~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
[deleted]
[–]mwobuddy 32 points33 points34 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lets put it this way: Your right to privacy about any part of you ends where your clothing ends. If you don't want people looking at your face, cover it with a mask or one of those muslim towels. If you don't want people to look at your tits, you can find shirts that go all the way up.
Its about reasonable expectation of privacy. If you don't wear gloves, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy if you touch a door knob and the police lift your prints because there was a murder in that building. You can't get away with suing the cops because the standard of privacy is that if you allow it to happen, you have no reasonable expectation of people not using it.
Sure, you can bitch all you want, but if you actually don't want that circumstance to occur, you cover up; tits, hands, or face, whatever.
[–]SworntotheDeath 35 points36 points37 points 10 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link
I don't understand how someone could get angry with someone else for looking at a body part that is readily visible, or, dare I suggest it, flaunted.
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 20 points21 points22 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
There's a strange disconnect between what a woman shows off of her anatomy and her expectation of privacy.
It's like bait to get a guy she doesn't like fired.
[–]tehwankingwalruses 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Thats because she doesn't want the creepy homeless guy checking her out, or the overweight accountant in the office. She wants the successful, attractive man to take notice. If an overly overweight woman riding around in a scooter at the grocery store compliments you on your tight jeans and stares at your ass, you'd probably get a little weird about it. If was a really attractive woman, it would be okay.
[–]TheRealBaseborn 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Personally, I think any attention is flattering regardless of who is giving it. If a 500 lb ogre of a woman says I look good, I smile and say thank you like any decent human being would. If anyone eyes me up and down I giggle and feel good about my appearance. It's nice to be appreciated.
[–]chocoboat 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link
This is what I don't get about women's clothing. Some women intentionally wear revealing clothing that shows their body in a sexual way. How in the world are they going to get upset when someone notices her sexy, revealing clothing?
I've heard excuses like "it's hot, we have to dress this way". Oh really? Men get hot too, but it's funny how I never see them dress like this. If it's hot, why not just wear a simple t-shirt and shorts? Why the cleavage and the booty shorts and the skintight clothing? You know you're wearing that because you want to look sexy.
And this is where feminists ask if I think that men are some kind of animals who can't control themselves. Well... YES! All humans are animals who are hard-wired to find parts of people's bodies to be attractive. It's not a choice. If there is cleavage, a man is tempted to look at it.
To be clear, I'm only talking about looking. Glancing at a woman's cleavage is harmless. The natural biological urge to find a woman attractive certainly does not excuse rape or sexual assault, which is very harmful and is one of the worst crimes that exist.
[–]Drippety 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
How in the world are they going to get upset when someone notices her sexy, revealing clothing?
The offence or lack thereof is contingent on who is doing the looking. If a lower status male catcalls or ogles an attractive/well-off woman it is an affront to her power, so she takes offence. It's no different than the royalty of old demanding that peasants not make eye contact. Some modern day celebrities like Jennifer Lopez demand the same of their servants.
[–]Beard2MuhTeeTs 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
this is one of those weird folksy type towns I live in,so a lot of hipsters, seen a lot of guys dressed in attention seeking manners as well. Most people are just willing to give each other their do respect and move on.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Drippety -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
One doesn't preclude the other. The females with the least amount of attention paid to them by males are most likely to become man-haters. That seems obvious. Same with males who don't do well with the opposite sex.
Main difference, in the west at least, as that females are privileged in every single sphere by daddy government, and men are fighting for equal rights.
[–]radeonr9270 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm actually wondering if this is a part of female psychology to just ignore this balantly attention seeking behavior
There's this
One of the tags in this is "Don't sexualize me please"
It might just be the area I am In but most of the women I know that dress that way are pretty open about it being for attention and attracting guys, and they certainly do not get offended when you look at them. They actually get kinda off put if you walk past and don't. But there is not a huge feminism movement here, I rarely hear anyone talk about it unless I'm on here, southern girls love attention for the most part.
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The problem is that some women intentionally dress this way, some don't, some dress this way and want the attention now but in an hour's time they don't. Or they want the intention when they're in their law firm but as soon as they're walking down the street they don't want it.
And yet others want it only by certain men and not by others but all men have to just know to which group they belong.
Basically the goalposts are constantly shifted so that, at any moment and in any situation, men are responsible for making women feel the way they happen to want to feel at any given moment and it's men's fault if that ever isn't the case.
Feminists will default to taking whatever position enforces that. .... for the sake of equality apparently.
