“It's treating women's appearance or sexual attractiveness as being at least as important as everything else - what we're doing, writing, saying - that's demeaning.”
jel3800 on May 30, 2012 at 09:43:05
“It is usually the first impression made by that person when meeting others for the first time. In that instant it is at least as important as everything else - maybe much more important than anything else. Other qualities may never be seen if the first impression is poor.”
“It's all part of the same mindset, part of the spectrum, though. When a woman does something, anything, it still comes down to whether she's 'hot' or not, however irrelevant it is, however insulting it is to have her work, her thoughts, ignored and to focus on her sexual attractiveness. It's a minor example, yes, but it's still objectifying.”
Parker95 on May 30, 2012 at 15:46:46
“"It's all part of the same mindset, part of the spectrum, though."
No I don't think it is
"When a woman does something, anything, it still comes down to whether she's 'hot' or not"
You seem to be the only one actually saying that. ”
“It's all part of the same spectrum. Woman writes science articles (or does anything else) - oh, that's not as important as whether some man finds her attractive, and of course he MUST say he does.”
Cole 33 on May 30, 2012 at 11:52:54
“The post referenced the quality of the article FIRST. And Second he noted how attractive he finds her.
It kind of goes counter to your argument no? he commented on her article first, which probably played a part in her being hot.
What he did was complimentary, and what many men (including myself) find incredibly HOT about many women like the author, is exactly their ability to be as intelligent, well spoken, educated, and science geeky as they are physically beautiful. That 'combination' is hot.
My wife is a complete girly girl, she likes to look hot, she hits the gym 5 days a week, she wears heels and short shorts and pink glossy lipstick. She also has her masters degree in history with a minor in english lit, and in the same night will knock out a few chapters of Guns, Germs and Steel, watch a documentary on the fall of the roman empire, and then watch something vacant jersey shore. (I'm not kidding, she does this, it's awesome)
Now I've met many women who only embody the former, but I married her not because she walks around the house in victoria secret boy shorts, but because she can do that *while* having an informed intelligent discussion on whether the Conquistadores knew they were introducing diseases to the Indians, or not and whether they used it as a tactic later on. I find that incredibly hot and sexy, but thats me.”
“Evolution IS adaptation over millions of years. Why is it so hard for you to grasp that? The time scale is enormous.
Seems to me it's creationists who're denying God's creative ability - to give the spark of life and watch the wonderful variety of life forms. You lot would reduce him to the rather nasty war god the ancient Hebrews worshipped (among others).”
“Hey Mr Blinkers, believing in God does not mean one has to be a Christian, let along a creationist. All creationism shows is a woeful lack of knowledge both of basic science (and I mean really basic) and of how the Bible was made, translated and then totally misinterpreted. You do know some of the earliest palaeontologists tried and tried to make the evidence fit the Biblical account, don't you, until they realised it simply doesn't, and that the Biblical account is NOT HISTORY - it's myth, poetry, all sorts of things, but neither history nor science.”
“That's what it is - the why shouldn't even come into it (and evolution is not about the origin of the universe or even of our planet; it's about the development of that life).”
creationscientist on May 30, 2012 at 13:23:02
“Correction. When you endorse evolution, as it is taught in schools, you make way for a disbelief in God. When God is taken out of the equation, you must assume evolution is the answer for all life. Dangerous conclusion.”
“I wouldn't have worried about the headline, more the implication that he really hadn't a clue where anti-Semitism comes from. The "Jews killed Christ" attitude that goes back centuries and is imbedded in European culture should surely be well known.”
“Part two - as to 'trying to have an orgasm,' well, it's not automatic for us to orgasm, no, but 'trying' is probably a good way for it not to happen either, it suggests anxiety. I don't see it as a man's fault unless he's being really selfish and isn't interested in making love with his partner.
I can only speak for my beloved and me, but 'playful, ad hoc and recreational' definitely describes our love life! :)”
“Ed, the 'why does it take so much time' is simply a case of our bodies - yes, we can orgasm quickly but arousal is likely to take longer than it does with men. It's not a matter of choice or reluctance, it's simply physical. Being rushed is no fun - first, if someone's inside you before you're ready, it hurts; second, it can really give the impression that all he's interested in is his own orgasm, and that you're not important at all - anything soft and warm would do.”
“Not always, one can be deceived for a long time. Happened to a friend of mine (no that is not a euphemism for 'me', I don't and never have dated) - she was with a bloke for ages and only found out his 'separated and getting a divorce' line was a lie when his wife found out and rang her up and abused her. My friend dumped the mongrel immediately and with any luck his wife did too!”
“What about the other posters who generalise about married sex like they know every married couple in the world, or like they (and it's a few men I'm talking about here) know what women think and feel better than women do? How about telling them they're full of it and to stop posting?”
“I think there's a distinction to be made between the idea of a longer time spent pleasuring each other and the idea of intercourse itself lasting forever. No, it is not necessarily pleasant for a woman to have the man inside her for a long time. Can be, but isn't automatically so, especially if she's not aroused enough. It can be uncomfortable or downright painful.”
Ed Baker on May 29, 2012 at 11:02:15
“All I read is about this goal oriented sex, where the male has something to prove, and women just complain about his failing them.... it sounds so sad.
With us, it's kind of playful, and ad hoc, and recreational..... instead of a source of stress.
So, when a woman is having intercourse, is she "trying" to have an orgasm if she wants one? Why does it take so much time? Why is it the male's fault if she doesn't achieve one?”