Your Vagina Isn't Just Too Big, Too Floppy, and Too Hairy—It's Also Too Brown

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Link:http://jezebel.com/5900928/your-vagina-isnt-just-too-big-too-floppy-and-too-hairyits-also-too-brown

ugh


Good news, ladies! Society has discovered another new thing that's wrong with you, which means another opportunity for you to make yourself more attractive for your man. Score! Turns out, the color of your vagina is gross and everyone hates it. So bleach that motherfucker. Bleach it right now!

In this commercial for an Indian product called Clean and Dry Intimate Wash, a (very light-skinned) couple sits down for what would have been a peaceful cup of morning coffee—if the woman's disgusting brown vagina hadn't ruined everything! The dude can't even bring himself look at her. He can't look at his coffee either, because it only reminds him of his wife's dripping, coffee-brown hole! Fortunately, the quick-thinking woman takes a shower, scrubbing her swarthy snatch with Clean and Dry Intimate Wash ("Freshness + Fairness"). And poof! Her vadge comes out blinding white like a downy baby lamb (and NOT THE GROSS BLACK KIND) and her husband—whose penis, I can only assume, is literally a light saber—is all, "Hey, lady! Cancel them divorce papers and LET'S BONE."

Needless to say, certain citizens are troubled by this product—which, in addition to just being fucking insane, brings up painful issues about the hierarchy of skin tone within the Indian community. As if it isn't bad enough that darker-skinned people are encouraged to stay out of the sun and invest in skin-bleaching products like Fair & Lovely, and that white actresses are being imported to play Indian people in Bollywood movies, now everyone has to be insecure about the fact that their vaginas happen to be the color that vaginas are??? Splendid! God, I was just saying the other day that my misogyny didn't have enough racism in it.

So what are the pro-vadge-bleaching people thinking? Here's a hilarious explanation from a male ad exec:

It is hard to deny that fairness creams often get social commentators and activists all worked up. What they should do is take a deep breath and think again. Lipstick is used to make your lips redder, fairness cream is used to make you fairer-so what's the problem? I don't think any Youngistani today thinks the British Raj/White man is superior to us Brown folk. That's all 1947 thinking!

The only reason I can offer for why people like fairness, is this: if you have two beautiful girls, one of them fair and the other dark, you see the fair girl's features more clearly. This is because her complexion reflects more light. I found this amazing difference when I directed Kabir Bedi, who is very fair and had to wear dark makeup for Othello, the Black hero of the play. I found I had to have a special spotlight following Kabir around the stage because otherwise the audience could not see his expressions.

See? It makes perfect sense. We just want our vaginas to reflect more light—is that so wrong? I mean, WHAT IF MY CAR BREAKS DOWN AT NIGHT AND I DON'T HAVE A REFLECTIVE ENOUGH VAGINA? Really, the ultimate one-vagina-to-rule-them-all would glow in the dark like one of those deep-sea fishes. I need my vagina to attract more krill so my husband will fuck me again! (My husband is a whale.)

Basically the idea is to get as far away as possible from any color that vaginas actually come in. Because that's what's at the heart of this type of thinking—the perfect vagina would be something that's not a vagina at all.



Now while we are here, to allow for actual discussion to take place on this thread I'm curious of your experiences with vaginas. I think we can talk like mature leftists and have a reasonable discussion on the subject matter. So basically in addition to obviously decrying this reactionary practice I think it would be helpful if we can learn about vaginas from a female perspective and the experience with vaginas. I guess I'll start with a couple things.

As some of you know I am a transwoman and during my junior year my depression came back really bad when my ex cheated on me with a couple guys, and depression tends to trigger my gender dysphoria. And as some of you might know many transpeople experience phantom limb syndrome. So one day when it was really bad I was able to used the sensation of where the vagina ought to be to have a female orgasm. It was wooonnnddeeerrrffffuulll. Seriously I envy you cis-woman, lady parts are awesome! Maybe if you are all mature enough I will share some more things. I imagine considering the maturity level of revleft there is about a 1/4th chance this won't derail but hopefully this leads to a fruitful discussion that goes beyond us simply agreeing with eachother about how reactionary this product is and can allow for an actual educational discussion.

[Was tun, wenn's brennt?]

To be crass, yet succinct and honest: I don't discriminate, I penetrate. The only time the color of a vagina would matter to me is if it called into question the health of the woman I was about to stick my tongue/finger/penis in.

[Alexios]

Uh where exactly is it implied that this is a common view amongst men? The article just says it's being sold by some company in India and has a piece from an executive defending it. Companies make products all the time that appeal to a minority. I don't see any evidence that this is a societal norm.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Uh where exactly is it implied that this is a common view amongst men? The article just says it's being sold by some company in India and has a piece from an executive defending it. Companies make products all the time that appeal to a minority. I don't see any evidence that this is a societal norm.