[–]Philarete -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It utterly baffles me how otherwise reasonable people cannot see that involuntarily checking someone out is very different from assaulting them. If there is a line to draw, it is between glancing and staring or leering (when looking becomes willful and creates discomfort). And yet my feminist friends insist that even involuntarily looking is evidence of rape culture.
[–]cottonthread 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Get better friends
[–]HAESisAMyth -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
They say they dress that way "because they like to look nice", but really it's to impress other girls or impress guys.
Who dresses up only for themselves? Narcissist hermits?
[–]microwave2000 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Have you ever thought that maybe girls do dress for themselves? They wake up in the morning and put on clothes that they like and make them feel good. They enjoy looking nice. Everyone feels better when they have a nice outfit on vs a stained shirt and dirty sweatpants. They are not dressing a certain way to get men to look at them so then they can act offended when men are looking at them.
[–]HAESisAMyth 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
Yes, I have had that exact thought many times. Immediately followed by the thought "Why does wearing nice clothes (btw nice clothes and sexual clothes can be different) make someone feel good?" There can be a few explanations... High quality textiles that fit your body and are in fashion are an affirmation of security... You have to money to buy these clothes, store them, keep them clean, and have enough clothes that you have choices every morning on what you will wear... This is a stark contrast to the homeless person who wakes up in their only set of clothes, dirty, and out of fashion.
So, first explanation is "nice clothes" are an indication to the self of economic prosperity. But like I parenthesized, nice clothes are not sexual clothes. A full coverage cashmere sweater is nice, but not sexually revealing in anyway.
So the next motivation we have to look at is: why wear sexually revealing clothes? We can focus on the self again, and see that a woman might wear a top that reveals considerable cleavage to affirm her physical attributes... She is young and her body is beautiful, and she likes to remind herself of this by showcasing her best features... Maybe a skirt that shows her gorgeous legs, or jean shorts that reveal how magnificent her ass is, but, sexual worth is is not determined by the self in the same way that ecomonic stability is... A person can feel good about economic stability without anyone else to accept or deny it, it just is... Sexual worth, on the other hand, requires validation by another party..."Is this top too revealing? Does my ass look good in this? Am I showing too much leg?" So one is for yourself, and the other is for not yourself.
I feel like I've explained the difference enough/rambled long enough... If you have any questions/rebuttals I'd be happy to explain/respond/defend my position.
E: strikethrough
[–]microwave2000 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
"Why wear sexually revealing clothes" What you may find to be a sexually revealing outfit may have been chosen to be worn by a woman just because she felt like it. Maybe she wore high-waisted shorts because she likes Taylor Swift and thinks they are cute, not because she wants to show men her legs. She's not trying to be revealing she's just having fun and expressing herself with her wardrobe.
[–]HAESisAMyth 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
just because she felt like it
expressing herself
What makes her "feel like" wearing an outfit that is sexually revealing? What is she expressing?
[–]microwave2000 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Just because you find an outfit to be sexually revealing doesn't mean the wearer of the outfit finds it to be revealing. She just wants to wear a crop top, shorts, whatever because she wants to. She gets to wear what she wants because she has choices and free will. She's not controlled by anyone. Do you think men who wear speedos, like 1960s swimsuits so short shorts, or the actual bikini like speedos wear them to be sexually revealing? Are they wearing them because they just feel like it?
[–]HAESisAMyth 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I absolutely believe that men who wears speedos do it to be sexually revealing, and, it's not up to those men on whether or not they or others find the speedos sexually revealing, because they are sexually revealing, it's an incontrovertible fact.
I have a problem with your usage of the phrase "just feel like it"... People always have motivations
[–]microwave2000 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I honestly think there are some things done without motivation. Why did I eat cheerios this morning instead of rice krispies? I don't know. I just felt like it.
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Good one! I'll try to remember that next time a woman says that: I dress for myself (like a girl pretending to be a princess).
Oh... is your mirror at home broken? Are you a narcissist?
[–]HAESisAMyth 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
They aren't narcissists, that's the point: they dress up to impress others, not for themselves.
They say dressing up makes them feel good, but it isn't the looking good that makes them feel good... It's the attention.
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well I think they are Narcissists because they want the attention.
Look at meeee! Look at my beautiful cleeeeavage!
You can't have it!
I AGREE with what you wrote and even upvoted you from being down and it makes no sense why someone downvoted your common sense comment.
[–]cottonthread -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
In my experience looking is fine but staring is not. SO much hyperbole in this thread.
If you guys want to look at tits so badly you need to learn to be subtle about it - or just google it/get a girlfriend (then you get to touch them too).
