TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

"Only women face unrealistic beauty standards."

jblades13

January 9, 2015
1052 upvotes
/r/MensRights
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title "Only women face unrealistic beauty standards."
Author

jblades13

Upvotes 1052
Comments 261
Date January 9, 2015 6:18 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2rvon5/only_women_face_unrealistic_beauty_standards/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/only-women-face-unrealistic-beauty-standards.990913
https://theredarchive.com/post/990913
Red Pill terms in post
standards
Top posts by jblades13

Debunking Article Claiming Woman Was Raped By MRA.

11 upvotes
June 29, 2014
/r/MensRights

Meta: On The Use of "Outrage" Flair.

0 upvotes
July 14, 2014
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]bigAlittleA 277 points278 points279 points 11 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

I know this is old, but still pretty funny, and sums it up the situation succinctly.

[–]therealJBlack 58 points59 points60 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

You should look at old school G.I. Joe dolls versus now.

[–][deleted] 41 points42 points43 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

By sheer coincidence, I watched Bigger, Stronger, Faster yesterday, where they mention this exact thing:

http://youtu.be/O77cVVOFqbE?t=1h12m5s

The whole documentary is priceless, by the way. A must-watch.

[–]SchrodingersRapist 52 points53 points54 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Blocked in my country....

Well fine!

[–]flyingwolf 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Http://privateinternetaccess.com

Enjoy.

I paid with an old starbucks card lol.

[–]SchrodingersRapist 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I've had that service for a couple years and I like it a lot. Atm though it was allowed to expire. Soon as I can afford another year's sub it will be reactivated.

Edit: besides there are plenty of ways around it, even a chrome addon that sets my country or origin elsewhere. Just bugs me that I have to do that sort of thing.

[–]huoyuanjiaa 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol thanks for the tip.

[–]Luckyluke23 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

good joke...

but i come from australia. where we get anything MONTHS after the us has put it on the shelf.

[–]SchrodingersRapist 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, Im not moving to your country because they censor video games. In a country where every single piece of wildlife seems to want to kill and eat you, make-believe is too violent....

[–]Luckyluke23 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah there is some pretty fucked up rules over here....

[–]TheLordOfShit 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just use Portable Tor and hop nodes until you can access it?

[–]theskepticalidealist 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Another good one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doT2FvAlmoU

[–]starbuxed 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I actually found that one hugely positive and healthy.

[–]3rdLevelRogue 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Blocked in the U.S.? What kind of terrorism is this?

[–]uncommonman 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Tack för undertexten.

[–]therealJBlack 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is a great documentary.

[–]TheLordOfShit 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or Luke Skywalker. Hell, watch Mark Hamill's reaction to his figure from the relaunch of the line of original toys. I forgot what the name of the show was, but when he got his hands on the action figure his eyes almost popped out of his head because he looked like Schwarzenegger.

[–]wonkifier 22 points23 points24 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

"Yes, but to try to be like Heman is empowering. To try to be like Barbie is to belittle yourself."

That's the gist of the last time I discussed it with someone.

I kinda get it, but that seems to suffer from its own cultural assumptions. So, meh.

[–]bigAlittleA 20 points21 points22 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It sure does. Like being a big strong man = good, being a beautiful woman = bad. Where the hell do feminists get their logic? I know they like to play the eternal victim, but jesus h christ!

[–]Blutarg 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

A big man like He-Man gets to go off to war and have the crap beaten out of him, while a pretty lady like Barbie doesn't get to. She has to content herself with big houses and glamorous jobs and romances.

[–]tohuw 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Barbie has had all kinds of jobs. Astronaut, President, etc.

Except for having a physique that would make it nearly impossible to walk upright, being Barbie would be pretty fun.

[–]gogodoctor26 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Dude look at some Superman depictions. He has muscles that are physically impossible to have

[–]harleypig 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

He's a Kryptonian ... they aren't human!

[–]gogodoctor26 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Dude, spoilers!

[–]Blutarg 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

His parents must be proud.

[–]RussellLawliet 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

His armpits are fucking RIPPED.

[–]scottsouth 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Also, they blame men for these unrealistic, unhealthy, and unfair standards of beauty for girls, yet I've never seen a single guy say they find the Barbie look attractive, but instead guys say the opposite.

[–]ittleoff 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Barbie was designed by women for the ease of designing/sewing clothes if I recall correctly.

[–]MOMMY_FUCKED_GANDHI 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

His calves are hilarious

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And feminists at my school INSIST that they are fighting for both of the sexes. smh

[–]Alarid 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I hate the constant image that men are strong, and women are weak.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 159 points160 points161 points 11 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

It is amazing that so many men choose to be below average in height, or to go bald.

[–]peacegnome 65 points66 points67 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

It is amazing that so many men choose to be below average in height

Half of them, if you can believe it!

[–]IcyWindows 27 points28 points29 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I would believe half if we were talking about the median height. :)

[–]zazhx 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Technically, an average is merely a measure of central tendency, including the median.

[–]Sutartsore 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

It's typically the mean. What he's getting at is it's totally possible for more than half of a group to be above or below the average.

