You can rate this post. Register or login now and tell us what you think.
Link />I for one would rather see women walking around in nothing than thongs and heels than becoming emaciated, pretending it means they're above it all.
...This is one thing you can't blame patriarchy for. :) As Sir Mix-A-Lot once helpfully explained, women seem to want to become atrociously skinny to gain the approval of other women, not because men enjoy it.
lol I agree for the most part buttttttt at the same time the fashion industry has been controlled by men also so technicallyyyyy they could be to blame because they set the standards and came up with the ideas of models being used as virtual hangers for the clothes they're trying to sell and they're the ones who started selling extreme thinness as being vogue.
But I wasn't even thinking about that until you reminded me lol thanks.
The super skinny look does support the system of patriarchy! It is the physical embodiment of what a woman is supposed to act like by male standards: weak, insignificant, and superficial (to the point of self-harm).
However, I do agree that it is mostly women who are pressuring other women to look this way.
""The super skinny look does support the system of patriarchy! It is the physical embodiment of what a woman is supposed to act like by male standards: weak, insignificant, and superficial (to the point of self-harm).""
...By 'male standards'?
What the fuck?
In case you haven't noticed, huge masses of women tend to prize superficiality in other women. It's not men buying those gossip magazines -- it's the men who are running in the other ear clutching their ears when they have to hear about what Brangelina or Bennifer is up to.
Is this every girl? Most girls? Of course not. But it's a pretty big chunk, and enough to put the lie to your sexist claim that this is some sort of "male standard".
"In case you haven't noticed, huge masses of women tend to prize superficiality in other women."
But part of the reason that is the case is because women are told (whether explicitly or not) throughout their lives that their worth is measured by superficial standards. I think it's less clear now because women have come a long way in society but the same underlying causes are there and constantly manifest themselves.
I think the fact that women can be very petty with one another (and sometimes downright vicious) is an example of that. Women generally feel on some level that they're in competition for male approval in some way.
But I think you underestimate how superficial men can be. I don't think most men want women to starve themselves but men are still very superficial. The fact is that women are judged more based on superficial traits by other women and men, whereas men aren't judged by either to the same extent.
For example, I think it's way more common to see women date men they weren't initially very attracted to physically (the attraction might have grown after spending time with them), than it is to see men date women they weren't physically attracted to and that sends a strong message to the sexes.
Also, I think you underestimate how much men gossip. I'd think it's almost the same amount as women based on what I've seen personally. But whether or not it's exactly the same when people gossip, it tends to be about women regardless of the sex doing the gossiping and being that it's gossip, it's normally commenting on some superficial aspect of the women in question.
And lastly ofcourse, men (at least from what I see) are just into their superficial appearances as women are. Maybe my view of this is a little biased because I'm from New York where people tend to take how they dress a little more seriously on average but that would be the same when you compare women from here to women in other areas.
But the difference normally between men's superficiality and women's is that for men at least, it's normally not something that has such disasterous consequences on their health (and it normally isn't a result of a serious psychological issue either). The only exception to this may be men using steriods to get built but I don't think that's anywhere near as prevalent as women trying to become unnaturally skinny.
~But as for how the look became the trend initially, it had nothing to do with making women look weak. It was an idea by designers that the clothes should not be outshone by the models and they wanted the clothes to hang off the models as they would a hanger. It was purely a marketing idea that just led to these consequences. Previously most women in mass media had to be pretty curvy to be considered attractive.
""But part of the reason that is the case is because women are told (whether explicitly or not) throughout their lives that their worth is measured by superficial standards.""
Many women's lives *will* be measured, in whole or in part, by superficial standards.
What's your point?
News flash: Men are measured by superficial standards constantly, too.
Height is a serious deciding factor in life success, despite it having little to no 'rational' role in determining how productive you are.
Attractive men are more likely to be judged favorably in all sorts of situations, just as attractive women are.
When it comes to dating, women may be judged on one superficial level -- beauty -- but men are often judged on two: Their attractiveness and their income level.
Is all this judgment "wrong"? Not necessarily. For most of humanity, male and female, we're biologically wired to enjoy interacting with attractive people. It makes sense we'd prefer an attractive person over an unattractive one even in non-sexual situations, ceteris paribus.