[–]SworntotheDeath -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't stare. In fact I don't look, because I think it's pathetic that people dress in a sexually provocative manner in the workplace.
But I will play along. Why the Hell shouldn't I stare at something someone flaunts? Why else would they flaunt it? To tease?
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
And notice that the patriarchy gets to wear a tie in the office but the oppressed woman gets to express her sex appeal and don't look at me power.
[–]MalibuStayZ 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That's the joke! In many occupations (bank, insurance company, consulting, ...) men are forced to wear a suit with long sleeves and ties in midsummer and in winter, while women can adjust their clothing to the temperature and then they still complain about sexism if men regulate the aircon colder than women need. If I could wear shorts and shirts with short sleeves like women can wear short skirts and blouses with short sleeves, I would also have no problem with 77 F.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Have you thought about wearing a formal kilt?
[–]Archibald_Andino 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Rule #1: if you're a really good looking guy, feel free to look all day long, they won't mind. Creepy guy? How dare you violate me!
Rule #2: If you're a woman with implants who wears tight, short shirts, oozing silicon, you must pretend to be annoyed at all the new attention you previously lacked before your surgery but secretly love now. (PS: you're not fooling anyone)
[–]McFeely_Smackup 18 points19 points20 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Physics tells us that when we look at something, nothing is shooting out from our eyes and touching that thing...in fact, photons are reflecting off that thing and hitting our eyes.
When I stare at your boob clevage, your photons are molesting ME.
[–]bluewit 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well generally speaking photons bounce off the surface of your eyes & scatter hitting everything within your direct visual range with some dispersed photons too... And quantum physics touch upon the idea of how the very state of being observed can have an influence on things...
[–]kurtu5 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Male sexual harrasment is like a pushy salesman who won't take no for an answer. Its one person who can be easily delt with.
Female sexual harrasment is like bulk unsolicited spam that you can't unsubscribe from or use filters. Gouge your eyes out? That seems to be the only solution.
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well put! That's how I feel with their cleavage and yoga pants. Like I didn't subscribe for this (not in the mood at the time it's shoved down my eyes). . And then the slut walk feminists say: we can go topless if we want and you can't react and you can't look and breasts are sexual and men are pigs.
. (sorry for ranting LOL)
[–]kurtu5 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Again the real problem is that people who call women out on their shit, don't reproduce. So our species is pretty much fucked and insane.
[–]cmumford 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think that Conan says it best.
[–]Ovendice 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
No.1 rule used by intelligent men: Ignore women in the workplace as much as humanly possible. If it's possible, try not to talk to them at ALL. Even saying 'hello' is risking a false accusation. But then of course be friendly with all your male co-workers so you don't have a reputation as an ass or distant.
When the females say, "He never says anything, " all the guys will say, "I don't know what you're talking, he's one of the friendliest guys I know- he just doesn't like you. And it goes without saying, NEVER, ever stare or even look at women in the workplace at all.
I've actually worked with women in the past that I was so cold and distant to day after day after day after of not talking to them they would actually quit! YAY! Success! They weren't doing a fucking thing anyway and nothing more than walking false accusations and lawsuits with all the personality of vomit. Good riddance.
[–]HeroOfTime31 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
This the same attitude feminists have when they say things along the lines of "all men are potential rapists". You're saying "all women are potential false accusers". Being an MRA isn't about hating women or generalizing them. Try to be better than the feminazis
[–]Endless_Summer 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is a naive attitude
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're right, we should be better than feminists. But we live in a system, that enables women to earn a price for making a successful false accusation. They get to fire someone unpopular or are able to sue the company. And if you're getting caught with your false accusation, you don't get punished. You probably don't even lose your job. Now compare that to a rapist!
[–]Ovendice -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
When feminists say all men are potential rapists, that's a lie, stating that any female in the boundaries of this U.S. of A in the workplace is walking false accusation and a lawsuit isn't a lie. That's the night and day difference. Everything feminists say is a lie, lies crafted for very specific, malicious goals, which is the very epitome of evil. And it's more complex- the power women have over men and the laws are what need to be changed; instead of debating or having to GUESS if a female may or may not make a false accusation (impossible to do; women are MASTERS at manipulation and deceit) we need to change the LAWS that enable women to have god like power over us. Why can't I just hold a gun to your head? What.. are you saying you don't TRUST me? I PROMISE I won't pull the trigger. See now what I mean? The whole debate over 'character' is ridiculous and petty when the issue is the power someone wields is the real issue.