A: 30      B: 30      C: 30      D: 10

The average there is 25, and 75% are above it.

[–]zazhx 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Yes, I am familiar with primary school level mathematics. I realize it's a joke, but I am concerned that many people at least appear to not be familiar with the meaning of the word "average."

[–]Sutartsore 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A lot of people are under the impression that half are necessarily below a group's mean and half are above it, so it's worth pointing out the misconception. Using "average" ambiguously only further confuses the issue.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I like maths, too.

[–]Smitty1017 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now kith

[–]Mordvark 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Psh, everyone knows height in a population is normally distributed. /s

(But this is why the joke works for height, but doesn't always work for test scores).

[–]mikesteane 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is a popular assumption. I suspect however, that, the scale needs to be unevenly dilated so that high scores are further apart than low ones.

[–]mikesteane 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It seems to me that the usage of "average" to cover all measures of central tendency is a modern invention and that traditionally, the word could only be used to refer to the mean value. The looser definition is advantageous to people who are mendacious with statistics, which, I suspect is the reason for its introduction.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I'm actually choosing to go bald once I work up the courage to shave the rest of my hair off. I've got a patch going and I'm kinda insecure about it.

Hi. I'm /u/yourotherusername and I'm going bald.

[–]flyingwolf 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Look as a man there is no easy way to do it.

Let it go naturally and people will say you are trying to hang on to it.

Shave it completely and you will have that one shiny spot.

Here is my advice, go the captain picard route. Just buzz it close, keep it clean and let it go as it pleases.

That man has his shit together. He started going bald in his early 20's and figured no woman would ever want him. And well...

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

And well...

And then he became the captain of the Starship Fucking Enterprise and founded a school for gifted children.

[–]flyingwolf 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But he went crazy and released a bunch of government secrets eventually.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

True, but the govt eventually forgave him and made him the deputy director of the CIA.

EDIT: forgot about the damn wikibot

[–]autowikiabot 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Avery Bullock:


Bullock has worked at the CIA for over 25 years. Despite his age, he is in top physical form, as evidenced by his close fight with Stan in "Bullocks To Stan". "Roger Codger" reveals that he is a Protestant along with agent Duper, the only non-Episcopalians. He is also a cocaine addict in "I Can't Stan You", and he has a fetish for overweight Asian women, bagging Coco in "One Little Word". In "Cock of the Sleepwalk", he claims to be part of a group of "responsible" cocaine and opium users when he offers Stan some cocaine. However, before Stan can completely excuse himself from Bullock's office, Bullock comes crashing through the celling in a cocaine high. Interesting: The Full Cognitive Redaction of Avery Bullock by the Coward Stan Smith/Goofs | The Full Cognitive Redaction of Avery Bullock by the Coward Stan Smith/References | The Full Cognitive Redaction of Avery Bullock by the Coward Stan Smith/Quotes | The Full Cognitive Redaction of Avery Bullock by the Coward Stan Smith/Notes

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Source Please note this bot is in testing. Any help would be greatly appreciated, even if it is just a bug report! Please checkout the source code to submit bugs

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I started to gray at 18. Now all peppery. I don't mind that.

Might try the buzz though. Good idea.

[–]flyingwolf 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am slightly balding, the points of my forehead you know, just starting to recede, and I am going gray at the temples nicely. I cant complain.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not me. Front is fine. Its the friar tuck bald patch. Started to notice it in photos this summer. I've been wearing a lot of hats since.

[–]flyingwolf 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

From what I hear that makes it worse.

[–]livin4donuts 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Gotta go full bore and get laser hair removal on your dome.

[–]Kolz 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I think bald is a better look than balding. I'm not even sure why, maybe it shows that you've taken command of the process?

[–]theskepticalidealist 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Some men look better bald than others.

[–]digitalcriminal 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Being fit helps the look a lot...

[–]34Mbit 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you've got the ripped physique, then you can own a bald head quite confidently.

Just another reason to stay in shape.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I live in Michigan. Its like 3° out. So that could also lead to some hesitation. Lol.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Being bald is more attractive than going bald. Being bald is quite attractive, particularily of coupled with well groom facial hair. Look at Neil Strauss (who wrote the game where they make this argument) for inspiration.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can only hope this is true!

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

it isn't a choice. it is sarcasm. :)

[–]jakelove12 115 points116 points117 points 11 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

The notion that only women have beauty standards is absolutely ridiculous. Anybody who seriously believes that is either delusional, or lives secluded under a rock. That includes things like weight, muscles, hair, skin, teeth, body hair, clothing, scent, genital size/shape, attitude, and behavior.

We judge human beings on their physical and observable qualities. Idk why people don't think it happens to men. Especially when it's other dudes saying shit like that. It's almost as if they haven't experienced existing in reality.

The only thing I can think of that women are effected by that don't also effect men, is make-up. But that's not really something I'd consider a problem (for women). Rather, the opposite. Because the societal expectation isn't to "wear make-up", it's to "look good". Make-up is only a method of achieving that goal. Being socially acceptable to wear make-up is an advantage that men aren't offered.