""I think the fact that women can be very petty with one another (and sometimes downright vicious) is an example of that. Women generally feel on some level that they're in competition for male approval in some way.""
The most vicious cruelty I've ever heard of between women has been in all-girls schools.
That said, considering social interactions tend to center around men in competition for *female* approval, with men being expected (traditionally) to take the initiative, the idea that women are just delicate little flowers undermined by the hint of a man's approval is rather silly.
""The fact is that women are judged more based on superficial traits by other women and men, whereas men aren't judged by either to the same extent.""
Oh really?
That's funny, every statistic I've ever seen suggests that men are far more willing to date a woman who earns less than they do, whereas women tend to be highly resistant to that idea.
The resistance doesn't decrease as a woman's income decreases -- a woman earning six figures will still be far more likely to look for a partner with a higher income than herself, compared to a man earning the same.
What, do you think superficiality only means 'looks'?
If anything, it makes more sense to judge someone by their looks than to do so by their income level.
Attractive people make us happy -- a simple scan of our brains proves that. By contrast, there's a wealth of evidence that money doesn't buy happiness.
""Maybe my view of this is a little biased because I'm from New York where people tend to take how they dress a little more seriously on average but that would be the same when you compare women from here to women in other areas.""
Yes, us philistines out in Los Angeles wouldn't understand a concern with fashion. :)
Okay, first of all, I never said that men aren't judged superficially or that to some extent being judged superficially can't be avoided.
All I am saying is that historically it has been worse for women and still is to this day in spite of everything else. If anything, I think men are experiencing more now what women have for years as I see more men my age put way more into their appearance than men in any other generation but it's still hasn't become as important as it has been for women (and either way it doesn't help either sex).
"When it comes to dating, women may be judged on one superficial level -- beauty -- but men are often judged on two: Their attractiveness and their income level."
Actually, no. When it comes to dating women are judged primarily on their looks while men are judged primarily on their income or occupation. I'm not saying physical appearance won't play any role in the women's choice but if you're referring to people looking for a life long relationship, women will often take a man's financial standing more seriously.
A man's income might be superficial as well but it's not AS superficial if it's related to what he's chosen to do with his life.
Also, right next to income, the next main thing women tend to look for in a husband in stability. So even if the man in question isn't earning a ton of money, but presents himself as a dependable guy which is a part of his character (which isn't superficial), it will greatly increase his chance of finding a wife.
So, basically a woman's looks are traded in for a man's wealth/status. I don't agree that that is the way it should be but it's the way it is for the majority of people and for that reason it is actually beneficial for most women to often appear superficial or docile in some way if they want to get married. Women judging men based on income and men judging women on looks are two sides of the same coin.
"If anything, it makes more sense to judge someone by their looks than to do so by their income level."
I don't think so. Looks are easiest and most likely to change. The income of your partner, if you're considering marrying them or cohabitating, can have serious implications for your future (and the future of your children if you choose to have any).
Women still make less than men, but even if you're talking about a woman earning a high salary, most men are still reluctant to leave their jobs and become house husbands and whether or not either partner stays home, most studies show that women still take care of the vast majority of hte housework and childrearing; it becomes a full time job in itself.
"Attractive people make us happy -- a simple scan of our brains proves that. By contrast, there's a wealth of evidence that money doesn't buy happiness."
Money can't buy happiness but it can limit the amount of stress in your life drastically. If people are rich and miserable, it has nothing to do with their income, whereas when poor people are suffering physically or mentally, it often is a result of their lack of income.
"That said, considering social interactions tend to center around men in competition for *female* approval, with men being expected (traditionally) to take the initiative, the idea that women are just delicate little flowers undermined by the hint of a man's approval is rather silly."
Men may compete for women, but women also compete for men and on average it's easier for a man to find a woman the older, wealthier and/or more successful/smarter he becomes. For women, it's pretty much the exact opposite. The first reason is biological; men want younger and healthier mates to reproduce.
But the other reasons reflect a desire in most men to also have women who are beneath them in some way. Women may not be delicate little flowers but many men often want them to be even if they don't admit it. Studies show men are less likely to marry women with high powered careers and women with higher I.Q.'s have a harder time finding a husband. Even many liberal men who support feminism don't always practice what they preach once they marry.
Part of that comes from the fact that many men still feel emasculated if they can't provide financially well for their wife and children, but that idea comes from the system that we have that was created by men and for the most part benefits men.