[–]SworntotheDeath 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think this goes a little too far. I have a handful of female coworkers and I am friendly enough with them, but I always have an alibi, and I am always very conscious of what I say.
[–]Ricwulf 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't quite think that the comparison is the best. Would be better if the guy was ripped and buff with the women checking him out. It's a much clearer double standard where we must ignore a woman's body, even if she wears clothes that are designed to flaunt said body, but not for guys. If a guy were to walk around topless and show off his washboard abs, women would be staring like crazy.
Personally, I'm of the opinion of stare away. Find others attractive. Just remain respectful in your interactions is all.
[+]Xbsnxks -7 points-6 points-5 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
I frequent this sub often. Normally it's tame & I enjoy it. But what your suggesting is pretty much men still dictating what women can and can't wear. You go out and find a top for a women that does not hang low & see how hard it is. I hate shopping with my wife for work clothes because it's always difficult since her breasts are large and no matter what cleavage comes through. She even covers up to the neck and men still make it obvious when looking. And she's covered!
Why don't you act like an adult & be respectful of everyone's autonomy to wear what they want without being told that since they show skin then they lost their privacy. That is some serious controlling shit. Do you live in Pakistan? (I'm honestly curious). Are you in your 60s or 70s?
Wow. So all you guys wearing your pants low, I hope you're cool with another man sticking their finger there. I guess you're just asking for it because you lost that right to privacy with your boxers showing. Better not walk around topless on a hot day. Cover that shit up. Another man may start checking out your define sensual nipples & harass you. Have more respect for yourself. That chest hair & beer belly is too obscene. Another man has every right to your body now because you showed skin.
This sub just lost a follower. I'm really disappointed because this post was the opposite to progressing men's rights and is just what women are trying to combat. Try harder next time boys.
[–]Philarete 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I understand what you're saying, and there is a risk of going too far, but I don't think the comic goes there.
But what your suggesting is pretty much men still dictating what women can and can't wear.
Women are free to wear what they want to. However, clothing is partly used for social signalling, and society does dictate what is appropriate. If I go to an interview with a big firm in a pair of sweatpants and a T-shirt I can guarantee I won't get the job. Clothing can also display something about current actions. Athletic clothes are connected to athletic events, formal clothes show that the wearer is acting formally. Some clothes are attention-grabbing, others attention-deflecting. If I wear a sharp-looking suit, it would unreasonable to be offended if people notice. Likewise, if I wear the blandest pair of sweatpants I cannot reasonably be offended if nobody notices. Simply citing autonomy doesn't change the expectations and evaluations of others. Nor does unfortunate circumstances compelling clothing change reasonable expectation. For example, if I cannot afford proper formal clothes, I cannot complain if I'm looked at funny at a formal event.
Why don't you act like an adult & be respectful of everyone's autonomy to wear what they want without being told that since they show skin then they lost their privacy.
The right to privacy exists only when it is reasonable. Public display means that right to privacy goes away. If I have a phobia of people seeing my calves, yet wear shorts, I cannot reasonably complain that my privacy is violated. If you don't want something seen, it must be obscured in some way such that it's remaining private is reasonable. Usually that means creating some barrier for view.
This is a jump in reasoning. While your right to privacy goes away, your right to bodily autonomy does not. To use your example, if I go outside topless, I cannot reasonably complain if people look at my chest. I've displayed it publicly. If I wear low hanging pants, I cannot reasonably complain that people look at my underwear line since I would be showing it. None of this creates any right for someone to touch my chest, or touch my underwear. I publicly display my face frequently, but I would be offended if someone just walked up and put their hand on my face. Display does NOT create of right to touch.
To clarify further, while public display means there is no right to privacy, it doesn't mean viewing cannot constitute harassment. Staring, leering or otherwise threatening expressions can create a level of threat which is unacceptable. For example, if someone decided to stare at my face continually, I might reasonably conclude the person intended harm. This could actually be a tort if the physical threat appeared significant and imminent.
In my opinion, the feminist push to make all viewing or "checking out" threatening is unreasonable. It simply is not intended that way. I do not believe this lack of privacy justifies any physical interaction at all. Nor does it justify actually threatening or harassing looks. There's a line to be drawn, but including every male look is not a reasonable line.
I'm sorry that this has been such a problem. I'd hope the good would outweigh the bad, as every sub makes mistakes.