Anyway, staring at his head getting bigger and smaller made me LOL

[–]horus-ra 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

We judge human beings on their physical and observable qualities.

This is something that I think that so many people tend to overlook. As human beings our best and most advanced sense is sight. Something like 60% of our brain is dedicated involved in vision or vision related functions, so it makes sense that visually observable qualities play a massive role in our decision making process.

[–]forensic_freak 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Where are you pulling that 60% figure from?

I just think it's way too high considering the other things it has to do: the other stimuli and processing them, memory, motor function, and homeostasis.

[–]horus-ra 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Oops, I said dedicated, I meant to say involved in. http://www.quora.com/How-much-of-the-brain-is-involved-with-vision

[–]forensic_freak 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're a top redditor. Dealing with this interaction with humility and accuracy.

That's a great read too, thank you!

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well our lack of telepathy as to what kind of person they are also limits us to what we can see/hear/etc. We usually see people before we smell/hear them, and touching tasting as a first indicator is considered bad form.

[–]Furah 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unless you're blind and deaf.

[–]Neijo 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

This often get's the label as "trp-thinking" but it makes sense.

One thing that always seem to pop-up when discussing stuff like this, others say "Yeah, but most men have sharp costumes n look rich." But after reading a reddit thread on Askreddit or something, a multitude of women replied on the topic "What are things that isn't porn, but sexy as hell?" the answer "A man in a sharp costume looking professional" or something like that. I'm no woman, but I believe they admire nakedish female bodies like a work of art, men usually find it attracting and also maybe artistically, if so made. Men however, (or it might just be me) even if homosexuality is okay in my book and just as okay as heteroesexuality, I have a hard time looking at a naked man, it's just uncomfortable. However, a man in a sharp suit is something I admire. As do women.

So, what I guess I want to say is that magazines want to go for as many audiences as possible. It's strictly statistics and data on why they made the decision for that cover. We are both sort of "objectified" in the media (can't find the right word, but I guess you will understand.) Just in different ways

[–]tehwankingwalruses 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

This often get's the label as "trp-thinking" but it makes sense.

Because most of the "trp-thinking" makes sense when you take out the angry nerds and shit.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

excuse my ignorance, what exactly is trp-thinking?

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Demonspawn 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

They are male supremacists, which is not compatible with /r/MensRights

Common misconception.

MR is "ought": Society/Humanity ought to work this way so that things can be better for men; let's try to get society/humanity to be that way.

TRP is "is": Society/Humanity is this way. If you do these things you can make a better life for yourself, because society/humanity rewards those actions.

[–]flyingwolf 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well said.

TRP are "self" supremacists, and I don't disagree, I cannot help you on the battlefield of life if I stand up like a moron and get taken out in the first skirmish.

The problem is that a lot of what you find on TRP is the first stages, the people who have just found it and are angry still, angry at life, at past relationships, current relationships, just angry. A lot like the atheism subreddit. Lots of anger.

But if you read the older guys who have been there for a while, the ones who have passed the anger stage you find out its more about being the best YOU that you can ve and letting things come to you naturally.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Honestly I haven't read too deep on there so I haven't found the older ones. Too much chest beating for me.

Not that a guy can't beat his chest, just isn't for me is all.

[–]timberwolfe 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Read the top posts

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, thank you for the explanation :)

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tehwankingwalruses 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I think because generally when you cut through the fluff and vocal minority, there is genuine good information and ideas. The thing is though, most people never cut through because they don't like what they see on the surface.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tehwankingwalruses 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

True. If you hang around enough you see that its a lot of the same people.

[–]bananashammock 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good observations, I can agree there are some. Truly, I can. However, I don't see many good ideas stemming from them. TRP philosophy is created by damaged people for use by damaged people to, whether directly or indirectly, damage others, IMO. Nothing about that is good.

[–]flyingwolf 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Careful, that's getting close to support TRP and when you do that you can kiss your ability to post without being destroyed goodbye. Ask me how I know lol.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]flyingwolf -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Which is sad because once you get past the angst and the hate there really is one major strong message, be the best YOU that you can be.

[–]TheLordOfShit 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you want to take a look, both heads do that in this gif.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ThatEconGuy 24 points25 points26 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Monroe's pregnant in that photo, just FYI.

[–]flyingwolf 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

Marilyn was a size 2, 20 to 22 inch waist.

When my facebook friends post those "real women have curves" pictures with Marilyn as the image I remind them she was 6 months pregnant in that picture, and that today she would wear a size 2.

[–]Kronos6948 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Anyone got a reputable source on her being pregnant in that photo? I want to say that to folks, but they know I'm a stickler for proof. So, without any, I would look like an ass. Googling gives me meh results. The only thing I see of any real relevance is from neoneocon.com, and I don't want to use a political website which may be biased as a source.

[–]Arby01 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/04/marilyn-monroe-was-not-even-close-to-a-size-12-16/

not that picture but a good writeup on the subject.

[–]Nvjds 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, its pretty clear she ain't no size two

[–]flyingwolf -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Misses, Size 2, Standard Dress.

