Yup, it's such a well known power dynamic you see it in dehumanization tactics in all sorts of history.Yet, something as trivial as how one "presents" themselves is a frequent and enduring focus for control.
It is often taboo to show sympathy or respect (as opposed to pity, opposition, fear or disgust) for the plight of a disempowered person. All the considerations I'm hearing so far, whether in favor or against, appear to be bound by this taboo.
I suppose the question I’m interested in is how the topless lass (as an individual) might be responding to a power dynamic via her toplessness.Yup, it's such a well known power dynamic you see it in dehumanization tactics in all sorts of history.
In cults they call it having 'no image'. By forcing you into dull clothes that represent the group, you're less likely to feel empowered as an individual.
Sorry, not obvious. I'm not sure how to understand your whole post, paragraph in parentheses included, I'm not sure what your stance is in this post.I am kidding, which is hopefully obvious.
edit: I will say this in a plainer (ok--less angry) way:Sorry, not obvious. I'm not sure how to understand your whole post, paragraph in parentheses included, I'm not sure what your stance is in this post.
There would be things to say, and to rebut, about it. But since I have no idea about what you're joking or to what degree…
The only thing I'm gonna say is that the responsibility is shared. Regardless of if one agrees with how things are being perceived and interpreted or not, if one knows that it will perceived one way, one can't just decide to ignore how it will be perceived, then be surprised, or complain that it is being perceived that way. One, has to take responsibility for their own decision.
In such a scenario, "one" is "any woman".
It's not fair, but life isn't fair ; moreover it's not fair that men are wired like they are wired. And, just like it's not fair that women are sexualized, it's not fair that men are financialized.
Yes...men like that need to stop sending women mixed signals. A woman can't be blamed if she just reaches out and grabs a wad of cash in a situation like that, and runs out the door as someone calls the police. It's unfair how the laws are stacked against our female biology.@WickerDeer
A guy in line at a store randomly bragged to me about how much money he had, lamenting about how he didn’t know where to invest it.
I couldn’t handle it - exposing his wallet to me like that. I can’t help that gold-digging instinct and men need to be more mindful of how their wallets affect women.
I don’t care if this is a false analogy, it is hilarious. 😂Yes...men like that need to stop sending women mixed signals. A woman can't be blamed if she just reaches out and grabs a wad of cash in a situation like that, and runs out the door as someone calls the police. It's unfair how the laws are stacked against our female biology.
He could at least have covered up the wallet with some lace or something, like a classy man. Leave something up to the imagination!
Since covering women and letting women be uncovered hasn't solved the world's problems, perhaps we need to consider covering men.
I can't fathom any respectable lady letting their husband outside without a blindfold on.
What if he saw a boob.
Only cheap men go out without covering their eyes.
They say that eyes are the windows to the soul and ancient Latin texts say that love starts with the eyes, so then what if a woman sees a man's uncovered eyes and falls in love with him, entrancing him with her seductive feminine charms as women are wont to do? This is completely scandalous, intolerable, unacceptable, unthinkable etc.
Look at this cad--his wife must be so ashamed...just flashing everyone. What if he sees the outline of a breast through clothing? OMG the scandal!
What is this world coming to. Men gone wild.
I deeply regret having to show you this picture, but it just shows how serious this problem is.
(also I am kidding, which is hopefully obvious. my point is that at some point people need to assign responsibility to where it belongs rather than to breasts or whatever. I wrote this after researching "breast ironing" which is so disturbing, but also makes sense as an extension of this idea that one's body somehow has any responsibility for the behavior of others, which it doesn't.)
I just want them to come out with wallet string-bikinis so I can comment about how classy it is for a man to have a tiny little string around his wallet than one of those cheap, slutty men who might let his wallet be exposed just as it is.I don’t care if this is a false analogy, it is hilarious. 😂
Women aren't wired either to be incapable of taking responsibility for their actions. Dressing a certain way is an action, whether you like it or not. You have to take responsibility in how your present yourself, and in how people perceive you as a result of you presenting yourself a certain way. Women aren't exempt of that responsibility.1. Men aren't "wired" to be incapable of taking responsibility for their actions or acting in an ethical manner.
Many men are ethical and responsible people. Just because a few men and women have trouble with behaving in a responsible way doesn't mean that it is how men or women are wired.
Agree with the first part, half agree with the second one. There is a responsibility in how one presents themselves. This is not a debate, this is not up for discussion.2. People choose their behavior and actions--one's physical form does not share responsibility for another's actions.
However, generally, people have their wallet hidden from sight. Men who flaunt their money inevitably end up attracting gold-diggers, the same way that women who flaunt their bodies, end up attracting the least refined men. Some of them don't complain about it, others get played over and over while avoiding taking responsibility in regards to how they present themselves, shifting the blame entirely on the person who was attracted to that.3. It would be unethical to prohibit men from carrying wallets just because some women are attracted to wealth. I don't see why we would blame men for the right to own money, or for having a wallet in town anymore than we would blame women for their physical form and dress.
Other people acting unethically is their responsibility...not the wallet or the physical form.
So, should the IG thot be entirely responsible for that situation with PJ Washington, and him not at all ? Or does he, at any point, have any ounce of responsibility in it ? Because that's what you're arguing here. She's being unethical, she's profiting, and she did the act of divorcing him after having a kid from him.4. I'm not even arguing against nudity laws. I'm just saying that I think it's dangerous if we don't assign responsibility where it belongs--to the individual who is committing the unethical act...not the physical form or wallet.
I'm not arguing for any ban either, just, if you do A, expect B. If you know men are thirsty, and you dress skankily because you "feel like it", then expect men to thirst after you. That's not rocket science. If you know women are attracted by money and status, and you flaunt your money and status, then expect women to try and play you. Still not rocket science.I feel that when we take these scapegoating to extremes, gross human rights violations tend to occur, which I do not think should happen to men or women.