Well here is a link to another article which points out the broad desire for paler skin in Indian society, I imagine this can extend down to the genital regions

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/india-obsessed-white-skin-actress-article-1.1498783



AFP RELAXNEWS

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2013, 10:03 AM
Actress and director Nandita Das is fighting to change the idea that Indian women are only beautiful if they have fair skin.
AFP

Actress and director Nandita Das is fighting to change the idea that Indian women are only beautiful if they have fair skin.
MUMBAI - Looking to find a husband, make friends, and get ahead at work? Then you need to have lighter skin.

That's the all-pervasive message in India, and it's something that one actress is fighting to overturn.

The new poster girl of the "Dark is Beautiful" campaign, Nandita Das, has called out India's obsession with fair skin -- a prejudice she says has driven some young women to the brink of suicide.

"Magazines, TV, cinema -- everywhere being fair is synonymous with being beautiful," Das told AFP.

Described as having "dusky" skin as opposed to a fair complexion, the 43-year-old is well used to Indian preoccupations with color, and not just in the film industry, where she has refused requests to lighten her skin for roles.

"How can you be so confident despite being so dark?" is a question regularly asked of Das, who has preferred to star in unconventional, issue-based films but says she would struggle to get ahead in mainstream Bollywood movies.

'Beauty beyond color'

In May, Das became the face of the Dark is Beautiful campaign, launched in 2009 by activist group Women of Worth to celebrate "beauty beyond color".

Her backing has helped to generate increasing debate in the media, but the response has underlined just how ingrained the preference is for fairer skin, which has long been associated with higher social classes and castes.

"I started getting tonnes of emails from young women pouring their heart out about how they were discriminated against. Some wanted to commit suicide because they couldn't be fair," she said.

Das found her own photograph had been lightened by a newspaper even for a feature on the campaign. When looking for a nanny, she was told one candidate was "good, but quite dark".

RELATED: SKIN-WHITENING PRODUCTS RECALLED

Amid such pressures to be pale, India's whitening cream market swelled from $397 million in 2008 to $638 million over four years, according to market researchers at Euromonitor International.

Skin-lightening products accounted for 84 percent of the country's facial moisturizer market last year, their report shows.

The bias facing darker-skinned women was raised again in September when an Indian-origin woman, Nina Davuluri, won the "Miss America" contest in the United States.

"Had she been in India, far from entering a beauty contest, it is more likely that Ms. Davuluri would have grown up hearing mostly disparaging remarks about the color of her skin," said an editorial in The Hindu newspaper.

"She would have been -- going by the storyline of most 'fairness' cream advertisements -- a person with low self-esteem and few friends."

Vaginal whitening cream

Last year, a commercial for an "intimate wash" to whiten vaginas emerged, showing a young Indian woman who uses the product to successfully regain her boyfriend's attention.

The advert was widely panned, but a glance through matrimonial websites and newspaper columns suggests that fair skin, at least on a woman's face, remains key to attaining an Indian husband.

Aspiring grooms often state in their adverts their preference for a fair bride, while nearly all women's profiles describe their complexion as fair or so-called "wheatish".

Ekta Ghosh, a fashion designer in Mumbai who specializes in wedding wear, said the message that only fair is beautiful had been passed down to Indian girls for generations.

"Parents, relatives, they all keep saying you should do something to lighten your skin tone," she said.

RELATED: ADS IN SENEGAL: DON'T BLEACH, 'BLACK IS BEAUTIFUL'

India's mass market whitening pioneer was "Fair & Lovely", launched in 1975 by Hindustan Unilever and now selling in a range of other countries where pale skin is desirable, across Africa and the Middle East as well as Asia.

Indian consumer group Emami later came up with "Fair and Teen" for girls and "Fair and Handsome" for men.

Promoted by Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan, the latest advert shows him tossing a tube of the cream from the red carpet to a young male fan.

Dark is Beautiful has launched a petition against the "irresponsible" video and its message that "fair skin is a prerequisite for success".

So far more than 15,000 people have signed up in protest, but Khan has not responded.

"You're telling people they're just not good enough," said Das, who describes whitening cream adverts in general as "so regressive and derogatory".

Fairness cream producers suggest they help to boost users' confidence, although both Emami and Hindustan Unilever declined to comment for this article.

Not everyone, however, is convinced such creams are even effective.

Receptionist Prachi Chawan, 28, said she had been using Fair & Lovely products for three years "out of habit", but was yet to see noticeable results.

"There have been no side effects but no change either," she said.

Das believes whitening cream developers did not create Indians' color bias and insecurities, but have "cashed in" on it, creating a "vicious circle".