Dimension/size 2
Bust 32
Waist 24
Hip 34½

Marilyns measurements.

Studio Measurements.
37-23-36 (inches)

Dressmaker Measurements.
35-22-35 (inches).

So, want to tell me again how she wasn't a size 2?

Also please keep in mind when her clothes were displayed in London they had to make special molds for new mannequins because of her extreme hour-glass shape.

[–]Nvjds 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It was a reference to All About That Bass

[–]flyingwolf -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh.

Yeah I hate that song.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]flyingwolf 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

lol, that should be a size 2, not a 20. Damned fingers and brain getting ahead of the rest of me.

Fixing it now, thank you.

[–]Kensin 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Is it just me or have female beauty standards not really changed that much over the last 50 years.

We had Heroin chic in the 90s. Probably the most drastic turn in female beauty standards I've seen in my lifetime.

[–]bakedpotato486 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Way back in the 60's there was British model, I kid you not, Twiggy.

[–]unklestinky 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you google search 50's or 60's fashion models you will see that that tall scrawny body type was typical for that time period. Just google search Twiggy

[–]waffleso_0 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What about brad pitt in johnny suede? http://cdn03.cdn.socialitelife.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/brad-pitt-shirtless-underwear-johnny-suede-08062011-13-580x435.jpg

[–]Ultramegasaurus 141 points142 points143 points 11 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

A man actually has to tick far more boxes to be attractive

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (32 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Sauce?

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

http://justhdphotos.com/file/26767/1920x1080/Funny%20Photos%202302.jpg

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

For science, http://np.reddit.com/r/TrollXChromosomes/comments/29dxze/oh_i_didnt_realise_thats_all_it_takes_ive_been/

[–]TheLordOfShit 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So they're not just feminists - which is code for sexist man haters - but they're delusional HAES lazy, unhealthy, unmotivated dour people.

[–]jojotmagnifficent 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Haha, wow, so much fat logic in there. So what if your TDEE is 1500 and a guys is 2200? If you are both eating maintenance then you are both going to experience the same hunger levels and it will be about the same effort. In both cases if you don't already look like that then you will need to eat a deficit to lose the fat, the only difference is that the woman might have to take it a bit slower than the man because her BMR will be closer to her TDEE due to lack of muscle mass, but at the end of the day thats all the woman would have to do, where as the guy would then probably look like a skinny stick man and have to bust his ass in the gym, specifically making sure he gets enough protein and fats in his diet, adequate amounts of sleep and rest etc. to look like the guy on the right, and it would probably take a few years, where as most chicks could happily look like th girl on the left in a few months unless they start off as full on ham planets.

I think they just don't understand how "small" the difference is between normal and eating like a hippo. 200 calories over every day will make you 5kg fatter a year and you will probably have to gain like 20kg of fat before the metabolic cost of that fat will make up the difference in metabolism for your over eating.

[–]WeHaveIgnition 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That particular guy probably cycles bulking and cutting too.

[–]kkjdroid 35 points36 points37 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Or ridiculously skinny. Attractive face preferable.

[–]Mmffgg 26 points27 points28 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Well if that's how you feel, just send the ridiculously skinny girls my way shitlord

[–]kkjdroid 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

http://b1969d.medialib.glogster.com/media/36cb9daabc4f9660164fd16b472eb7ef8537ddc9f96e189d76d47028666f9a25/anorexia-nervosa-1.jpg

[–]Mmffgg 30 points31 points32 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I take what I can get.

[–]flyingwolf 20 points21 points22 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Judging by the headscarf and lack of hair I am going to say cancer.

Judging by the calvin klein bag I am going to say model?

Judging by the smoke, fuck I don't know.

[–]Furah 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Judging by the smoke, fuck I don't know.

It's lung cancer.

[–]flyingwolf 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Already have lung cancer might as well go for skin cancer huh. One more and she can get a hat trick!

[–]Jeester 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Judging by the smoke, fuck I don't know.

French

[–]Nvjds 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

2 soon :(((

[–]Jeester 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It wasn't a joke! Pleeeeeeease don't take it like that. She jst looked French and the french smoke a lot.

[–]countingbodies_ 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Looks like a colorized holocaust photo on beach day.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

:L

[–]sitchmellers 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

STOP RAPING ME IM TRIGGERED THIS IS WHY I NEED FEMINISM

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women: have a pulse

[–]34Mbit 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That might be the demographics of this sub speaking (young men?), but it's not as straight forward as that.

The innate sexual dimorphism in our psyches puts a value on younger, fertile women. Conversely, older and more capable men tend to be valued more (in some ways) as time goes on.

So the adage of men aging like wine and women aging like milk might be true. Once a woman goes above 25-30, they might find it very difficult to maintain superficial appearances of attractiveness.

[–]Omnipraetor 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

or ugly

[+]Reason-and-rhyme -28 points-27 points-26 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

if you're trying to make this sub look like a sexist shit hole, nice work.

[–]tmone 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

How is he doing that? Please explain.

