Do Men Even Want Women?

[Rival]

Maybe nothing, but its related to things like cosmetics and hairstyles and shoes and so forth. Ideally we should care what other people look like or smell like, but we still do anyway, and there is a lot of judging that happens. There's like a resistance that keeps people apart, and its possible to dial up that resistance. Like you can go without deodorant, frown, wear old wrinkly messed up clothes and messed up hair. You can keep your face dirty, and all of that can be used to keep people away. Then you can also go in the opposite direction and actively research what other people like or even wear a disguise.

Deodourant is a matter of personal hygiene, like teeth cleaning or showering; shaving, makeup, etc. are not.

 

[Akivah]

It seems to me that the modern image of a beautiful woman is of a little girl with big breasts.

Hmmm, sorta like how your avatar looks.

 

[Rival]

Hmmm, sorta like how your avatar looks.

Lol, the creator of the PPG did it deliberately. PPG satirises a lot of things.

 

[Mindmaster]

This is not in a debate section but I thought it would be better here.

So in today's culture it's sort of taken as a given that attractive women will wear makeup to give the illusion of clear skin, big eyes, red lips and dainty brows; they will have no body hair at all; they will have thin, tiny figures and high, somewhat annoying voices.

The problem is that this is not a woman. Women have body hair; their faces are not perfectly even with flawless skin, huge eyes and red lips; their bodies have some fat and are not tiny.

It seems to me like men, or women who like women sometimes, prefer a woman to look like a little girl. Little girls have hairless bodies, big eyes, smooth skin and petite figures. Not even a teen girl, a little girl. Teen girls have body hair and so-so skin.

It seems to me that the modern image of a beautiful woman is of a little girl with big breasts.

I find this very disturbing.

What is attractive is a kept man or woman... Not a childlike appearance...

All that makeup, preening, and dressing are reflective of effort. As far as breast size, historically men are at least subconsciously always going to look at healthier women for permanent relations because they are looking for the mother of their children. That means some curves are going to be more desired, and a kept woman will also mind your children as well. At least, that is the theory... So while times are modern:

1) Men prefer women with boobs, because they are an outward visible sign that a woman can produce healthy children. Large breasts are generally associated with being able to feed children well...

2) Millions of years of wiring for this (selection criteria) make it even more desired when children are not the objective.

3) Lazy (regarding appearance) women are always going to be less desirable than those whom make the effort to keep themselves to a higher standard. What this entails changes as the times do, but to be considered a high quality man or woman there are standards and this has been the case throughout history.

Does that make people mad? Who cares...

Really, it's just that our biological wiring gives less than a single crap about gender studies, roles, equality, and all that jazz.

 

[Rival]

What is attractive is a kept man or woman... Not a childlike appearance...

All that makeup, preening, and dressing are reflective of effort. As far as breast size, historically men are at least subconsciously always going to look at healthier women for permanent relations because they are looking for the mother of their children. That means some curves are going to be more desired, and a kept woman will also mind your children as well. At least, that is the theory... So while times are modern:

1) Men prefer women with boobs, because they are an outward visible sign that a woman can produce healthy children. Large breasts are generally associated with being able to feed children well...

2) Millions of years of wiring for this (selection criteria) make it even more desired when children are not the objective.

3) Lazy (regarding appearance) women are always going to be less desirable than those whom make the effort to keep themselves to a higher standard. What this entails changes as the times do, but to be considered a high quality man or woman there are standards and this has been the case throughout history.

Does that make people mad? Who cares...

Really, it's just that our biological wiring gives less than a single crap about gender studies, roles, equality, and all that jazz.

I get the boob thing, but I don't get the shaving and makeup thing. These things should not be considered 'kept' or 'groomed' because body hair etc. is a natural part of a woman. It has every right to be there. Not removing it is not 'lazy' or unkempt. It's normal. What I want to know is why is a shaved, childlike body considered attractive when it's abnormal.

 

[Skwim]

It's no secret that some appearances are more attractive than others, in both women and men, and this will change from culture to culture and era to era.

For whatever reason, today in North American males generally prefer women without body hair, smooth unblemished skin, a flat stomach, breasts that are larger than smaller--although perky often beats out larger, well groomed hair, and good symmetrical facial features. And the closer a woman approaches these features the more attractive they tend to be. Other than those attractive elements that arise from copying a particular celebrity I don't believe the "why" of them is ever completely understood. My suspicion is that they lie within psychological factors.

Here's a video I just came across that demonstrates the change in appealing body types through the years.

