http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FpyGwP3yzE

Comments?

Hey sam,

Interesting post.

I'm not into objectifying women, but god damn, we can't expect the most beautiful creation in the world to be bundled up and hidden.

Everything that's beautiful has curves.

Women are obsessed with their bodies as they know their entire purpose in life is to bear children.

This is an evolutionary demand upon their persons that they heed by seeking men at practically any cost to themselves.

If you want a man, you have to look good. Ergo, women want to look good.

If you want a man, you have to look good. Ergo, women want to look good.

Or give lots and lots of damned good blowjobs! :D

Baron Max

Damn skippy!

Women are obsessed with their bodies as they know their entire purpose in life is to bear children.

Ironic, then, that the ideal to which they aspire is so unhealthy and unfit for childbirth.

Anyway.

Comments?

Nothing new, really.
More of the same.
See? Even you couldn't think about anything to say. It's all been said before.

What's more interesting is the trend in many countries towards banning underweight fashion models. Should be interesting to see how this trend continues and what it will lead to.

I read recently that eating disorders are a chronic health issue in the US.

Where will this end?

SamCDKey:

Only idiotic teenage girls get a "disorder" from it.

The rest of the populace is normal.

Also, SamCDKey, it will never end, because women want men. The only women who don't look to be sexy are nuns and masculine lesbians.

invert_nexus:

They plump up when they get knocked up, my good man.

Also, no one said that evolutionary urges make sense, only that they are the grounding foundations for many behaviours in our sexual politics.

I read recently that eating disorders are a chronic health issue in the US.

Where will this end?

Athens 2004 Summer Olympics - Gold Medals

US 35

India 0

Sydney 2000 Summer Olympics - Gold Medals

US 39

India 0

Atlanta 1996 Summer Olympics - Gold Medals

US 44

India 0

Athens 2004 Summer Olympics - Gold Medals

US 35

India 0

Sydney 2000 Summer Olympics - Gold Medals

US 39

India 0

Atlanta 1996 Summer Olympics - Gold Medals

US 44

India 0

I see. So eating disorders end in gold medals?:confused:

APparently so.

APparently so.

But in decreasing order.

Hmm Do athletes also suffer from body image issues and eating disorders?

edit: apparently one cannot eat gold medals
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-02-05-women-health-cover_x.htm


Disordered eating — reported by one-third of female athletes in college — is just one element in a spectrum of health problems many confront, studies show. Despite the opportunities that have opened up to women since Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 banned sex discrimination in schools that receive federal money, universities report that an increasing number of these competitors are suffering from depression and anxiety disorders. They struggle to juggle practices, competitions and academic demands. Some are so overwhelmed that, despite their athletic talent, they drop their sports or even drop out of college. There are extreme cases of anorexia and suicide even among elite athletes.

Sad.:(

I find advertising of this sort horrible. Always have. But what's an eating disorder? Everyone I know has an eating disorder. Men and women. In a non-agrarian society (hunter/gatherer) the norm is to be what we would consider "underweight". We all have an ideal that we find sexually attractive (men and women) and this advertising just plays on that.

Before the invention of agriculture and civilization it is estimated that the average human lifespan was around 50 years. And it was only that low due largely to predation. With agriculture and a monotonic diet (and far more sedentary existence), the average lifespan dropped to the mid 30's. Only recently has it recovered and actually increased due to an approximation of the varied diet our hunter/gatherer forebears enjoyed and advances in medical treatment.

Studies also show that over time, the thinnest (but nutritionally adequate) among us have the lowest incidence of chronic disease such as cancer and heart disease and thus the longest lifespans.

So, like it or not, the images we see as attractive are closer to what we were like in our most "natural" state as humans. And this is clearly reflected in our sexual preferences.

There are three kinds of eating disorders:

1. anorexia nervosa: wilful starvation accompanied by neurological changes

2. bulimia: eat and puke.
The acid from the stomach erodes the oesophagus and causes oesophagitis. This is the most common eating disorder since it allows the person to eat as much as they like, they simply puke it out later.

3. binge eating: another common disorder, often accompanied by bulimia, where person eats large quantities of food followed by puking and starvation due to associated guilt in cyclic patterns.

Yes, I know. I suffer from #3 to some degree. My point was that, while not to the extremes listed above, we all are in a completely unnatural food environment that none of us has adequately adapted to yet.

Er there are other places across the ocean.

Err, leave your anti-american bigotry at the door please. The entire developed world is subject to these extremes. The US obviously moreso due to a generally higher per-capita income and a number of cultural influences.

What? No eating disorders "across the pond"? No fat people? No painfully thin people?

Sam, you kill me. (and just leave that one alone).

Fat people and thin people are not equal to eating disorders.

Anorexia, bulimia, binge eating are not prevalent in all societies to the same extent.

Anyway what I'm discussing here is the image of women in advertising.

Like the video said, the women don't even have pores! And teenagers are sexualised to an alarming degree (I remember someone telling me about age inappropriate clothing).

SamCDKey:

Teenagers are sexual objects. They are prime-breeders. Society's exclusion of them from the sexual process is essentially trying to restrain every single breeding drive we have.

Of -course- they want to be sexy. They are being screamed at to do so in their body.