[–]bluewit 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's apparently a bait-troll account. I realized too late, but a re-read of it shows the entire comment is intended to derail the topic & hopefully generate drama for the sake of presumable showing how downvoted a comment would get for "calling out" made up interpretations of how to read the comic strip & how "hateful" the sub is towards women that the users downvote someone speaking up for women bla bla bla. Least that's how I can't help but read it...
men still dictating what women can and can't wear. Why don't you act like an adult & be respectful of everyone's autonomy to wear what they want without being told that since they show skin then they lost their privacy. That is some serious controlling shit. Do you live in Pakistan? (I'm honestly curious). Are you in your 60s or 70s? I hope you're cool with another man sticking their finger there. I guess you're just asking for it because you lost that right to privacy with your boxers showing. Better not walk around topless on a hot day. Cover that shit up. Another man may start checking out your define sensual nipples & harass you. Have more respect for yourself. That chest hair & beer belly is too obscene. Another man has every right to your body now because you showed skin.
men still dictating what women can and can't wear.
I hope you're cool with another man sticking their finger there. I guess you're just asking for it because you lost that right to privacy with your boxers showing. Better not walk around topless on a hot day. Cover that shit up. Another man may start checking out your define sensual nipples & harass you. Have more respect for yourself. That chest hair & beer belly is too obscene. Another man has every right to your body now because you showed skin.
troll level minus9000
[–]Philarete 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I wondered if it was a troll account, but I decided to address it seriously because I know people who think that way. Maybe I could give something valuable to the audience, if not the parent commenter.
[–]AloysiusC 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No you're not biased at all:
1) Picture of woman with revealing anatomy and man looking.
you: Shut up it's no her fault she can't help it.
2) Picture of man with revealing anatomy and woman horrified
you: he's asking for getting men sticking their finger in there. You're all crazy I'm unsubbing.
edti: And don't lie about frequenting this sub often. Your account shows such a loooong history. Yeah right. You're full of crap.
[–]logic11 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why do you assume that the article is saying the woman shouldn't dress like that? Maybe it's saying that if you dress with cleavage showing it's likely that people are going to look, and that you shouldn't automatically judge the people who look? That if men dress the same as those women, women will look.
I'm a bit older now, but a few years ago I was running and literally had a woman stop her car next to me and tell me to keep running, because it was working for me. The look that woman gave me was... salacious would be the best term. If a man did that to a woman in our current climate it would be likened to sexual assault.
[–]Drippety -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
You're a gigantic douche bag. You care more about a woman being offended over some guy looking at her tits than things like male genital mutilation, male victims of rape and domestic violence, and fathers being allowed to see their children. You're scum. Good riddance.
[–]cottonthread -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Lol, that's a pretty big leap dude. This sub isn't a bastion of mens rights activism - you can still fight that stuff without being subscribed here
[–]Drippety 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This sub isn't a bastion of mens rights activism
?
[–]cottonthread 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Oops I missed a word there - it was meant to say solitary-bastion. Meaning the only possible place or whatever
[–]Drippety -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Meaning the only possible place or whatever
Sure. But by the same token I don't think it's fair to reject a sub due to a harmless comic that most women here find funny. That's just fucking petty. Like I said -- good riddance.
[–]cottonthread 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
So choosing not to participate in this sub somehow means he's now fine with circumcision and male victims?
[–]RubixCubeDonut -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Try exercising more reading comprehension. It'll make you look less foolish:
You care more about a woman being offended over some guy looking at her tits than things like male genital mutilation, male victims of rape and domestic violence, and fathers being allowed to see their children.
He didn't suggest they were fine with circumcision and male victims, he clearly suggested that they were willing to leave because we took issue with women complaining about people "staring" at their cleavage.
It'd be like leaving a cancer support group because people refused to wear wigs while at the meeting while on chemotherapy.
[–]cottonthread 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And I was disputing that logic. I'm saying that leaving the sub because of it's apparent toxicity doesn't mean he cares less about men's rights. It just means he wants to discuss it somewhere else that bothers him less - maybe he'll be more comfortable in menslib or something.
I've seen a few people have been leaving lately because of the growing undercurrent of people who are just here to hate on things and I can understand why tbh. The amount of posts made purely to complain about feminism or some random criminal who happens to be a woman are ridiculous. It's not constructive and it distracts people from the real issues at hand.
There are plenty of other places for those things such as againstfeminism, mensrants, tumblrinaction and pussypassdenied.
[+]Xbsnxks -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Oh. And feel free to downvote me. I understand you're angry that you have to act like an adult and be respectful.
And boobs are not a sexual organ just so you know... The vagina is. Please don't be that demographic that shames women for breastfeeding. That's what they're for, in case you haven't had your sex Ed class.