While men's fairness products are gaining ground, the actress says women and girls still face far more pressure over their skin tone, which she puts down to a general lack of respect and inequality.

"Until we let women have the same space as men and treat them as human beings, all this will carry on."

[Quail]

I don't think these products are necessarily limited to India, although there aren't any adverts in the UK. A while ago there were some funny reviews posted on Amazon for a vaginal bleaching product, but I can't remember the name of it. In any case (and on a more serious note) I think the beauty industry is just tapping into insecurities that they know women already have - in this case, both the worry that their vagina will be perceived as disgusting and the way that paler skin is promoted as a beauty standard.

As an aside, I have never really been self conscious about my own vagina and I've never looked at another woman I've been with and recoiled in horror. It's only really come to my attention in the past couple of years, the idea of people feeling insecure about their vagina, and part of me does think, "Is this something I should be concerned about now??" but most of me thinks, "Would I ever be offended by someone else's genitals? No? Then it's okay." The entire beauty industry is built on making people feel bad about themselves though so they buy products to make themselves more "acceptable" so it doesn't surprise me they're exploiting insecurity about vaginas - especially since I'm guessing most straight women don't tend to get too close to other people's vaginas?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

The same skin-whitening shit goes on in South Korea as well. And it's not just white skin - there're cosmetics over there made to specifically make people look 'European' as if that's some kind of beauty pinnacle :rolleyes: . It's totally manufactured bullshit, and even people with more tanned skin tones who are ethnically Korean endure large amounts of racial abuse.

[Tim Cornelis]

The same skin-whitening shit goes on in South Korea as well. And it's not just white skin - there're cosmetics over there made to specifically make people look 'European' as if that's some kind of beauty pinnacle :rolleyes: . It's totally manufactured bullshit, and even people with more tanned skin tones who are ethnically Korean endure large amounts of racial abuse.

The same in the Arab world.

[FreedomForAll]

No matter what happens in society you'll have people wanting to change their characteristics. We have no control over our appearances, so some people will gravitate towards altering theirs in some way. Since it is entirely subjective, the problem only exists when it becomes some sort of collective decision of what must be done. Still, I've never seen an agreement on what exactly constitutes an ideal, since everyone has differing tastes.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I don't think these products are necessarily limited to India, although there aren't any adverts in the UK. A while ago there were some funny reviews posted on Amazon for a vaginal bleaching product, but I can't remember the name of it. In any case (and on a more serious note) I think the beauty industry is just tapping into insecurities that they know women already have - in this case, both the worry that their vagina will be perceived as disgusting and the way that paler skin is promoted as a beauty standard.

As an aside, I have never really been self conscious about my own vagina and I've never looked at another woman I've been with and recoiled in horror. It's only really come to my attention in the past couple of years, the idea of people feeling insecure about their vagina, and part of me does think, "Is this something I should be concerned about now??" but most of me thinks, "Would I ever be offended by someone else's genitals? No? Then it's okay." The entire beauty industry is built on making people feel bad about themselves though so they buy products to make themselves more "acceptable" so it doesn't surprise me they're exploiting insecurity about vaginas - especially since I'm guessing most straight women don't tend to get too close to other people's vaginas?
you mentioned the beauty industry and beauty standards and i think that's the key thing here. i was talking to my girlfriend about all of this after she said that a model in an advert (whose name i can't remember, she's famous though) was 'probably the most beautiful woman in the world'. i was perplexed and actually angry - we had a discussion about it and we agreed that this woman was the most beautiful woman in my girlfriend's world, because there's a standard of beauty that is spoon-fed to her in the cultural activities she engages in, one of them being fashion. furthermore, women feel pressured into shaving their vaginas because its more womanly, based on a socially-constructed ideal of beauty. what's more interesting is these standards of beauty change across sections of society - i mentioned my ex, who died her hair red as was the fashion, emulating the hairstyle of amy childs (the only way is essex). my girlfriend said that she couldn't stand amy childs, but this woman was 'the most beautiful woman in the world' to my ex - my ex was a working class, uncultured woman and my current girlfriend is middle-class and educated.

my point is that there is a standard of beauty and its all related to gender-roles, the demands of genders and the patriarchal industry behind the gender-based commodities whether its hair-dye, vaginal die or those specific vagina-cleaning products. i saw and avert for 'vagiseal' (i think its called) and asked my girlfriend what she thought of it? she's never used it, but we could see the strangeness of using a specific cleaning product to mask the natural odour of vaginas. vaginas have a scent, that's how they are. they have hair too, why are we obsessed with making woman have vaginas that look like they belong to a prepubescent? why do we have to modify their colour?

if you ask me, the wonderful thing about vaginas is that they're all different. the same with people. if it was up to marketing people and the patriarchal fashion industry, all women would look the same, with bleached vaginas, excessive make-up, the same hair-colours, the same clothes and the same everything. imagine what a boring world it would be, if everyone was the same. i'm reminded of adorno's work on the culture industry, how our superficial culture is close to fascism, how western, liberal society contains elements of the kind of identity-thinking that fascism thrives on. how television adverts, pop-music and other cultural commodities are reminiscent of fascist propaganda. the same goes for these products aimed at women which tells them how to look, making them feel insecure when they don't fit the ideal-type that society demands from women.