[–]Reason-and-rhyme -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Making a sweeping generalization about what men find attractive and portraying beauty standards for women as being much lower than those for men.

I know, I know - you probably think "well everyone knows it's truuuuuue". you are missing the point of a gender equality movement. The sub will ignore me because this is actually just a male attitudes circlejerk sub - hence the downvotes. But this language and the process of holding up a common male perspective as objective truth is exactly what people point to when trying to demonstrate that mens rights movements are misogynistic.

[–]tmone 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Are you suggesting that women beauty standards are higher than men?

[–]Reason-and-rhyme 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not suggesting anything actually. But a sub that claims to represent an equality movement can't just be like "hurr durr women have it so easy", that's completely ignoring the experiences of lots of women the same way that "only women experience unrealistic standards" ignores the male perspective. How can you not see the hipocrisy here?

[–]tmone 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Fair enough. I, and a majority of posters, are definitely in agreement with you when it comes to equal beauty standards imposed on both men and women.

Where I think you went wrong was assuming that this sub was a "sexist shit hole" simply because one commenter chose to suggest otherwise. How dare he! You chose one comment out of hundreds to cast a sweeping generalization yourself. Something you argued against originally.

[–]Reason-and-rhyme 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I didn't say it was a sexist shit hole. I was saying that the comment made it look that way. Especially with all the upvotes for that comment.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]demenciacion 26 points27 points28 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Not saying that is not true, but you could make a list just as long for women.

[–]Psionx0 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Yes. But the point of this post is that we acknowledge that there is a list like that for women, and now it's time to acknowledge that list and it's issues with men.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Psionx0 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ooops.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]Blutarg -7 points-6 points-5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No you couldn't. For a woman she just has to be slender, unless her man is a chubby- chaser. There are no female CCs.

[–]demenciacion 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Are you really saying that there are no ugly women?

[–]sitchmellers 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Ginger man here :(

[–]papertiger12 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ginger man right here too, buddy. "Tall, dark and handsome" is something I will never be.

[–]mwilke[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Benedict Cumberbatch is a ginger and he's all the rage right now. Your time is coming.

[–]boss_ginger 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

:(

[–]Kyouki13 20 points21 points22 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Did they seriously shrink his head?

[–]SweetiePieJonas 29 points30 points31 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To make his body look bigger.

[–]Neijo 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's to make more focus on his body rather than his head, but yeah, it looks hilarious

[–]jimii 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's to make him look larger/taller.

[–]Neijo 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it may have multiple purposes, seeing that women often prefer tall men.

[–]Omnipraetor 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And enlarge his junk. You know, for reasons...

[–]ConfirmedCynic 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Yet one more proof that brains aren't at the top of the female list, right? lol

[–]Jahonay 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a dude with a big head I feel like it is less attractive for a dude.

[–]nusttothat 57 points58 points59 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Only women face beauty standards... and nothing else.

Sh*t, I've got to be a millionaire ganster philantropist movie star violin player to meet 100% a girl's wants.

[–]Peter_Principle_ 79 points80 points81 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Sh*t, I've got to be a millionaire ganster philantropist movie star violin player to meet 100% a girl's wants.

And you're how tall? 5'10"? Sorry, Frodo, not interested.

[–]Doomblaze 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Violin... check

above 6 ft...check

Better get started on that move star career, I got a long way to go

[–]adamwizzy 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Six foot what though, it better be 2-3...

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy.

If you would like to do the same, add the browser extension GreaseMonkey to Firefox and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

[–]adamwizzy 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And I swear to god, don't come at me if you have a PER of less than 16.5, don't want another sub 15 loser hitting me up.

[–]Amunium 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

But not much more. My 6'7" is often considered too much.

[–]adamwizzy 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, girls don't want guys to be too tall, kind of annoying, I;'d say I'm at the sweet spot of 6'3" though.

[–]selfoner 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've been called a dwarf by a woman half an inch shorter than me.

[–]ConfirmedCynic 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

With a chocolate penis that ejaculates money.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And painter and physicist

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It aint men who consider eighty percent of the opposite sex to be below their standards.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

keep in mind that the "unrealistic beauty standard" is defined by Female models, in womens fashion magazines and advertisements, runway events watched by women, beauty pageants that only women give a rats ass about.

The unrealistic beauty standards for women are 100% a female invention; consumed, perpetuated, and supplied by women.

So pardon me if I don't feel too guilty about women making other women feel badly about not being as pretty as they think women should be. I just like women...pretty much all of them. I guess that makes me a monster.

[–]thehumungus 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

WHY DID THEY MAKE HIS HANDS BIGGER?

[–]marswithrings 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

you know what they say about guys with big hands

[–]thehumungus 33 points34 points35 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

they make shitty pop music?

[–]marswithrings 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

let me put it this way then; same reason they made his bulge bigger

[–]ziggythebear 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

  • Woosh*

[–]diatheskier 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

big gloves?

[–]iMADEthis2post 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm more amused they made his head smaller.

[–]flyingwolf 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That bulge is hilarious.

They make his hands, cock, muscles and legs bigger, and shrink his head.