Superluminal:

Your statistics on human ages are wrong.

The average lifespan for neolithic hunter-gatherers was 18.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_lifespan

SamCDKey:

Teenagers are sexual objects. They are prime-breeders. Society's exclusion of them from the sexual process is essentially trying to restrain every single breeding drive we have.

Of -course- they want to be sexy. They are being screamed at to do so in their body.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6376421.stm

SamCDKey:

The article is nonsense as one cannot be harmed by that which is within one's nature to be.

Teenagers = Reach puberty to have sex and bear children.

Our society = Ridiculously anti-human in restricting this.

HIstorically, girls would get married around the time they got their periods. Men would wait a bit longer after sexual maturity, specifically if there was war considerations.

Also: There is no way we can stop sexualization in the media. That is what men want. Badly. If women want men, they have to sexualize themselves in some way.

Superluminal:

Generally those websites use outdated information to support Primitivism. Very similar to "My Ishmael" and other propoganda books produced by a type of social scientist that has a political agenda, rather than the empirical analysis of history and archaeology.

http://www.tesarta.com/www/resources/library/lifespans.html

This has information take from Britannica 1961.

Superluminal:

Excellent point regarding the dichotomy being the main cause of illness. It's when we are forced to swallow contradictions that neuroses develop.

I see. So eating disorders end in gold medals?:confused:

Typical for you to be confused, sam.

Try not tossing so many stones from your glass menagerie.

Typical for you to be confused, sam.

Try not tossing so many stones from your glass menagerie.

Typical for you to see everything through your rolled lenses.:itold:

I must agree with PJ here. The damage most likely comes from the incredible dichotomy between what human nature dictates, advertising insists on, and parents and society demonize.

Sort of like the HAL9000 computer in 2001 a Space Oddessy

So what is the solution to this?

So what is the solution to this?

From your view of an impotent armchair quarterback, bitch about it on a forum.

From your view of an impotent armchair quarterback, bitch about it on a forum.

Interesting choice of words.:D

Interesting choice of words.:D

Ah, just like you to focus on a few choice words, run them up your imaginative flagpole, and ignore the message.

An excellent propagandist.

An excellent propagandist.

From you my dear, that is a compliment.

Thank you.:worship:

Unfortunately, nothing short of a complete revamp of society and our values. In the US at least. Our christian "morals" are at the base of this problem.

The issue arises when we deny the proven facts of human nature and pretend we can "mold" humans into whatever we want (i.e. the blank slate approach).

I'm not suggesting the rediculous position of just giving in to all of our hunter/gatherer behaviors. But understanding why we are the way we are and accepting it goes a long way toward dealing with society in a rational way.

If you have a cancer and pretend that it's a beauty-mark bulging out on your neck, you'll be pretty confused when it finally chokes off your air supply.

Meh.

So you would say that the primitive societies where children are not considered children, where they are treated as adults where labor and sex and pregnancy are concerned, are more natural and should be the criteria that all societies follow?

So you would say that the primitive societies where children are not considered children, where they are treated as adults where labor and sex and pregnancy are concerned, are more natural and should be the criteria that all societies follow?

Have you ever, in your entire life, hit the broad side of a barn?

Have you ever, in your entire life, hit the broad side of a barn?

Would you like to add to the discussion?

Would you like to add to the discussion?

And you did? :shrug:

And you did? :shrug:

We could troll or we could wait for supe to respond.

He actually thinks through his opinions.

So what is your opinion of the sexualisation of teenage girls?

Do you believe it is an expression of natural sexuality and that societies where girls are married off at 12 are the ones that have the right idea?

Or anything else?

Did you even read my post?

I did, which is why I asked you this question.

What do you see as a way towards this:

But understanding why we are the way we are and accepting it goes a long way toward dealing with society in a rational way.

LIke I said, I have no idea. The majority of people would have to embrace what we currently think of a "rationalism". That may never happen. What we need is some good advertisers :D :m: in politics to sell the idea.

What would your vision of a rational approach be? Details.

Prime example. Given some recent discussions here regarding the appropriate age at which "children" can be approached sexually:

There is strong evidence that many males find the flowering of the young female very sexually attractive. There are appalling statistics that show the rate of "abuse" delivered unto these young girls (especially by family members) with stepfamilies being 3-5 times worse.

So what if we acknowledge the following things as truths:

1) It is natural for males to find pubescent girls sexually attractive.

2) Sexual attraction, for males, is one of the most powerful drives known. DO NOT MINIMIZE OR TRIVIALIZE THIS! If you do, you are making the worst, most fatal, mistake in trying to resolve this issue.

3) Our social structure will always place young girls in situations with adult males (normal and step families).

Given these, which are almost certainly true, how should we proceed to minimize the damage to all parties involved?

I know what I would do. What would you all do?

What would you do?

It's complex and details imply a well thought-out approach. I don't really have one. The problem is that without serious short-term damage to society, I don't see a way.

Now you've piqued my interest.

What serious short term damage?

SamCDKey:

I say we should gear children to be adults by the age of thirteen and to consider early marriage and solidification of relationships at this age. It is the only way to channel the natural instinct into a socially constructive mold.