[Lily Briscoe]

Leaving aside the question of 'vaginal bleaching' which seems obviously tied to racism,

i was talking to my girlfriend about all of this after she said that a model in an advert (whose name i can't remember, she's famous though) was 'probably the most beautiful woman in the world'. i was perplexed and actually angry - we had a discussion about it and we agreed that this woman was the most beautiful woman in my girlfriend's world, because there's a standard of beauty that is spoon-fed to her in the cultural activities she engages in, one of them being fashion.
While she may find it difficult to rival your level of patronizing, maybe the next time you shave your face or go get a haircut or use body spray, your girlfriend can pull you aside and angrily give you a lecture about how you're a slave to cultural expectations and the male grooming industry, which has spoon fed these standards to you. I don't really see why some dude judging and lecturing his girlfriend for not fitting into some cultural standard of beauty is more problematic than some dude judging and lecturing his girlfriend for liking fashion or wearing makeup or shaving her legs or dying her hair. It doesn't make you a feminist warrior, it just makes you seem like a bit of an ass.

[Quail]

Leaving aside the question of 'vaginal bleaching' which seems obviously tied to racism,

While she may find it difficult to rival your level of patronizing, maybe the next time you shave your face or go get a haircut or use body spray, your girlfriend can pull you aside and angrily give you a lecture about how you're a slave to cultural expectations and the male grooming industry, which has spoon fed these standards to you. I don't really see why some dude judging and lecturing his girlfriend for not fitting into some cultural standard of beauty is more problematic than some dude judging and lecturing his girlfriend for liking fashion or wearing makeup or shaving her legs or dying her hair. It doesn't make you a feminist warrior, it just makes you seem like a bit of an ass.
I didn't get the impression from his post that Admiral etc. was lecturing his girlfriend because she didn't fit the cultural beauty standard, but rather that he felt upset that his girlfriend felt the need to compare herself to this model on the television, but maybe I misinterpreted.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

The same in the Arab world.

Mental. Arab women are beautiful, why'd they wanna look more European?

[Decolonize The Left]

This is not limited to any one country wherein folks are generally not considered 'white.' When I was in south east Asia there was face whitening cream packets hanging in most rural convenience stores. While many Asian folks are of pale skin tones, folks up in the rural mountains are usually darker skinned and are discriminated against on that ground much of the time.

This article, which was hilariously written btw, reminds me of the vaginal shaving fad/hysteria which is currently underway in the US.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Aren't things like this always very unhealthy? We know douching is, bleaching your vagina can't be much better.

[Lily Briscoe]

I didn't get the impression from his post that Admiral etc. was lecturing his girlfriend because she didn't fit the cultural beauty standard, but rather that he felt upset that his girlfriend felt the need to compare herself to this model on the television, but maybe I misinterpreted.

I think I may not have phrased it very clearly. I know he wasn't judging and lecturing his girlfriend for failing to perfectly embody a cultural standard of beauty. Instead he was judging and lecturing her for thinking a model was attractive and being interested in fashion, and seems to have the attitude that women who dye their hair or shave their legs or wear makeup are like these mindless cultural drones and slaves to the beauty industry who need a good talking to. My point was that I don't think this attitude is any less problematic.

[Quail]

I think I may not have phrased it very clearly. I know he wasn't judging and lecturing his girlfriend for failing to perfectly embody a cultural standard of beauty. Instead he was judging and lecturing her for thinking a model was attractive and being interested in fashion, and seems to have the attitude that women who dye their hair or shave their legs or wear makeup are like these mindless cultural drones and slaves to the beauty industry who need a good talking to. My point was that I don't think this attitude is any less problematic.