So the importance of appearance is nothing new. Now, if a woman doesn't care about how she appears, and is satisfied with "not looking her best," so be it, but most men will pretty much disregard her in favor of the woman who does care and goes out of her way to look as appealing as she can. Want to remain fat and dumpy rather than put in the effort to meet the current standards of attractiveness then don't complain if your not treated like those who do. Preferential appeal is part human nature, and that ain't going to change.

.

.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I get the boob thing, but I don't get the shaving and makeup thing. These things should not be considered 'kept' or 'groomed' because body hair etc. is a natural part of a woman. It has every right to be there. Not removing it is not 'lazy' or unkempt. It's normal. What I want to know is why is a shaved, childlike body considered attractive when it's abnormal.

It's because body hair is associated with masculinity in our culture.

 

[Rival]

It's no secret that some appearances are more attractive than others, in both women and men, and this will change from culture to culture and era to era.

For whatever reason, today in North American males generally prefer women without body hair, smooth unblemished skin, a flat stomach, breasts that are larger than smaller--although perky often beats out larger, well groomed hair, and good symmetrical facial features. And the closer a woman approaches these features the more attractive they tend to be. Other than those attractive elements that arise from copying a particular celebrity, I don't believe the "why" of them is ever completely understood. My suspicion is that they lie in psychological factors.

Here's a video I just came across that demonstrates the change in appealing body types through the years.

So the importance of appearance is nothing new. Now, if a woman doesn't care about how she appears, and is satisfied with "not looking her best," so be it, but most men will pretty much disregard her in favor of the woman who does care and goes out of her way to look as appealing as she can. Want to remain fat and dumpy rather than put in the effort to meet the current standards of attractiveness then don't complain if your not treated like those who do. Preferential appeal is part human nature, and that ain't going to change.

.

.

Right so basically if a woman looks like how nature made her that's bad. That's disgusting.

 

[Stevicus]

This is not in a debate section but I thought it would be better here.

So in today's culture it's sort of taken as a given that attractive women will wear makeup to give the illusion of clear skin, big eyes, red lips and dainty brows; they will have no body hair at all; they will have thin, tiny figures and high, somewhat annoying voices.

The problem is that this is not a woman. Women have body hair; their faces are not perfectly even with flawless skin, huge eyes and red lips; their bodies have some fat and are not tiny.

It seems to me like men, or women who like women sometimes, prefer a woman to look like a little girl. Little girls have hairless bodies, big eyes, smooth skin and petite figures. Not even a teen girl, a little girl. Teen girls have body hair and so-so skin.

It seems to me that the modern image of a beautiful woman is of a little girl with big breasts.

I find this very disturbing.

I'm not sure that many men are really that picky about these things - not as much as women seem to think we are. I never could quite get the fixation over body hair either. Back when I was younger, the whole idea was to "let your hair grow," but now, everyone wants to be shaved, from head to toe and every part in between. I've heard some guys even shave their chest hair, since a hairy chest is no longer considered attractive - or so I'm told.

I don't know who decides all this stuff, whether there's some kind of central fashion committee or what. All I really know is that women seem to be far more in tune and in the know regarding what's "in style" or "in fashion," while most men aren't.

 

[Rival]

Yeah I've noticed that this isn't just women. Men with beards are often discriminated against and they are waxing chest hair and sometimes even pubic hair. It's mind boggling.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm not sure that many men are really that picky about these things - not as much as women seem to think we are. I never could quite get the fixation over body hair either. Back when I was younger, the whole idea was to "let your hair grow," but now, everyone wants to be shaved, from head to toe and every part in between. I've heard some guys even shave their chest hair, since a hairy chest is no longer considered attractive - or so I'm told.

I don't know who decides all this stuff, whether there's some kind of central fashion committee or what. All I really know is that women seem to be far more in tune and in the know regarding what's "in style" or "in fashion," while most men aren't.

The fashion world is run by gay men, primarily.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I get the boob thing, but I don't get the shaving and makeup thing. These things should not be considered 'kept' or 'groomed' because body hair etc. is a natural part of a woman. It has every right to be there. Not removing it is not 'lazy' or unkempt. It's normal. What I want to know is why is a shaved, childlike body considered attractive when it's abnormal.

It's not culturally normal, and thus, isn't considered attractive. If we lived in a society where women didn't shave their legs and pits, than people wouldn't find it unattractive. However, I don't see the cultural landscape changing anytime soon in that regard.