I never realised how big his head was before.

Also, is his stylist Vanilla Ice?

[–]Tmomp 44 points45 points46 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Did you know Hugh Jackman doesn't work out at all, and that in playing Wolverine he never takes his shirt off?

Same with Daniel Craig. And the whole cast of 300.

[–]Reddit1990 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow, they must have some crazy genetics.

[–]PussyWhistle 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Did you know Hugh Jackman doesn't work out at all

I know you're probably joking, but just in case: This

Also this

[–]ametalshard 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Always hurts to be reminded how much this guy skips leg day.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Prolly due to the retarded notion that squats will give you bitch hips, especially squats below parallel.

[–]jojotmagnifficent 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

nah bro, it's cause they are bad for your knees /s

[–]bowlofbrown 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

deadlifts work legs tho. Hams and glutes.

[–]secondaccountforme 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Literally a picture of him on leg day.

[–]ametalshard 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, sad how obvious it is, even literally on leg day.

[–]threemorereasons 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

He really doesn't. His legs look thin because of the way his shorts are sitting. If you've ever set foot in a gym, you will know that nobody who can deadlift 180kg (~396lbs) for multiple reps can be accused of skipping leg day.

[–]ametalshard 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are multiple pictures of him with extremely thin legs. How come mine are bigger than his and all I do for legs is some free squats and long distance running?

I won't play the fool. I know a lot of guys who mostly just deadlift... some deadlift 500 pounds and their legs are still smaller than some runners'. The only thing I don't understand is how they insist on calling it "leg day" when their legs are still so small.

[–]marswithrings 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

i'm not sure i follow the point you're trying to make but to be fair, the rich have it far easier when it comes to getting the body types idolized by the media. the working man or woman doesn't have the time to workout as much as these stars have to for the bodies they end up with, and they usually can't afford the personal trainers the rich use or the diets the rich go on either.

i mean don't get me wrong a lot of folks could do better even in their current circumstance but just because craig and jackman can do it doesn't mean average joe off the street can too

tl;dr: it's a little easier when your job is to look good

edit: people seem to be misunderstanding why i thought this was relevant, allow me to expand on my line of thinking here - maybe my original wording was awkward but i believe i'm just backing up the guy i responded to

many women seem to think that because muscles come from exercise, the body image issues men complain about aren't as important or serious. they think if men were just a little more committed they could achieve this body; it's not unrealistic in their minds.

so i think it actually becomes very important to remind people that those beach-ready bodies take a lot more time, energy, and money than the average working person has available. it helps to illustrate how that body image really, actually is unrealistic.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You're not sure the point he's making? Lol. I love when people sidestep the actual discussion to get on a soapbox about an entirely different issue; yes no fucking shit it's easier to find time and money to workout when you're rich and it's your job. :facepalm:

[–]marswithrings -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

i don't think it's an entirely different issue, i'm responding directly to his comments about people like craig and jackman.

besides, i think you're interpreting my disclaimer as "i have no clue what you're trying to say, but let me talk about this," when it was more of "if you're saying what i think you're saying, this is important to keep in mind (but i may be misinterpreting you)"

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]marswithrings 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

well specifically for males, it backs up the claim that musclebound men is an unrealistic body standard.

many women seem to think that because muscles come from exercise, the body image issues men complain about isn't as important or serious. they think if men were just a little more committed they could achieve this body; it's not unrealistic in their minds.

so i think it actually becomes very important to remind people that those beach-ready bodies take a lot more time, energy, and money than the average working person has available. it helps to illustrate how that body image really, actually is unrealistic.

of course i guess this is specifically talking to people who are cherry-picking and ignoring other male body issues like height, but in my experience this is an extremely common route for those attempting to dismiss male issues to take. and besides, the guy i responded to was already honed in on the muscles thing, so if we're talking about relevance i think i'm line.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The point you're trying to make was already made, and that's the point; that men's beauty standards/physique standards, require a lot more dedication and commitment and hard work to achieve. A woman can get breast implants with some money and some time, but a man can't get 50 pounds of muscle and 7% bodyfat without dedicating his entire lifestyle to it. Bringing up the issue of celebrities having the time and money to do so I don't think is very relevant, although true.

[–]marswithrings 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

if it's not relevant then the guy before me shouldn't have brought it up, no?

i mean maybe you took everything i said away from the comment before me and didn't need to read mine, maybe for you all my comment did was provide an "explain it like i'm 5" version.

fine. but that's far from irrelevant, and it's very far from soapboxing about a completely unrelated issue. haha

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The point about men's body issues is relevant, not their celebrity status as you brought it up. If you wanted to talk about their celebrity status, you should have brought up the fact that a woman can simply be born beautiful and make it on her looks, while a man has to spend a year working out to be taken seriously and discuss the differences between what a man vs. a woman has to achieve and how and why those standards developed, not the difference between the celebrity workout regime and the standard man's.

