Posted on 03/29/2006 12:39:50 PM PST by NYer
If it is "defeminizing" then why do men "look at the crotch" of a woman wearing pants?
I agree that women look far more feminine in a skirt than pants. I only wear dresses or skirts to Mass or when I go out. But, I will stick to wearing pants around home to clean and garden and paint, etc...
Unless you are walkign with someone, carry a good book and let your time not be wasted, and lessen the opportunity for distraction.
What is it with the fascination of men (and women) with the pre-pubescent girl look for their privates?
Isn't that a little scary when you stop and think about it?
Without getting too graphic, there are certain sexual benefits to such an arrangement.
Plus, it's part of the "stripperification" of America. With the prevalence and mainstreaming of pornography and strip clubs, women take certain cues from women who are sex symbols.
Skirts are definitely more appealing, but also less revealing (unless minis). I'd certainly rather see a women in a skirt, and I find that more attractive, in the proper sense of attraction being an appreciation of beauty, as opposed to a desire for lust.
And yes it is true about looking at a woman rear end. But the crotch?
Watch the eyes of men when around women dressed in slacks.
Any men out there want to comment? Maybe my husband is the odd one out.
Apparently so.
Just look around in any major urban downtown.
Femininty doesn't involve being a walking sexual advertisement. Otherwise, the height of femininity would be a prostitute.
I agree that women look far more feminine in a skirt than pants. I only wear dresses or skirts to Mass or when I go out. But, I will stick to wearing pants around home to clean and garden and paint, etc...
That is what my wife does, and I see nothing wrong with that. People should wear whatever they want around their own home, and no one should be troubled by it.
I think I know where you are going with this, and I also think I want to remain in ignorance of what it actually is.
Plus, it's part of the "stripperification" of America.
I still don't see the sexual attraction to the pre-pubsecent look, even in a stripper. What exactly is attractive about looking like a 10 year old? Its creepy and icky just to write about it. To me, as a father of young girls, it sends off all the wrong messages in terms of making young girls sexual objects. Its like the homosexual ideal "man" being a pre-pubescent young boy of 12. Its just gross.
With the prevalence and mainstreaming of pornography and strip clubs, women take certain cues from women who are sex symbols.
Its so sad that women think the height of their powers and prowess is to be mistaken, however so slightly, for an easy sexual plaything for men
I hear ya, sister. Being petite, it's hard for me to find clothes that are age appropriate, fit right, are flattering, and wouldn't get me arrested if I wore them on Sunset Boulevard.
It's a trend that's gone in and out of style historically - I was just reading a book set in the days of Louis XIV and the (upperclass) bride was having all her body hair plucked, and I remember reading something about it in Roman times too. It's only ever been the nobility who had the time (and the servants) to do such things.
If you look at Classical Greek statues of women, you'll note that they are "bare." A respectable Greek woman was supposed to have a hairless body.
A repsectable rich woman, surely - I can't imagine a respectable poor one would have the time.
Well, historically, the habits of the poor weren't really taken into account by anyone "important."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.