As far as I'm concerned women don't hang their vaginas out in public except for porn. Right? Do, please let me know if that has happened and I'll retract that
[–]bluewit 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
brillaint how you intentionally choose to ignore the other comments in this thread literally quoting definitions where tits are in fact sex organs, (nevermind ignoring basic biological signing-- are peacocks ornate tailfeathers then not sexual signing organs, right, they're just for... tailfeathering? I mean you have to be intentionally being obtuse to pretend the cleavage is somehow less a sexual region to display than the area directly above the male genitals spanning the lower abdominal cradle)
Your argument falls apart entirely if we look at the comic strip again:
the man simply takes her approach & does the same, choosing to wear what he wants, what's YOUR problem that somehow turns it into telling people anything about their privacy?
[–]logic11 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I used to live in a country where women routinely went topless. It took me two days after arriving to stop caring. It wasn't even that I stopped looking at breasts, or that nobody else looked at them, it was just that they were looked at the same way we might look at a nice pair of legs (either gender looking at the other gender). So, here's the thing... I don't live in that country anymore, instead I live in a country where women cover up. Here breasts are given a great deal more emphasis. It's a matter of cultural mores, and to change those mores you can't just say "guys, change"... you have to work with desensitizing. If women today started routinely going topless by next week it would be normal and everyone would stop caring (or at least the number of people who cared would be much, much smaller). We were even heading in that direction for a long time, but we've recently discovered this puritanical streak. I don't see it much in /r/mensrights though, I wonder where the puritanical streak could be coming from?
[+]ee4m -11 points-10 points-9 points 10 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link
This cartoon seems to confuse a frumpy woman wearing clothes that give air to an area which is otherwise sweaty and not not genitals, with an man drawing attention to their genitals in a way which women don't in the work place.
Tits aren't sex organs.
[–]bluewit 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Noun 1. sex organ - any organ involved in sexual reproduction sex organ - any organ involved in sexual reproduction reproductive organ organ - a fully differentiated structural and functional unit in an animal that is specialized for some particular function genital system, reproductive system - organs and tissues involved in the production and maturation of gametes and in their union and subsequent development as offspring genital organ, genitalia, genitals, private parts, privates, crotch - external sex organ female internal reproductive organ - the reproductive organs of a woman male internal reproductive organ - the reproductive organs of a man male reproductive gland - the reproductive organs of a man mamilla, mammilla, nipple, teat, tit, pap - the small projection of a mammary gland Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.
Noun 1. sex organ - any organ involved in sexual reproduction
sex organ - any organ involved in sexual reproduction
reproductive organ
organ - a fully differentiated structural and functional unit in an animal that is specialized for some particular function
genital system, reproductive system - organs and tissues involved in the production and maturation of gametes and in their union and subsequent development as offspring
genital organ, genitalia, genitals, private parts, privates, crotch - external sex organ
female internal reproductive organ - the reproductive organs of a woman
male internal reproductive organ - the reproductive organs of a man
male reproductive gland - the reproductive organs of a man
mamilla, mammilla, nipple, teat, tit, pap - the small projection of a mammary gland
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.
edit: formatting
[–]ezrel -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Did you post that to show that breast are sex organs? I don't understand how what you posted shows that. It defines sex organ as any organ involved in sexual reproduction but breast are not part of sexual reproduction. It then goes on to define other words. Ar all the words in the list supposed to be sex organs? Then why is the word 'organ' in the list?
Female breast are a secondary sex characteristic like for example facial hair on men. Wikipedia does not list it as part of mammalian female sex organs. It states that female breasts are not commonly included in the classification of reproductive organs. The article on the female reproductive system doesn't even make a mention of breasts either.
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
yea, you aren't playing pedantic semantic phony baloney game at alllllll... & you clearly aren't disingenuous /s
They aren't the huge deal people make of them in the west in other cultures.
you recognize that for our society & culture they are at the least anthropologically a significant [huge deal] sex signer like a big ol red baboon ass (the sex signer-- not calling you what I should call you). Discussion over.
[–]ezrel -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Who are you quoting? I didn't write that. I'm not the person you were replying to but they also didn't write that. I never said if they are a huge deal or not. I was wondering about the quote you posted. Sex organ is a defined term and if I would have been wrong about the definition I would have liked to know.
[edit:] Oh I see, this was meant as a reply to a comment from an other user further down in this thread.
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Who are you quoting? I didn't write that. I'm not the person you were replying to but they also didn't write that.
oh? you didn't know who I was quoting AND say you aren't the person to whom I was replying AND say THEY didn't write that, before you get an answer to the "Who are you quoting? " bit?