[–]marswithrings 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the guy i was responding to is the one who originally brought up celebrities in the first place. if you don't think that's relevant to the original thread here, again, fine, i don't care to argue over that - but again, i'm on track as far as the comment i was responding to.

as far as your point about men having to work while women can be just "born beautiful", i mean, sure that's another argument that you could make but... so what? now my comment is irrelevant because i didn't make every argument and tackle every angle? the existence of other arguments i could have made instead of the one i did make is what's actually irrelevant here.

what you're essentially saying is i could have made a more convincing argument in your opinion, that just has nothing to do with if i was on-topic or not.

and i don't care to debate whether my comment was necessary, whether it was the best argument that could be made in that situation, whatever, etc. the only thing i've been pushing back on is that you've been calling it completely irrelevant and that's just not true.

[–]MotherFuckin-Oedipus[🍰] 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Even without the photoshop, the point would still work.

[–]Doriphor 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That Justin Bieber is trashy as all hell?

[–]cragnathor 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ever notice he is aiming to look like Vanilla Ice?

[–]Doriphor 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow.I never noticed!

[–]YUNG_CHIKKIN_WING 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

channimg tatum. how am i to compete?

[–]Da_Wall 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Excellent point! +100

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Flatline334 28 points29 points30 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Except for the lazy men that make excuses for their ineptitude as well as successful women that are ready to climb the mountain. It is not as black and white as you put it.

[–]ConfirmedCynic 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except for the lazy men

Some decide that "prize" at the top of the mountain isn't worth it.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When applied to tumblr feminists they exchange the mountain top for the Marianas trench.

[–]imeasureutils 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In fairness, nagging has been a very successful biological trait.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Simone de Bueavoir said that women have to climb to the top of the social ladder and men take the elevator to the top floor.

That elevator sure is broken a hell of a lot of times.

[–]mikesteane 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She was completely wrong.

[–]Rawtashk 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit. This is the most succinctly put analogy on this that I've ever heard.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is really a ridiculous generalisation you understand?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

An aphorism is either a half-truth or a truth and a half

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sickened it has the number of upvotes it has. At least it's not the top comment....

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I have known many women who do claim the mountain top. I Have known many men who don't. I don't even know if women are more lazy than men. You're just making a blatant statement here which doesn't even make sense in your own frame work, because as you say:

When women see a beautiful/successful women

So you admit that there are women who do climb?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good point

[–]Raudskeggr 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, if it was acknowledged that it worked both ways, that would be one less air in quiver right?

And even upon being forced to acknowledge this, the goalpost would move, saying that women are more harmed psychologically by these unrealistic standards. There'd be a BS survey by some pseudo-scientist to back up the claim.

Pointing out their own double standards and hypocrisy won't suddenly turn the SJW types and radicals into reasonable, fair-minded people.

[–]free2live 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

air in quiver

I'm sorry but that's funny as hell. Is that a fuckup or one of those phrases you've heard said but never really understood?

[–]Raudskeggr 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Arrow. :p Whoops!

[–]mikesteane 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

The real unrealistic thing is women, under the influence of the female narrative, believing that their sexual market value varies in tandem with the male equivalent. Most women understand that biology, and nothing else, determines this. However, a large number, usually those that have been to indoctrination centres known as universities think that they should imitate the male career pattern of building a successful career and get an advantageous marriage in their late thirties as a result.

The really damaging unrealistic standard is the feminist "women can and should be like men" meme.

[–]mwilke[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Personally I think everyone should build careers and delay marriage.

[–]Blutarg 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't you think women should get married (if they want to) when they're young and most able to have children?

[–]mikesteane 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Not necessarily a good strategy for women. Their sexual market value peaks in their twenties and then declines. If they start a career, they will have to interrupt it to have children. They will not necessarily be able to start where they left off especially in fast changing fields like IT. It may be a better move to have children early and build a career later. Many women, taken in by the having-it-all lie, regret taking the other route, when the facts hit them.

[–]mwilke[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

  • A woman might be at her hottest when she's younger, but that doesn't mean she's best suited for marriage or even a long-term serious relationship. I assume you wouldn't pick the mother of your children based purely on how hot she is; you probably care about her personality, her choices in life, her emotional fitness to be a partner. A hot 24-year-old will be plenty attractive a few years later. Besides, a woman could start a relationship when she's young, and get married a few years later. I doubt her partner will reject her ugly old 28-year-old eggs if he liked her at 24.

  • How early are you talking, anyway? A woman could get married at 27 and have a child at 29, another at 31. This is assuming she even wants to have children; about a quarter of women in the US will make it to 40 with no children, many of those by choice.

  • Taking 3-6 months off of work when you have several years of seniority is a piece of cake, compared to trying to crawl out of an entry-level job while you have little ones at home. Plus, if a woman starts later, when her career is more established, she can better afford childcare. Everything is easier when you're better off, and child rearing is no exception.

  • Maternity leave does not require a woman to completely detach from the world. IT doesn't change so fast that a few-month absence will mean a woman comes back to some vastly different alien landscape of technology. She can keep up on articles and news and webcasts and whatnot during her absence. She can telecommute with a laptop. IT may not have been the best example, because it's actually a pretty flexible gig. You can work from nearly anywhere, and in my experience as a consultant it's pretty child-centric. On one of my projects, I work with a distributed team of developers, male and female, who work from their homes all over the country. Most of them have children, most have a spouse who works part-time.