Yeah, you are right. It is problematic to assume that all women who use beauty products are doing so because they're mindless slaves to the beauty industry, but then on the other hand loads of women use beauty products not because they find it fun and enjoyable, but just so that they don't feel bad about themselves. When you're growing up you end up doing everything automatically because your family and friends are doing it and you don't really question a lot of it. When I was about 12 or 13 my mum was like, "Right, we need to pluck those eyebrows!" and got out the tweezers so from then on I thought I had to pluck my eyebrows every time they grew back so they didn't look bad, even though I had never noticed or cared about them before. Everyone around me when I was growing up talked about how gross body hair was, so that was another thing I internalised and I shaved every other day or so for years out of the fear people would think I was gross if I didn't. My mum (and many other women) won't leave the house without make up. After being bombarded with messages about what is and isn't an acceptable way to look, it can be really hard to feel confident enough to ignore those beauty norms. That doesn't mean you're mindless or brainwashed or anything like that. Feeling good about yourself and accepting the way you look is hard in a world where you're constantly receiving messages that you look bad and need to change yourself (I know I'm not immune to it, despite not really using any beauty products - and none of this is to say that beauty products can't be used for fun and personal preference too). I guess my slightly long winded point was meant to be that it can be upsetting to see this in action with someone you care about (and often women will say someone else is beautiful as a way of putting themselves down) - so instead of getting the judgemental vibe from Admiral etc's post I read it that way. But I will have to let him actually clarify what he meant.

[Art Vandelay]

Well I just finished that article and don't have enough time to type up a proper response, since I got to run to work, but I just can't seem to wrap my head around this. Like I knew the beauty industry was some sleazy shit, this almost reminded me of reading about african american women who bleach there skin in the U.S. to become more 'beautiful' (and it has all sorts of negative health consequences), but did they really have the audacity to take it this far? Has anyone ever seriously been with a woman and had that thought cross their mind? That the pigmentation of their vagina wasn't up to their standards? This is just beyond absurd to me.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I think I may not have phrased it very clearly. I know he wasn't judging and lecturing his girlfriend for failing to perfectly embody a cultural standard of beauty. Instead he was judging and lecturing her for thinking a model was attractive and being interested in fashion, and seems to have the attitude that women who dye their hair or shave their legs or wear makeup are like these mindless cultural drones and slaves to the beauty industry who need a good talking to. My point was that I don't think this attitude is any less problematic.
quail was right about why i got upset and the rest of it.

my problem is with the arbitrary nature of attraction and beauty standards and how people (yes, men too) internalize the notions that they have to look a certain way. this set of cultural norms is far more problematic than me "lecturing" my girlfriend. i'd prefer it if we called it cultural criticism, too - it was a discussion and you're assumption that me and my girlfriend can't have discussions like this without me patronizing her is more patronizing than me discussing these things in the first place. she's an intelligent woman and we had a fruitful discussion in which we both learned things.

if you read me properly, you'll understand that i view this issue structurally. the same applies to the male-grooming industry and all of these industries operate within the remit of (obviously) capitalism and patriarchy. patriarchy demands roles from men and women, it just so happens that, as the more oppressed gender, females have it worse and also there's the fact that this thread was about a product intended to women. read what i said but flip it and take a male-grooming product in replacement, the same things apply in a generalized sense. in fact, me and my girlfriend explored this question while i was busy "patronizing" her.

as a side note, my hair is long and my beard unkept, partly because i'm always on the road and partly because i don't listen to what the male-grooming industry tells me because i would rather look how i do than modify my appearance to look like joey essex or whatever other tool people are currently trying to look like. however, if the level of this discussion is based on assumptions rather than sociological analysis, then i'll assume that you took offence because you buy into the cultural norms that i criticize. this is fine, however, and if you want to discuss things properly then know that none of what i said was personally against anyone, but rather against certain social norms as a whole. we're all guilty to varying degrees, yes, but this doesn't negate the fact that the things we are talking about are structural, whether we embrace them or enjoy them or not. it is our duty to understand the society around us.

[Lily Briscoe]

quail was right about why i got upset and the rest of it.

my problem is with the arbitrary nature of attraction and beauty standards and how people (yes, men too) internalize the notions that they have to look a certain way. this set of cultural norms is far more problematic than me "lecturing" my girlfriend. i'd prefer it if we called it cultural criticism, too - it was a discussion and you're assumption that me and my girlfriend can't have discussions like this without me patronizing her is more patronizing than me discussing these things in the first place. she's an intelligent woman and we had a fruitful discussion in which we both learned things.

if you read me properly, you'll understand that i view this issue structurally. the same applies to the male-grooming industry and all of these industries operate within the remit of (obviously) capitalism and patriarchy. patriarchy demands roles from men and women, it just so happens that, as the more oppressed gender, females have it worse and also there's the fact that this thread was about a product intended to women. read what i said but flip it and take a male-grooming product in replacement, the same things apply in a generalized sense. in fact, me and my girlfriend explored this question while i was busy "patronizing" her.

as a side note, my hair is long and my beard unkept, partly because i'm always on the road and partly because i don't listen to what the male-grooming industry tells me because i would rather look how i do than modify my appearance to look like joey essex or whatever other tool people are currently trying to look like. however, if the level of this discussion is based on assumptions rather than sociological analysis, then i'll assume that you took offence because you buy into the cultural norms that i criticize. this is fine, however, and if you want to discuss things properly then know that none of what i said was personally against anyone, but rather against certain social norms as a whole. we're all guilty to varying degrees, yes, but this doesn't negate the fact that the things we are talking about are structural, whether we embrace them or enjoy them or not. it is our duty to understand the society around us.

