Male sexuality, especially the part wired to the eyeballs, is useless, stupid, and annoying.
Yeah, how useful to be inspired to lust that strongly for someone I don’t know, just because she looks nice. For dozens of such someones per day, in fact. Who the hell designed this?
Having said that, I don’t find it unpleasant in an of itself. (I don’t find unrequited sexual lust to be bothersome unless it stretches on for years w/o resolultion) But rather than facilitate sexual connections with real women in real life, the whole visual-sexuality thing is a distraction that mostly just gets in the way.
I’ll agree with annoying, but useless and stupid? I doubt we’d be here without at least one of the sexes back in the day wanting to fuck anything that moves.
Unless we’re going to go with the fact that someone designed it.
That’s one of the worst ways of putting it, especially on a message board with a lot of female members.
To the OP though, yes it’s nearly impossible to dislike watching all the pretty women walking around these days. For me it’s not that they are eye candy, it’s that I love everything about women, and it brings me joy to think about them.
Uh, I mean, isn’t it funny how wimmin nag, and uh, watch soap operas?
I can’t say that I personally find “flowers” to be a more crass example than “eye candy” and “fodder for the spank bank”…
Unless you’re referring to the bit about wet t-shirts, in which case I can only plead innocence based on temporary devilish interference to my sense of humor.
I used to have trouble understanding this. Then they started the Daily Kitten, and now I understand it.
It doesn’t matter that the kitten in that picture is now a big, fat cat. It doesn’t matter if the kitten died forty years ago. It doesn’t matter that I have beautiful kittehs of my own at home. I just want to see another picture of a kitten.
I know you’ll catch some shit for this, Sage Rat, but for what it’s worth, I agree. Of course, I’m a woman, and as nice pretty things to cheer me up go, I prefer interns to flowers.
Seriously though… why the outrage at the idea that men enjoy looking at us? I enjoy looking at men. Some men purely because they’re aesthetically pleasing, and others that are definitely going in the “spank bank”. So what? How does that hurt them?
I wish that someday someone would help me to understand what is inherently demeaning about being found sexually attractive. I’m able to find a man sexually attractive without seeing him as a “sex object”, it doesn’t mitigate my ability to take him seriously, or appreciate his other positive attributes, or interact with him neutrally. So why would I assume that just because a man occasionally looks at me and thinks “sex”, that’s all he *ever * sees when he looks at me?
Yeah, really…that line of thinking seems just shy of that whole “all sex is rape” mentality, or something.
I enjoy pretty women as much as the next guy, but not “too pretty” women. I get a kind of vibe that’s either she’s milking it for private gain or covering for some mental ugliness or is just hypercompetitive or something. I prefer wildflowers to hothouse orchids, as it were.
Back before the Winter of Our Missed Content I posted about an experience that happened to me one glorious spring day. I was outside eating lunch, the sun was shining, sky was blue, birds were singing, etc. Just a beautiful day. As I was eating, a very lovely young woman walked by. She had on a sun dress, was healthy and athletic looking, nice tan, long long long legs, amazing figure. She was walking confidently, humming something to herself - she just had a great look about her. The combination of the day, the setting, and the beautiful young woman made an impression on me even though I didn’t see her for more than about 30 seconds, several years ago, and we never said a solitary word to her.
Like the guy in Citizen Kane, I don’t suspect I’ll ever forget her.
Digg linked to an article today reporting on a study that says that the physiological reaction that occurs in men when they look at a woman is mostly the same regardless of the woman’s appearance. Apparently, the sight of Heidi Klum is no more stimulating (in a biological sense) than gazing upon Ruth Buzzi.
This seems true to me. Perhaps I was hasty in adding the qualifier of “pretty.” True, seeing women one considers attractive is a particularly agreeable activity, but frankly just admiring the opposite sex in general is still the only pastime I can think of that absolutely never gets boring. You can’t fight nature.
Odd. My wife will often point out a pretty girl before I even notice her. I thought girls checked out the attractiveness of other girls all the time. Maybe not out of enjoyment the way guys do, but they definitely give one another the once over, in my experience.
Ever look at so called lad-mags like Maxim and Stuff? Wall to wall pretty girls. Ever look at their counterparts Cosmo and Glamour? Wall to wall pretty girls.
You can tell a lot about the sexes by what publishers think they need. Maxim prints the same twenty tips every month about how to get women into bed; Cosmo prints the same twenty tips every month about what to do once you get there.
Should I be worried about not being pretty enough to get hired as office dressing or do I have to work not to come across as ‘too pretty’ and therefore needy?
Same here; I find a lot of supposedly ‘pretty’ women to be unpleasantly slathered in make-up, and overly concerned with their appearance. Or trying too hard to be fashionable than necessarily attractive. I prefer quirky girls who are almost ‘accidentally’ beautiful.