Multiple accounts busted. nice try.
[–]ezrel -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
My first thought was that you mistook me for the person you replied to and that you were referencing an earlier part of your conversation with /u/eem4. So, I looked if the quote came from the parent comment. I later figured out that you were replying to an other comment that happened further down in this thread. I hope my confusion to a misplaced comment from you doesn't have to end discussion.
[+]ee4m -7 points-6 points-5 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Still doesn't make the claim that the clevance is showing sexual organs.
It says nipples are.
[–]bluewit 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
..
...
doesn't make the claim that the clevance is showing sexual organs. It says nipples are.
doesn't make the claim that the clevance is showing sexual organs.
enough bs please.
Edit :I also decided to try taking your original comment for an edit:
This cartoon seems to confuse be about a frumpy woman wearing clothes that give air to an area which is otherwise sweaty and not not genitals which men aren't typically permitted to air out in the workplace, *and*- which draws attention to the area of a sex organ , with an man drawing attention to their genitals giving air to a region which happens to be just above his genitals and otherwise can get sweaty, in a way which women don't in the work place. which draws attention to how men in workplace environments are expected to dress in a modest way, while so often women instead dress in ways that favor their own physical comfort, or self-image over the appropriateness/consideration to those to who have to interact with them; and these women instead act maligned when people's eyes are naturally drawn to instances of immodesty. But hey, at least it's been pretty long since we had to hear a bs campaign about how women feel forced by the patriarchy to put on makeup & derive value by looking a certain way, since now the choice to look a certain way is more empowerment based than men's fault suddenly for whatever reason
and pretending tits aren't directly tied to sexual signing is just pedantic semantic phony baloney at best & you know it.
[–]Beard2MuhTeeTs 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Right, tits=good times, we don't have to pretend like we don't know that, just need to ask before we go in for the grab ;)
[–]ee4m -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
yeaaaaa I'm gonna go ahead & say that neither is exposed genitals in some cultures etc, and hey, know what? neither is violence / rape in some cultures, right?
if you wanna seem like you're actually trying to carry on a serious rational discussion rather than moving goalposts each time your argument is shot to complete shit you may wanna refrain from imposing other cultural values on a rational discussion already focused on a given culture's existing moires-- or at the least, maybe try to pull your head out of wherever it seems to be stuffed.
[–]ee4m -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I'm not moving the goal posts.
Are you really confused as to why your mother might be uncomfortable with people staring at her tits, when all she is doing is wearing a top thats normal for women?
I'm not moving the goal posts. [proceeds to both move goal posts AND turn the conversation into feels vs rational thought regarding double standards & cultural values]
[proceeds to both move goal posts AND turn the conversation into feels vs rational thought regarding double standards & cultural values]
My mother? Is my mother alive? Do you know where I can reach her??? TELL ME!!!!
If my mother were dense enough to not understand that if her tits are more exposed people are more likely to look at them, then odds are I would not have been conceived.
Are you really confused as to why your mother others might be uncomfortable with people staring at her tits, when all she is doing is wearing a top thats normal for women telling them where they are or are not allowed to aim their eyes because of how they choose to dress?
Please find another sub to troll if you gotta be a troll
[–]ee4m -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think you are a little autistic, and don't have a good handle on social skills. You also think breasts are sex organs, so you are confused by cultural and media representation of breasts.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link
The staring and making them feel self conscious I guess.
Would it bother you if larger men kept staring at your earlobes?
The media generates an exaggerated breast obsession.
[–]logic11 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Nope. It's not the media generating an exaggerate breast obsession, in fact by exposing breasts more frequently the media reduces the obsession. It's the taboo that generates the obsession.
Also, while tit's aren't sex organs they are in fact genitalia... which means features specific to a gender.
[–]ezrel 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Also, while tit's aren't sex organs they are in fact genitalia...
Genitalia is a synonym for sex organ.
which means features specific to a gender.
You probably meant secondary sex characteristic (features that appear at sexual maturity). Other examples are facial hear, lower body fat and the adams apple on males and smaller waist, the ability to extend the elbow more and smaller waist for women. Secondary sex characteristics are not specific for one sex, for example pubic hair and underarm hair are secondary sexual characteristics for both men and women.
[–]ee4m 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah, the taboo ... and the media. People in remote villages, nudists and people that grew up in places where toplessness is normal don't make a big deal out of them.