Getting pissed off at your girlfriend for finding a model attractive, and then proceeding to explain to her that her opinion isn't valid, she's just brainwashed - if that isn't patronizing then clearly I have no idea what that word even means.

People should be encouraged to look how they want, without feeling pressured to meet somebody else's expectations against their own wishes (or being judged for failing to do so). Whether its some bro judging women for not being tall blondes with enormous breasts, or some hippie judging women for not being sufficiently au naturel, or some moralist judging women for showing too much skin, I don't really see what difference it makes. There is always, always somebody judging though, no matter what.

Anyway, despite your insistence to the contrary, I don't think you actually have offered much of anything in the way of "structural" analysis, and what you've said doesn't really get beyond the level of 'ideas' and 'culture'. Instead it basically amounts to 'women feel pressured to look a certain way' because 'women buy into/are spoon-fed cultural norms' - which is hardly some groundbreaking structural insight.

If you wanted to actually do something resembling a 'structural analysis', maybe you could look at the tangible ways that women's physical appearance effects their material situation - not just the way they're treated in everyday interactions (although this too), but also their ability to get a job, their ability to keep a job they already have, their ability to make decent tips if they're waitresses/servers/baristas/bartenders/whatever, etc. etc., and I think this is related to the nature of a lot of 'womens/affective labor'*, rather than a product of some cultural conspiracy on the part of the beauty industry to plant false ideas in the heads of women (who are apparently universally gullible so they lap that shit up). I don't think the beauty industry invents 'cultural norms' out of thin air, it just cashes in on cultural norms that already exist.

But none of this is to imply that the only possible reason women, or men for that matter, modify their appearance is because they're pressured into it by external factors. Many grooming rituals are as much about functionality and comfort as aesthetics. Also, to the extent that you can meaningfully speak about 'human nature', I think it's pretty reasonable to say that humans tend to be creative and aesthetically-minded. People living in primitive communal 'societies' were modifying their appearances in various ways for millennia before the development of agriculture and the rise of class society, and I see no reason why the abolition of classes would necessarily mean everyone deciding to look like Chewbacca.


*I think by this same token, the rise of the whole 'metrosexual' thing and increasing emphasis on male grooming rituals in a lot of 'the west' is to a certain extent related to the rise of service sector economies and the 'feminization' of labor, where more and more men are going into jobs that consist of serving/caring for/pleasing people and being 'the face of the company', as opposed to jobs in production.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Yeah all of the emphasis on fitting social norms of beauty is not only dangerous but absurd. The more uniformity in beauty norms, the less beautiful people become as they become indistinguishable. Then again, it's clear how it fits the needs of a consumer market because it's easier to market goods to a population that wants to look the same.


Getting pissed off at your girlfriend for finding a model attractive, and then proceeding to explain to her that her opinion isn't valid, she's just brainwashed - if that isn't patronizing then clearly I have no idea what that word even means.

People should be encouraged to look how they want, without feeling pressured to meet somebody else's expectations against their own wishes (or being judged for failing to do so). Whether its some bro judging women for not being tall blondes with enormous breasts, or some hippie judging women for not being sufficiently au naturel, or some moralist judging women for showing too much skin, I don't really see what difference it makes. There is always, always somebody judging though, no matter what.


So its fine for a woman to implicitly call every woman who doesn't look like some unrealistically beautiful model on television unattractive or even ugly but its soooo patronizing when Admiral G says to her that those beauty standards are artificial? You seem to think that there is no political ramification for reifying the beauty categories but there is for opposing them, or that it's fine to believe a reactionary or oppressive value system but wrong to tell those who hold it that it's harmful.

I have to say, I'm offended at the words of his girlfriend because it implicitly calls the women I find beautiful to be "ugly" and I am offended on their behalf, since I know those women don't fit some stupid gender norm imposed on them by someone else.

[Quail]

I think this

People should be encouraged to look how they want, without feeling pressured to meet somebody else's expectations against their own wishes (or being judged for failing to do so). Whether its some bro judging women for not being tall blondes with enormous breasts, or some hippie judging women for not being sufficiently au naturel, or some moralist judging women for showing too much skin, I don't really see what difference it makes. There is always, always somebody judging though, no matter what.
is correct. But I also think there's a difference between judging women for the way they look, and pointing out that the beauty norms someone aspires to are unrealistic. On a more extreme end of the spectrum, do you think it is patronising to tell someone with anorexia that their "thinspiration" pictures are made up and photoshopped to hell, and that it is physically impossible to have a completely flat stomach? Obviously there is a difference between the way that many anorexic people glorify a certain aesthetic and the way that healthier people have a certain "ideal" standard of beauty, but I have learned anything growing up it is that subscribing to any kind of "ideal" body/face/etc is really damaging on a personal level.