  • I think that "have-it-all" myth is sold to both men and women. Look, kids take time and energy and resources. If you want them, regardless of if you're male or female, you are going to have to make sacrifices, to your career, your money, your time. If you are a twenty-something male, and you want to have kids with a woman in your own age bracket, you're basically in the same boat as your female partner; unless you're willing to take a younger partner, your own extended fertility doesn't count for much, because you probably want to have your kids at around the same age a woman would, late 20s to early 30s.

[–]Brettmdavidson 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This post makes me feel relieved in a way, like, "oh good I'm not totally crazy for feeling this way."

[–]Blutarg -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You might be crazy for another reason!

[–]Brettmdavidson 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

???

[–]jojotmagnifficent 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh totally, thats why we all look like Jeff Seid, cause I mean, who even has to try to be sub 10% body fat (certainly no more than about 12-13%) and carry enough lean mass at the same time to put them in the "obese" BMI category at the same time. It's not like we have to win the genetic lottery and be 6ft+ (probably about 20% of the population), spend enough time devoted to hitting the gym and watching your macros that people make fun of you and claim your begin obsessive about it (/r/swoleacceptance is here for you bros) and do the whole shaving/waxing 90% of your body thing, and probably also getting someone else to do it because who the fuck can shave their own back without missing spots and shredding it to ribbons?

I mean, c'mon, it's so easy for me to be attractive that a full 80% of men are rated below attractive by women according to OK Cupids (pretty massive and accurate of reality) data. The average guy is like a whole 2-3/10, clearly we are just dripping with sex appeal.

[–]drakecherry 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

his butt never changes.

[–]Folsomdsf 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a man able to appreciate the ass of another man, that part was solid and good to go.

[–]aegorrivers 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Since women love to objectify us, we should objectify them. I actually never had unreasonable standards for women until I realized that I was being held to unfair standards. Since then, I have made mine as unrealistic as possible.

[–]CrackpotPatriot 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When I saw this image a couple days ago online, my first thought was how we're forcing men into these unhealthy body image demands; unfortunately, the message is lost in your negativity. Meh.

[–]chasemyers 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wtf

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Peter_Principle_ 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The stuff you're seeing here is using various counter examples to point out the feminist "only women face unrealistic beauty standards" argument is irrational. I'm not sure why you think telling them to stick a cork in their dumb argument is "dropping to their level."

[+]Dickballs68 -14 points-13 points-12 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

NO ONE SAYS THIS! Good lord you pussies make me embarrassed to be a man. You nerds are worse then feminists

[–]Amunium 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

than*

[–]Dickballs68 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Still worse

[+]ChristopherBurr -23 points-22 points-21 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

we're getting a little nit-picky here. I'm willing to believe that while men have "beauty standards", they aren't nearly the standards that women are dealing with. It's not the same.

Women also seem to be a little more forgiving then men when it comes to body type.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Let's just assume that women do have it worse. Who cares? It's not a contest. They don't get a prize.

It's time to admit that both genders suffer from the same things [in most cases]. Rather than act like only women face "unrealistic beauty standards". Because that is asinine and false.

[–]ChristopherBurr -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The whole point of the post was to boo-hoo we have it tough. We don't really, and I'm calling out OP on it.

[–]DevilishRogue 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Bull. Men in general are far more forgiving about women on every physical aspect from height to weight to disability to disfigurement.

[–]ChristopherBurr -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Men are forgiving about physical appearance for sex. Beyond that, not so much.

[–]RussellLawliet 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Says who?

[–]ChristopherBurr 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

really - you're gonna play dumb? There are plenty of fat ugly sluts out there, there is no such thing as a fat ugly stud

[–]RussellLawliet 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Jeez. Go back to The Red Pill, please.

[–]ChristopherBurr 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

just face the reality. You may not like the way I said it, but you really can't deny the sentiment.

[–]farsidethree 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nit picky is some dumb bitch fighting about pink fucking legos. That's fucking nit picky

[–]Rolten -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

The beauty standards for both are:

-No fat

-Muscular (or for women: being tight/firm thanks to muscles)

[–]ChristopherBurr 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

men are judged on their wallets, women are judged on looks

[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah dude, it's all about the money. That's why when you go out to a club the first question a girl asks you is how loaded you are. /s

[–]ChristopherBurr 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

if you don't think your cloths, watch, shoes haven't been observed, you're crazy

[–]demenciacion -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That is just not true and you know it

[–]Rolten 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What else is there? Boob size perhaps, but according to this gif it's also dick size. Not to mention that height is quite important for men.

Face? Men and women both need to look pretty. For men being able to grow a manly beard is a big + as well.

[–]demenciacion -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well exactly what I was trying to say is there are a bunch of factors that contribute to beauty, not just that you posted

[–]Psionx0 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't know what world you're living on, but it is absolutely true.

[–]demenciacion 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are far more beauty standards than those

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter