As a by-the-way in another debate, someone said women should be free to wear short skirts without being stared at. I was wondering whether that was the purpose of a miniskirt. 😲
Could any lady readers put me right on this? I don't want to cause offence if women are really sensitive about this. 😳
Originally posted by MixoI don't wear skirts, least of all mini-skirts, but I agree that they're worn to be stared at since they obviously (to me!) aren't being worn for comfort!
As a by-the-way in another debate, someone said women should be free to wear short skirts without being stared at. I was wondering whether that was the purpose of a miniskirt. 😲
Could any lady readers put me right on this? I don't want to cause offence if women are really sensitive about this. 😳
My sister would insist on wearing very tight sweaters and then complain that no one ever looked at her face. Remind me to spend more time teaching cause and effect this year.
Originally posted by Mixoa reminder of course about the difference between *looking at* and *trying to peek under* -- even though some don't require much effort
As a by-the-way in another debate, someone said women should be free to wear short skirts without being stared at. I was wondering whether that was the purpose of a miniskirt. 😲
Could any lady readers put me right on this? I don't want to cause offence if women are really sensitive about this. 😳
1 edit
Originally posted by reader1107It's so hard to strike the right balance between being an object of idolatry and a locus of lechery.
I don't wear skirts, least of all mini-skirts, but I agree that they're worn to be stared at since they obviously (to me!) aren't being worn for comfort!
My sister would insist on wearing very tight sweaters and then complain that no one ever looked at her face. Remind me to spend more time teaching cause and effect this year.
In a free and wealthy society, unencumbered by modesty mores (as say, India), women naturally compete against one another to look their most sexy, as sexiness increases their social value, and correspondingly their chances of finding and keeping a desirable mate. Hence, they keep pushing the envelope of sexiness, to get one up an the girl next door. Needless to add, men encourage this pushing of this envelope.
However, pushing the envelope too far implies indiscriminate availability, so there comes a point beyond which women will not proceed. An equilibrium develops between these two contrary propensities. The greater the free competition between women, however, the further women will tend towards the maximization of personal sexiness.
In contemporary England, free and easy, the envelope is quite extended, to the extent that the trappings of sexiness are embraced by women who would, from an aesthetic point of view, do better to eschew them in favour of discreet disguise.
This is what girls have told me, as unreasonable as it may sound. They wear mini-shirts, and other revealing clothing both to feel sexy about themselves and to get attention. However, they then use a litmus test for guys based upon who stares. They want us to feel like we can look but can't have. The guys that aren't interested in their bodies are the ones they want to date.
2 edits
Originally posted by MixoYes, the purpose of sexy, form-fitting clothes is to be admired--however, I think when women say they wish they could wear such clothing without being stared at, they don't mean they don't want to be looked at, they just mean they don't want to be blatantly drooled over. They would like to be admired, but discreetly. It may not seem like it would make a difference how long the stare lasts, but different types of stares mean different things. A short, one-or-two-second glance (with eye contact included) is flattering; a look that lasts much longer without any eye contact (not to mention having your chest talked at instead of your eyes) feels invasive and rude. I imagine it probably makes little-to-no sense to many, but that is my best guess as to the logic behind those types of complaints.
As a by-the-way in another debate, someone said women should be free to wear short skirts without being stared at. I was wondering whether that was the purpose of a miniskirt. 😲
Could any lady readers put me right on this? I don't want to cause offence if women are really sensitive about this. 😳
Edit: ark13 makes a valid point too, although it's not that girls don't want to date guys that are not interested in them physically, they just don't like for that to be their only interest.
Originally posted by carpenoctemValid? Maybe. Logical? No way.
Yes, the purpose of sexy, form-fitting clothes is to be admired--however, I think when women say they wish they could wear such clothing without being stared at, they don't mean they don't want to be looked at, they just mean they don't want to be blatantly drooled over. They would like to be admired, but discreetly. It may not seem like it would make a ...[text shortened]... ess as to the logic behind those types of complaints.
Edit: ark13 makes a valid point too.
Originally posted by ark13So they want to date gay men? Hmm.
This is what girls have told me, as unreasonable as it may sound. They wear mini-shirts, and other revealing clothing both to feel sexy about themselves and to get attention. However, they then use a litmus test for guys based upon who stares. They want us to feel like we can look but can't have. The guys that aren't interested in their bodies are the ones they want to date.
But yes, they also use their surface sexiness to gauge desperation. Men who act coolly, as opposed to libidinously, imply that they have higher social value, as they don't need to pursue you, having other women available to them.
Originally posted by carpenoctemBut if the manner of dress is crude rather than sophisticated--as is not unknown in England--then more drooling than appreciation may be evoked.
Yes, the purpose of sexy, form-fitting clothes is to be admired--however, I think when women say they wish they could wear such clothing without being stared at, they don't mean they don't want to be looked at, they just mean they don't want to be blatantly drooled over. They would like to be admired, but discreetly. It may not seem like it would make a ...[text shortened]... ess as to the logic behind those types of complaints.
Edit: ark13 makes a valid point too.
Originally posted by MixoDepends on the culture, I guess.
As a by-the-way in another debate, someone said women should be free to wear short skirts without being stared at. I was wondering whether that was the purpose of a miniskirt. 😲
Could any lady readers put me right on this? I don't want to cause offence if women are really sensitive about this. 😳
When I lived in Romania, in the beginning, I used to have a lot of neck pains due to an abundance of skimpy clothes and slim bodies, not just going out but everywhere in general.
I had once a very interesting discussion with a Romanian girl where she told me that foreigners tended to stare a lot more, because they weren't used to see so many nice women with large belts (I don't think those could qualify as "mini-skirts"😉 but that for Romanian girls it was perfectly normal to wear them. These belts were worn at the workplace, university, parks, etc. Basically everywhere, to a point where young women wore them not to attract attention to their bodies (especially since everyone wore them) but because it was fashionable.
In such a context, staring is rude because it makes people feel unconfortable and because it is not a normal thing to do just because people wear mini-skirts. There, the foreigners would be rude because they stared at the locals when normal Romanian guys would look, but not stare.