I don't think this is a "conspiracy" by the beauty industry, but it is clear from the various products available and the adverts for them that the beauty industry preys on and exploits insecurities that women already have. Beauty norms are enforced when it comes to employment, as you note, but they are also enforced collectively by people in society in general. They're enforced by family members, friends, colleagues, customers, people in the street you don't even know, etc.

(As long as it is done in a sensitive way and not framed as a personal attack) I think it is important to make people question their idea of beauty. On a personal level, rejecting the usual beauty norms is liberating and good for your self esteem. On a societal level, the more people accept a wider idea of what is beautiful, the less such norms will be enforced. Though I don't think they will disappear completely in a capitalist society.

[Lily Briscoe]

I think this

is correct. But I also think there's a difference between judging women for the way they look, and pointing out that the beauty norms someone aspires to are unrealistic. On a more extreme end of the spectrum, do you think it is patronising to tell someone with anorexia that their "thinspiration" pictures are made up and photoshopped to hell, and that it is physically impossible to have a completely flat stomach? Obviously there is a difference between the way that many anorexic people glorify a certain aesthetic and the way that healthier people have a certain "ideal" standard of beauty, but I have learned anything growing up it is that subscribing to any kind of "ideal" body/face/etc is really damaging on a personal level.

I don't think someone finding a model beautiful is inherently on the same spectrum as anorexia at all. It is perfectly possible for someone to note that they find a particular model beautiful as just like a banal observation, without it implying that the person making it is trying to 'measure up' to that model, or that they think the only attractive qualities are the qualities that that particular model embodies. It also isn't clear that the comment was related to self-esteem issues, or that there was this subtext where the woman who made the comment was really saying "I am so hideous" or anything like that. But even if the comment was made out of self-esteem issues (and perhaps even more so if the comment was made out of self-esteem issues), some dude responding to it by getting pissed off at her and shooting down her opinion as something she's been "spoon-fed" is absolutely patronizing, in addition to being an awful way of dealing with someone who has self-esteem issues. And yes, I think that would apply in the case of someone with anorexia.


I don't think this is a "conspiracy" by the beauty industry, but it is clear from the various products available and the adverts for them that the beauty industry preys on and exploits insecurities that women already have. Beauty norms are enforced when it comes to employment, as you note, but they are also enforced collectively by people in society in general. They're enforced by family members, friends, colleagues, customers, people in the street you don't even know, etc.I think it is a lot more complicated than this, though. I think in a lot of the examples in bold, someone who (for example) dresses sort of frumpy and doesn't wear makeup or whatever may receive less positive attention, yes, but I think they equally may receive less negative and/or unwanted attention too. They also may have their opinions taken more seriously and be less likely to be written off as an airhead or whatever.


(As long as it is done in a sensitive way and not framed as a personal attack) I think it is important to make people question their idea of beauty. On a personal level, rejecting the usual beauty norms is liberating and good for your self esteem. On a societal level, the more people accept a wider idea of what is beautiful, the less such norms will be enforced. Though I don't think they will disappear completely in a capitalist society.Honestly, to me this stuff basically boils down to lifestyle choices, not political acts. I think if some women feel better not using cosmetics or shaving/waxing/etc., then that is totally fine and they should do what makes them happy. But I don't think that either A. abstaining from the use of female beauty/grooming products (in the case of women), or, B. stating your completely abstract "opposition" to female beauty standards (in the case of men), has any effect at all on any broader structural phenomenon. Similarly, if people want to buy only organic, "fair trade" clothing, I don't care--that's their business. But as soon as they start convincing themselves that not 'supporting' this industry or that industry as consumers somehow translates into meaningful political action that's going to stop oppression, and then moralize/judge people who don't follow their particular consumer and lifestyle choices and accuse them of "upholding a reactionary and oppressive value system" or whatever bullshit, then I think it becomes pretty problematic. And in the case that this behavior is centered around 'the beauty industry' and 'female beauty standards', I think when it's men behaving this way toward women it stops merely being something that's obnoxious/self-righteous and actually becomes something that's really condescending and demeaning.