[–]logic11 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's pretty much my point. Anywhere the taboo isn't found don't have the hangup (I used to live in the Solomon Islands...). Those people might have the same media though. I've also seen kids who grew up with the taboo but without much access to media (religious upbringing) carry the same emphasis... so I think the media might be a small part, the simple lack of normalization is the bulk of it.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
But that should not be solely about breasts. Why they & you are specifically bothered about breasts then?
You asked.
If people were staring at a body part of yours regularly, you would be uncomfortable.
Women used breast as a means to attract men, from time immemorial. Women used breast as a means to attract men,
Women used breast as a means to attract men, from time immemorial.
Women used breast as a means to attract men,
Nah, in order cultures they are primarily about feeding babies.
Why do you think I'm a woman?
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
If people are staring at your body part so regularly and you are getting uncomfortable, you are part of a problem. Not all people are like you.
People aren't. If they were I'd eventually get uncomfortable too, so would you.
Of course, it is primarily about feeding, babies. That is why men too are interested in it. Just to make sure his baby is well fed. Got it, evolutionary programming, etc.?
Men in older cultures aren't so invested, tits just aren#t the big deal and taboo they are in the west.
You know soOOoo much about womyn boobz than women. May be you are man boobz? Found that mostly you post to this sub with a vendetta. Shame.
No I have low body fat %. You are an idiot.
I suppose you think your grandmother is trying to attract mates when she is wearing a top that allows the air to calculate around her breasts.
[–]ee4m 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I man, but thats irrelevant because gender doesn;t affect the ability to understand that staring is rude and it makes people uncomfortable.
And you dont know the difference between breasts and sex organs.
[+]WaitingToBeBanned -25 points-24 points-23 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Funny but not relevant. Fuck off.
[–]fudgeybhole 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
^ Sounds an awful lot like butthurt don't ya think boys?
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Who are you calling boys? That's transphobic!
[+]WaitingToBeBanned -18 points-17 points-16 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Nobody thinks that, now fuck off.
Relevant username is trolling username
I think it's a bot maybe?
[–]AloysiusC -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Good thing you don't get to decide what's relevant :)
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
It is not a matter of personal decision.
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Subjective observations always are.
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
To an extent, I suppose. But that is still not relevant to men's rights, at all.
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Humor me. Try to justify why it might be relevant. Yes, I'm asking you to argue against your viewpoint.
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
No, you come up with your own arguments.
[–]AloysiusC 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I haven't even taken the opposing position. Pity you don't see the value in that exercise.
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Nope, you were too lazy to do that and instead tried to have me do it for you. Go away if you have nothing to contribute.
Your loss.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]mwobuddy 32 points33 points34 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SworntotheDeath 35 points36 points37 points (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 20 points21 points22 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]tehwankingwalruses 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]TheRealBaseborn 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]chocoboat 13 points14 points15 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drippety 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Beard2MuhTeeTs 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Drippety -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]radeonr9270 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Beard2MuhTeeTs 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Philarete -4 points-3 points-2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]cottonthread 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HAESisAMyth -1 points0 points1 point (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]microwave2000 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]HAESisAMyth 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]microwave2000 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]HAESisAMyth 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]microwave2000 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]HAESisAMyth 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]microwave2000 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]HAESisAMyth 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cottonthread -5 points-4 points-3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]SworntotheDeath -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 19 points20 points21 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MalibuStayZ 14 points15 points16 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Archibald_Andino 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]McFeely_Smackup 18 points19 points20 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kurtu5 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]kurtu5 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cmumford 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ovendice 4 points5 points6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]HeroOfTime31 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endless_Summer 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ovendice -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SworntotheDeath 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ricwulf 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Xbsnxks -7 points-6 points-5 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]Philarete 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Philarete 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]logic11 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drippety -2 points-1 points0 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]cottonthread -2 points-1 points0 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drippety 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]cottonthread 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drippety -2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]cottonthread 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]RubixCubeDonut -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]cottonthread 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Xbsnxks -6 points-5 points-4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]logic11 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]ee4m -11 points-10 points-9 points (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 3 points4 points5 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]ezrel -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]ezrel -2 points-1 points0 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ezrel -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]ee4m -7 points-6 points-5 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 7 points8 points9 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Beard2MuhTeeTs 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m -2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (11 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ee4m -3 points-2 points-1 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]logic11 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]ezrel 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ee4m 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]logic11 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ee4m -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ee4m 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ee4m 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]WaitingToBeBanned -25 points-24 points-23 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]fudgeybhole 7 points8 points9 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]WaitingToBeBanned -18 points-17 points-16 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluewit 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC -2 points-1 points0 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link