Also, men benefit both in their careers and their general well being when they have a woman at home taking care of most of their needs and most men still expect a woman to do that. Conversely, a women's personal life, well being and vocation almost always suffer after marriage. You can give some exceptions but they're still just exceptions.
But this went really far off topic. Just for the record, I just added the link because I found it bothersome; I don't think the trends in fashion indicate men wanting weak women but other things in our daily interactions most definitely do.
And, just because girls are in an all girls' school doesn't mean they haven't been socialized in a male dominated culture.
Starving yourself causes death . Its unnatural. I meaaan what the hell. And if your anorexic, you can't even have kids, and you will probably die if you go on for too long straving yourself
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
!
But I wasn't even thinking about that until you reminded me lol thanks.
However, I do agree that it is mostly women who are pressuring other women to look this way.
...By 'male standards'?
What the fuck?
In case you haven't noticed, huge masses of women tend to prize superficiality in other women. It's not men buying those gossip magazines -- it's the men who are running in the other ear clutching their ears when they have to hear about what Brangelina or Bennifer is up to.
Is this every girl? Most girls? Of course not. But it's a pretty big chunk, and enough to put the lie to your sexist claim that this is some sort of "male standard".
But part of the reason that is the case is because women are told (whether explicitly or not) throughout their lives that their worth is measured by superficial standards. I think it's less clear now because women have come a long way in society but the same underlying causes are there and constantly manifest themselves.
I think the fact that women can be very petty with one another (and sometimes downright vicious) is an example of that. Women generally feel on some level that they're in competition for male approval in some way.
But I think you underestimate how superficial men can be. I don't think most men want women to starve themselves but men are still very superficial. The fact is that women are judged more based on superficial traits by other women and men, whereas men aren't judged by either to the same extent.
For example, I think it's way more common to see women date men they weren't initially very attracted to physically (the attraction might have grown after spending time with them), than it is to see men date women they weren't physically attracted to and that sends a strong message to the sexes.
Also, I think you underestimate how much men gossip. I'd think it's almost the same amount as women based on what I've seen personally. But whether or not it's exactly the same when people gossip, it tends to be about women regardless of the sex doing the gossiping and being that it's gossip, it's normally commenting on some superficial aspect of the women in question.
And lastly ofcourse, men (at least from what I see) are just into their superficial appearances as women are. Maybe my view of this is a little biased because I'm from New York where people tend to take how they dress a little more seriously on average but that would be the same when you compare women from here to women in other areas.
But the difference normally between men's superficiality and women's is that for men at least, it's normally not something that has such disasterous consequences on their health (and it normally isn't a result of a serious psychological issue either). The only exception to this may be men using steriods to get built but I don't think that's anywhere near as prevalent as women trying to become unnaturally skinny.
~But as for how the look became the trend initially, it had nothing to do with making women look weak. It was an idea by designers that the clothes should not be outshone by the models and they wanted the clothes to hang off the models as they would a hanger. It was purely a marketing idea that just led to these consequences. Previously most women in mass media had to be pretty curvy to be considered attractive.
Many women's lives *will* be measured, in whole or in part, by superficial standards.
What's your point?
News flash: Men are measured by superficial standards constantly, too.
Height is a serious deciding factor in life success, despite it having little to no 'rational' role in determining how productive you are.
Attractive men are more likely to be judged favorably in all sorts of situations, just as attractive women are.
When it comes to dating, women may be judged on one superficial level -- beauty -- but men are often judged on two: Their attractiveness and their income level.
Is all this judgment "wrong"? Not necessarily. For most of humanity, male and female, we're biologically wired to enjoy interacting with attractive people. It makes sense we'd prefer an attractive person over an unattractive one even in non-sexual situations, ceteris paribus.
""I think the fact that women can be very petty with one another (and sometimes downright vicious) is an example of that. Women generally feel on some level that they're in competition for male approval in some way.""
The most vicious cruelty I've ever heard of between women has been in all-girls schools.
That said, considering social interactions tend to center around men in competition for *female* approval, with men being expected (traditionally) to take the initiative, the idea that women are just delicate little flowers undermined by the hint of a man's approval is rather silly.
""The fact is that women are judged more based on superficial traits by other women and men, whereas men aren't judged by either to the same extent.""
