and universally agreed upon) concept that women should not be 'objectivized.
It doesn't come down to young or not. It comes down to: "Is she trying to raise social status or not, and does she consider her physical assets a prime means of raising that status or has she other assets she considered more useful in that endeavor?"
You see older women flaunting their stuff as well, and invariable when that happens the woman in question is dissatisfied with her social status AND considers her physical attributes a prime way to raise status by attracting a male higher on the social ladder.
Again, there is not so much an issue of women acting one way, and saying something else (though that definitively goes on as well) it's a matter of women who flaunt their stuff in an attempt to raise status not responding well to being viewed as sex objects in a mannerism and language associated with a social class lower than what they're aspiring to. On top of that, most women who attempt to raise status by merely employing physical attributes often vastly overestimate the potential they have to raise status by means of said attributes, so they're extremely sensitive to being complimented on their physical attributes in a way they perceive as being below their desired status.
Once you get the manner in which you compliment them, or view them as sexual objects in line with the social status they're attempting to achieve, reactions will be positive.
Compliment a Hooter's waitress in a manner a rich executive might compliment his trophy wife and she'll be swooning all over you (especially when your manner of dress, and habits, back up the image of "rich executive").
Now give her the exact same compliment in a language associated with the lowest classes and she'll be bitching to her friends about how she's so sick and tired of guys treating her like she's a sex object.
Once you figure out what social class the women is aspiring to, or deems herself to be a part of, there's very little inconsistency between how she acts and what she says, in terms of how accepting she is of being sexualized by strangers.
What you will find is that there is often a huge gap between the social class you judge her to be a part of (or to has the potential to be a part of) and the social class she deems herself to be a part of (or has the potential to be a part of).
quote:
ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
quote:
ORIGINAL: crumpets
It's a given that most mature women don't want to be treated as sex objects, especially while in public, yet, for them, it's fine that other women do enjoy being treated as sex object, where, it's just as much a given that (those) mature and sensible women who don't shove their panties in our faces every chance they get are not looking to use their sexuality to find a form of attention they find both flattering and validating, because these mature women don't find that form of attention flattering and these mature women certainly do not need to validate their sexuality by shoving their panties in our faces every chance they get!
Nope, it doesn't come down to maturity.
It comes down to: has she already achieved the social class she's aspiring to (or willing to settle for) or is she still attempting to raise her status.
The reason you see more younger women instead of mature women "shoving panties in your face" is because mature women are more likely to have reached the social status they're aspiring to, or at least have settled for the social status they currently have.
Mature women who are still looking to raise status AND who consider their physical assets a prime means of doing so will flaunt their physical attributes just as much as young women will.
quote:
ORIGINAL: crumpets
however, I've heard (many times) from the ladies here that they dress to be sexy for a particular man, where they don't want the attention of the rabble, despite the plain fact that they have no control over these unwashed masses once the ladies go out in public dressed the way they're (sometimes) dressed.
They say this when they perceive that the man they currently have is as high on the social ladder they think they'll be able to achieve.
When a "flaunting assets" type woman lands such a man, they often discontinue dressing in a manner as blatantly sexual as they did before hooking him.
The exception to this is when they assume that discontinuing dressing in an overtly sexual manner might lose them the man (they lack security in really 'having' him), in which case -due to their insecurity- they'll still be looking to trade 'up', and will still respond positively to a man of a higher social status than the one she has giving her a higher class appropriate compliment.
However, in this case, she'll become even more sensitive than she was before to compliments in the language of lower classes, precisely because of how insecure she is about really having secured her man, and her ticket into the social class she desires.
quote:
ORIGINAL: crumpets
If I'm the target audience of the purposefully sexual display, then the objectification will be taken appropriately by the woman, as it was meant to be, yet,
If I'm NOT the target audience, any and all objectification by me will be taken quite negatively, and, worse yet,
Sometimes a wardrobe malfunction truly is a wardrobe malfunction (in which case, any and all objectification would be considered objectionably crass, at the very least).
This is an intriguing and interesting twist that delves deeper into the underlying strategy and tactics I seek to better understand, as there is absolutely no way my initial observations are of mere happenstance.
Exactly.
Women who flaunt their stuff do so for a target audience.
Commenting on the display of their 'wares' when you're not the target audience annoys them as much as an Audi dealer would be annoyed if, after spending half an hour showing you cars, he figures out that your budget is only 20k.
If you're below the target audience the women flaunting her stuff is aiming for, you are -in her mind- wasting her time and energy by commenting on her appearance to begin with, and so she'll be annoyed, offended and insulted, because you are wasting her precious resources when -in her mind- it should be clear that you're not good enough for her.
It's not a matter of the sentiment of the comment being inappropriate, it's a matter of her deeming you not 'good enough' to be allowed to comment on her to begin with, because -in her mind- it's blatantly obvious that she can land somebody far better than you. By commenting on her you're implying that you have a shot at dating her, and thus you're implying that she can't land somebody better than you, which is -in her mind- in essence an insult instead of a compliment.
quote:
ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
And of course, wealth and status isn't the only thing women look for in a man. So even if his socio-economic status is sufficient for him to be 'permitted' to compliment her, it's no guarantee that she'll actually be interested. But even if she isn't actually interested in him for other reasons than lack of status, she won't perceive his compliment as vulgar, insulting, or objectifying.
Let me add that this would apply to the "average" female of the species in terms of evolutionary advantage. I'm sure it isn't lost upon the OP that in most other species (of fowl and hoofed mammals), it is the (brightly and colorfully plumed, distinctly uncamouflaged) male who struts his stuff and locks his horns in mating ritual displays.
In a nutshell, the reason why this makes perfect sense to the OP is because it aligns with his oft-expressed paradigm that Men are sluts, Women are whores.
If it didn't fit into this personal belief system of his, then everything you so carefully explained would have been for naught. 
DreamLady
_____________________________
Love is born with the pleasure of looking at each other, it is fed with the necessity of seeing each other, it is concluded with the impossibility of separation. ~José Marti
|
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 
Profile
However, I have the freedom of expression to express that I want them to stop expressing themselves at me. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread