I wear work boots everyday because I do not want distract women with my amazing ankles.

(January 16, 2016 at 5:47 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(January 16, 2016 at 3:13 pm)Heat Wrote: Also would you be fine with men who wear skin tight pants, specially designed to give the exact outline of their penis, yet then go claim it's specifically and solely for comfort?
It's the exact same thing.

I would not be attracted to him. My hormones might respond as hormones will do, but my mind and my heart would not want to be near him, much less be seen with him.

Who am I to speak?  I don't need to wear skimpy clothes. Skimpy clothes are for women who lack confidence. Female beauty is for men who appreciate it and that's not every bloke I pass by on the street.

I call bullshit. This is what we are raised to believe. If we dress in a certain way it means we have certain negative qualities. It's a load of shit.

Can we just let people dress however they want to dress without making character judgements on them? Why is that so hard.

(January 16, 2016 at 6:26 pm)*Deidre* Wrote:

(January 16, 2016 at 4:51 pm)MTL Wrote: They can be undeniably sexy, and many men love them.

but the argument that I am currently having with the user "Heat", in this thread, is as follows:

Heat is complaining that women:

1.  ONLY wear yoga pants because they know they are sexy and drive men crazy

2.  ...THEN claim that they only wear them for comfort

3.  ...THEN, when men complain that the pants are too sexy and thus distracting,
and that women should dress in a less-provocative way,
that those same women THEN get on their high horse and scream "Misogynist!" !!


I am arguing that while that may be true of SOME women,

I, as a woman, ONLY wear them because they are comfortable, versatile, and practical.

Personally, I do NOT wear yoga pants when I want to be sexy;
but I do NOT judge women who DO,
and I don't think anyone should be telling women how sexy they may or may not dress, in public.

Ah, I see. Your rebuttal is very on point. And I agree.

My thought is that I'm rather tired of guys telling women how to dress and so what if a woman dresses sexy in order to distract men. Men are dolts who are automatically distracted by women's attire now? lol Men have minds of their own...and not all men will walk into walls at the first sight of a woman in yoga pants. 

This sounds like a convo I'd see over on a christian forum, not here.   lol Religious men often blame women for why they are 'lusting' after them and 'sinning.'

I understand the premise, but it is interesting to see this type of mindset outside of a religious context.

Did you see the OP?  Posted by the user "True Christian" (albeit in a rather shit-and-run manner).

He opined that too many young women take their fashion cues from Miley Cyrus,
and not enough young women take example from the Virgin Mary.

In response, I posted pics of Katy Perry, Cher, and...oh yeah....MADONNA taking their cues from the Holy Virgin.



I see women dressed in outfits all the time that I do not consider particularly tasteful or classy,
but the point is respect for personal freedom
and also, as you are pointing out:  personal accountability:

He needs to take ownership of what is HIS problem,
and not expect her to make it HER problem.

A woman shouldn't have to modify her dress, because it distracts men.

No one should have to.

In fact, for me, it raises the issue of Limerence

I consider Limerence is basically worse than a crush;

...but not quite as serious as Stalking, or full-blown Obsession,
insofar as you respect the person's privacy and space.

Limerence is when you essentially develop a "supercrush" that lasts for years

Thoughts of that person invade your mind,
against your will, at all times of day,
invade your dreams,
for years and years,
and generally makes you miserable,
because you feel like you are "meant" to be together...

...but you are too responsible, sane, and mature, to stalk them or harass them,
and you maintain self-control and whatever distance it is humanly-possible to maintain.

It largely hangs on not knowing whether the object of your desire (or "Limerent Object" or LO)
would return your affections, or not...

...but even if you know they would not return your affections,
or if you know they are happily married, for example.
you could still be Limerent toward them for many years.

I've been Limerent in the past,
and it's a type of torture to not be able to stop thinking of a person,
and feel like you should be together,

but have to accept it and move on,
(especially if you're obliged to SEE or talk to that person, from time to time,
and your heart nearly stops every time you clap eyes on them).

Now:  I compare that to the invasive level of "distraction"
(due to sexual attraction) that Heat was talking about.

It is so persistent, so frequent, and intense enough, that it can be a little aggravating:

You're doing your best to behave,
but you feel like you're being taunted, at times,
and that your efforts at self-control are not appreciated.

Now,

I wouldn't go so far as to say it is like putting a feast before a starving man,
and asking him to maintain his self-control;

but I would say it is like an intense irritation that you cannot address;
and must simply endure;

like having poison ivy exposure and not being able to scratch it;
Or trying to study for a Calculus exam when you haven't slept for a couple of days,
or finding someone extremely obnoxious or annoying,
yet having to resist the urge to punch them in the face.

My point:

Women have stuff they have have to resist, too,
and ALWAYS resist it,
even if it makes them a little miserable.

I don't have the right to make my Limerent Object (my crush) uncomfortable,
by letting him know the intensity of my feelings for him,
just because I am inconvenienced...

...it is not his problem.

I must endure it,
OR, I must be the one to move away from HIM,
I cannot expect HIM to move away from ME.

Likewise,

men should not expect women to change their plans, or clothes,
or career, or life goals, or body, or anything else,
to accommodate what is easier for him...

...and vice-versa, too, of course.

(January 16, 2016 at 6:33 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(January 16, 2016 at 6:44 am)pool the great Wrote: I don't think women shouldn't be restricted to wear what they find comfortable.
I however advocate strongly for pants for men that are extremely revealing of their penis. So that it makes it perfectly clear when a man has a boner, pants that are capable of outlining the exact shape and size of a man's penis, without actually revealing the penis. I also want campaigns for supporting this trend and I want society to applaud and praise men that follow this trend and shame whoever that are against this trend among men.

Is that too much to ask?

Well you can wear some pants like that if you want, but you know why most men do not wear pants like that? Because they are generally not appealing  nor would they be comfortable for your package, especially if you pop a boner. Its not like men are covering up their super sexiness in the name of modesty.

I would be distracted. But not in the way pool thinks. Lol

(January 16, 2016 at 7:09 pm)Losty Wrote:

(January 16, 2016 at 6:33 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Well you can wear some pants like that if you want, but you know why most men do not wear pants like that? Because they are generally not appealing  nor would they be comfortable for your package, especially if you pop a boner. Its not like men are covering up their super sexiness in the name of modesty.

I would be distracted. But not in the way pool thinks. Lol

Ya, you would probably be starring, thinking "WTF is that guy wearing?".

In my opinion, it has nothing to do with confidence or lack of it. It has everything to do with other virtuous qualities that people want to do away with.

May the balance/order/light/reason/purity prevail over the darkness/ignorance/uncleanness/foolishness/chaos/corruption in all societies till it becomes dominant and victorious.

(January 16, 2016 at 7:18 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: In my opinion, it has nothing to do with confidence or lack of it. It has everything to do with other virtuous qualities that people want to do away with.

May the balance/order/light/reason/purity prevail over the darkness/ignorance/uncleanness/foolishness/chaos/corruption in all societies till it becomes dominant and victorious.

Are you sure you're up for this MK?  We're discussing how a woman's curvaceous body looks under yoga pants.  Or is your being up the reason you're here?  (Pro tip: no unsolicited dick pictures.)

(January 16, 2016 at 7:18 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: In my opinion, it has nothing to do with confidence or lack of it. It has everything to do with other virtuous qualities that people want to do away with.

May the balance/order/light/reason/purity prevail over the darkness/ignorance/uncleanness/foolishness/chaos/corruption in all societies till it becomes dominant and victorious.

As I stated a few pages back, I wear what I'm comfortable in and what the situation demands, not to attract the attention of men.

Now ask yourself WHY the various religions demand 'modesty' of women while not applting the same rule to men? Is it, perhaps, that those religions were created and run by "men"?

(January 16, 2016 at 7:07 pm)Losty Wrote:

(January 16, 2016 at 5:47 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: I would not be attracted to him. My hormones might respond as hormones will do, but my mind and my heart would not want to be near him, much less be seen with him.

Who am I to speak?  I don't need to wear skimpy clothes. Skimpy clothes are for women who lack confidence. Female beauty is for men who appreciate it and that's not every bloke I pass by on the street.

I call bullshit. This is what we are raised to believe. If we dress in a certain way it means we have certain negative qualities. It's a load of shit.

Can we just let people dress however they want to dress without making character judgements on them? Why is that so hard.

Theoretically speaking, I agree, Losty,
however I certainly understand what Rhonda is saying, too.

For example, there have been times that people have judged me simply as a lazy slob for not looking my best.
So you would be right about that, Losty,
because they were wrong about me being a slob....
...what I was, was massively depressed.

However, Rhonda could also be argued to be right, in a scenario like that:
But the negative quality that she would assess might not be "lazy slob",
but rather "someone with no self-respect".

And while that might be cruel-sounding,
it would still be correct;
because at that point, I had no self-worth.

I think people should have the freedom to dress as they please
without risk of harassment;

and I think it's great to encourage people to recognize the difference
between PASSING JUDGMENT vs. EXERCISING JUDGMENT;

but it kind of comes back to the discussion about rape, and blaming the victim:

We don't tell young women to be street-smart and be safe
because it would be "their fault" if they made a bad choice and got raped...

...but rather, we encourage them to be safe
because we just want to lower their odds of being raped, at all.

Because no matter how much punishment is meted-out to the rapist,
you are, at that point, still a rape victim.

You can't un-ring a bell.

Rape is part of your life story at that point,
and that's all we're trying to prevent.

It's not about blaming the victim...it's about preventing you from becoming a victim, in the first place.

In the same way,
If you dress a certain way,
and people pass judgment on you,
then that makes THEM the judgmental assholes...
....it doesn't make YOU whatever label it was that they were prepared to apply to you.

However, that said,
it is a little self-contradictory
to insist on having the freedom to use your clothing to express yourself...

...and then getting upset because someone misinterpreted your message.

People shouldn't ascribe negative qualities to you, based on superficial things, true...

...but on the other hand, you can't blame other people for failing to understand you,
simply because you misrepresented yourself, either.

It's why we dress professionally going to a job interview.

(January 16, 2016 at 7:18 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: In my opinion, it has nothing to do with confidence or lack of it. It has everything to do with other virtuous qualities that people want to do away with.

May the balance/order/light/reason/purity prevail over the darkness/ignorance/uncleanness/foolishness/chaos/corruption in all societies till it becomes dominant and victorious.

What is wrong with women's bodies? I personally see women's bodies as everything that is right and good in this world.