If I didn't shave my nose hair, I'd have long sprouts of thick, dark nose hairs sprouting out of my nostrils. I wouldn't expect women to find this attractive, so I simply shave it in the interest of not being repulsive, even though it's perfectly natural and has every right to be there.

 

[Mindmaster]

I get the boob thing, but I don't get the shaving and makeup thing. These things should not be considered 'kept' or 'groomed' because body hair etc. is a natural part of a woman. It has every right to be there. Not removing it is not 'lazy' or unkempt. It's normal. What I want to know is why is a shaved, childlike body considered attractive when it's abnormal.

Again, I think it is as simple as effort and no effort. It takes effort for a woman to remove the hair, much like it does for a man to shave or maintain a short haircut.

Social norms are responsible for what is associated with an attractive person, but I assure you at every juncture it is the effort that counts. Short hair on men, for example, is far more difficult to maintain than long hair. By your argument, we should all have long hair and shave nothing (not even the downstairs). Should we stop using deodorant because that is not how we naturally smell? How about soap? The argument basically goes into absurdity really fast... Most of this grooming in the past was functional, when plagues of lice and being dirty were serious health problems. This argument of what is natural is actually just arbitrary lines in the sand:

1) If never cut your hair it would be dragging on the ground.

2) Mens beards would reach below their waists.

3) Deodorant is unnatural, have fun with that.

etc...

Most of what are "norms" and considered groomed are of course being less offensive to the people you reside nearby.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

To one point of the OP, men do tend to find youthful traits in females more attractive. Blame evolution.

 

[Skwim]

Right so basically if a woman looks like how nature made her that's bad. That's disgusting.

Not bad, just not attractive perhaps, and maybe how nature made her is attractive. Not all people respond to all the attractive elements the same way. What may be high on the priority list of some people may be quite low on the list of others. Be careful about making value judgments such as bad and good.

.

 

[Rival]

To one point of the OP, men do tend to find youthful traits in females more attractive. Blame evolution.

Yes but lack of body hair is prepubescent. I had leg, pubic and underarm hair at 13. Below that is a bit *too* youthful, you know?

 

[Rival]

Again, I think it is as simple as effort and no effort. It takes effort for a woman to remove the hair, much like it does for a man to shave or maintain a short haircut.

Social norms are responsible for what is associated with an attractive person, but I assure you at every juncture it is the effort that counts. Short hair on men, for example, is far more difficult to maintain than long hair. By your argument, we should all have long hair and shave nothing (not even the downstairs). Should we stop using deodorant because that is not how we naturally smell? How about soap? The argument basically goes into absurdity really fast... Most of this grooming in the past was functional, when plagues of lice and being dirty were serious health problems. This argument of what is natural is actually just arbitrary lines in the sand:

1) If never cut your hair it would be dragging on the ground.

2) Mens beards would reach below their waists.

3) Deodorant is unnatural, have fun with that.

etc...

Most of what are "norms" and considered groomed are of course being less offensive to the people you reside nearby.

STD rates have gone *way up* since people started shaving their pubes. Underarm and pubic hair serve a purpose and ought to be there.

Theoretically no, we don't *need* to use deodorant, but it's not harmful or arbitrary either. Removal of hair is actively harmful as it leaves minute scars. This leaves us more susceptible to infection, as STD rates also show. After removing armpit hair then applying deodorant the deodorant can enter the bloodstream. That's not cool.

So yes, I agree that shaving is bad and that both sexes should have long hair which can be trimmed when necessary.

 

[Mindmaster]

Yes but lack of body hair is prepubescent. I had leg, pubic and underarm hair at 13. Below that is a bit *too* youthful, you know?

I think it is a bit presumptuous to associate this only with youth, for example, most men are looking at pictures of older women in their youth and the first nudie they see I guarantee the woman is virtually clean shaven and made up. It has little to do with projecting an adolescent image so much as it is the image they have seen of an adult and grown to associate with one.

Why does that need to change, anyway? It's not that anyone looks down on women who don't comply, and some men are far less picky about these things. I'm pretty "whatever" on it either way... If you want armpit hair to your knees it doesn't bother me, but I'm also not going to be interested when I'm looking to hook up either. I think with all things you should pick your battles, and I think that this battle has no net payoff.

 

[Rival]

Why does that need to change, anyway?

It needs to change because people DO look down on women who don't comply. Especially other women. The culture should not promote one or the other. Whether or not a woman has body hair should not be a concern.

 

[BSM1]

I know when I never shaved for four years or so, and I still mostly choose not to, that the people who gave me the most comments were women.

Did they say things like, "Nice moustache"? (Just kidding)