Oh really?
That's funny, every statistic I've ever seen suggests that men are far more willing to date a woman who earns less than they do, whereas women tend to be highly resistant to that idea.
The resistance doesn't decrease as a woman's income decreases -- a woman earning six figures will still be far more likely to look for a partner with a higher income than herself, compared to a man earning the same.
What, do you think superficiality only means 'looks'?
If anything, it makes more sense to judge someone by their looks than to do so by their income level.
Attractive people make us happy -- a simple scan of our brains proves that. By contrast, there's a wealth of evidence that money doesn't buy happiness.
""Maybe my view of this is a little biased because I'm from New York where people tend to take how they dress a little more seriously on average but that would be the same when you compare women from here to women in other areas.""
Yes, us philistines out in Los Angeles wouldn't understand a concern with fashion. :)
All I am saying is that historically it has been worse for women and still is to this day in spite of everything else. If anything, I think men are experiencing more now what women have for years as I see more men my age put way more into their appearance than men in any other generation but it's still hasn't become as important as it has been for women (and either way it doesn't help either sex).
"When it comes to dating, women may be judged on one superficial level -- beauty -- but men are often judged on two: Their attractiveness and their income level."
Actually, no. When it comes to dating women are judged primarily on their looks while men are judged primarily on their income or occupation. I'm not saying physical appearance won't play any role in the women's choice but if you're referring to people looking for a life long relationship, women will often take a man's financial standing more seriously.
A man's income might be superficial as well but it's not AS superficial if it's related to what he's chosen to do with his life.
Also, right next to income, the next main thing women tend to look for in a husband in stability. So even if the man in question isn't earning a ton of money, but presents himself as a dependable guy which is a part of his character (which isn't superficial), it will greatly increase his chance of finding a wife.
So, basically a woman's looks are traded in for a man's wealth/status. I don't agree that that is the way it should be but it's the way it is for the majority of people and for that reason it is actually beneficial for most women to often appear superficial or docile in some way if they want to get married. Women judging men based on income and men judging women on looks are two sides of the same coin.
"If anything, it makes more sense to judge someone by their looks than to do so by their income level."
I don't think so. Looks are easiest and most likely to change. The income of your partner, if you're considering marrying them or cohabitating, can have serious implications for your future (and the future of your children if you choose to have any).
Women still make less than men, but even if you're talking about a woman earning a high salary, most men are still reluctant to leave their jobs and become house husbands and whether or not either partner stays home, most studies show that women still take care of the vast majority of hte housework and childrearing; it becomes a full time job in itself.
"Attractive people make us happy -- a simple scan of our brains proves that. By contrast, there's a wealth of evidence that money doesn't buy happiness."
Money can't buy happiness but it can limit the amount of stress in your life drastically. If people are rich and miserable, it has nothing to do with their income, whereas when poor people are suffering physically or mentally, it often is a result of their lack of income.
"That said, considering social interactions tend to center around men in competition for *female* approval, with men being expected (traditionally) to take the initiative, the idea that women are just delicate little flowers undermined by the hint of a man's approval is rather silly."
Men may compete for women, but women also compete for men and on average it's easier for a man to find a woman the older, wealthier and/or more successful/smarter he becomes. For women, it's pretty much the exact opposite. The first reason is biological; men want younger and healthier mates to reproduce.
But the other reasons reflect a desire in most men to also have women who are beneath them in some way. Women may not be delicate little flowers but many men often want them to be even if they don't admit it. Studies show men are less likely to marry women with high powered careers and women with higher I.Q.'s have a harder time finding a husband. Even many liberal men who support feminism don't always practice what they preach once they marry.
Part of that comes from the fact that many men still feel emasculated if they can't provide financially well for their wife and children, but that idea comes from the system that we have that was created by men and for the most part benefits men.
Also, men benefit both in their careers and their general well being when they have a woman at home taking care of most of their needs and most men still expect a woman to do that. Conversely, a women's personal life, well being and vocation almost always suffer after marriage. You can give some exceptions but they're still just exceptions.
But this went really far off topic. Just for the record, I just added the link because I found it bothersome; I don't think the trends in fashion indicate men wanting weak women but other things in our daily interactions most definitely do.
And, just because girls are in an all girls' school doesn't mean they haven't been socialized in a male dominated culture.