[Quail]

I don't think someone finding a model beautiful is inherently on the same spectrum as anorexia at all. It is perfectly possible for someone to note that they find a particular model beautiful as just like a banal observation, without it implying that the person making it is trying to 'measure up' to that model, or that they think the only attractive qualities are the qualities that that particular model embodies. It also isn't clear that the comment was related to self-esteem issues, or that there was this subtext where the woman who made the comment was really saying "I am so hideous" or anything like that. But even if the comment was made out of self-esteem issues (and perhaps even more so if the comment was made out of self-esteem issues), some dude responding to it by getting pissed off at her and shooting down her opinion as something she's been "spoon-fed" is absolutely patronizing, in addition to being an awful way of dealing with someone who has self-esteem issues. And yes, I think that would apply in the case of someone with anorexia.

I am not defending the idea of "some guy getting pissed off at her and shooting down her opinion" (I did qualify my later comment with "as long as it is done in a sensitive way and not framed as a personal attack") but if one of my friends (male or female, really) said that someone like a heavily made up, airbrushed model was beautiful with the implication that they were not, I wouldn't just stand there and not say anything. I made the comparison with anorexia because people with eating disorders often have a distorted idea of what bodies "should" look like, in the same way that someone who feels that they should look like an airbrushed model has a distorted idea of what people "should" look like. My friends have often reminded me that I compare myself to unrealistic standards and I don't find it patronising or unhelpful.


I think it is a lot more complicated than this, though. I think in a lot of the examples in bold, someone who (for example) dresses sort of frumpy and doesn't wear makeup or whatever may receive less positive attention, yes, but I think they equally may receive less negative and/or unwanted attention too. They also may have their opinions taken more seriously and be less likely to be written off as an airhead or whatever.

I think it depends on the field they're working in. Women who are "conventionally attractive" are generally seen to be less intelligent (I read this somewhere but I don't know where), so yeah it is more complicated. On the one hand, women are encouraged to look a certain way, but then there are a set of assumptions that come with actually looking like that (and a set of assumptions that come with any appearance).


Honestly, to me this stuff basically boils down to lifestyle choices, not political acts. I think if some women feel better not using cosmetics or shaving/waxing/etc., then that is totally fine and they should do what makes them happy. But I don't think that either A. abstaining from the use of female beauty/grooming products (in the case of women), or, B. stating your completely abstract "opposition" to female beauty standards (in the case of men), has any effect at all on any broader structural phenomenon. Similarly, if people want to buy only organic, "fair trade" clothing, I don't care--that's their business. But as soon as they start convincing themselves that not 'supporting' this industry or that industry as consumers somehow translates into meaningful political action that's going to stop oppression, and then moralize/judge people who don't follow their particular consumer and lifestyle choices and accuse them of "upholding a reactionary and oppressive value system" or whatever bullshit, then I think it becomes pretty problematic. And in the case that this behavior is centered around 'the beauty industry' and 'female beauty standards', I think when it's men behaving this way toward women it stops merely being something that's obnoxious/self-righteous and actually becomes something that's really condescending and demeaning.
I don't think the idea of buying organic/fairtrade is really relevant to the discussion. Getting to the point where you are confident to only use beauty products for yourself and for fun has nothing to do with "voting with your wallet" or whatever. Rejecting the commonly accepted standards of beauty in favour of accepting yourself, while on the surface is quite a personal act, both paves the way to give you the confidence to reject other standards imposed on you and to inspire other people to do the same. It doesn't require any moralising, either - whether you shave or not, wear make up or not, is a personal choice and whatever you choose is fine as long as it genuinely is a choice. I don't think moralising is an effective way of encouraging people to challenge anything anyway. If anything, it will make them feel worse, which in this case is counterproductive.

[AmilcarCabral]

You know hating, bashing, trashing others for any thing, even for driving an older car of the 1990s, 1980s and older car that are not nice, shiny and modern like the new Kia, Hyundai, Toyota Avalon, etc. that have lots of cool features, like self-parking, GPS, and that look real aero-dynamic like space-ships but are too expensive for the great majority of people, is the national sport in many countries.

The whole world is doomed, inferioty complex in the majority of people leads to hating others, if people feel powerful inside, they wouldn't need to hate, bash and trash others to boost their egoes. It's really low self esteem in many people. So when males bash, and trash female sex, there is a trait of inferiority complex in those males.

There are lots of personality disorders, people with unfulfilled love, who didn't recieve enough love from their parents and society since they are born, who bash hate and trash others as a hobby

Another thing is that Marx said that the behaviour patterns of a society is the behaviour pattern of its ruling class. So if the ruling class of a society is oppressive, evil and abusive people will behave like that


.




Link:http://jezebel.com/5900928/your-vagina-isnt-just-too-big-too-floppy-and-too-hairyits-also-too-brown

ugh




Now while we are here, to allow for actual discussion to take place on this thread I'm curious of your experiences with vaginas. I think we can talk like mature leftists and have a reasonable discussion on the subject matter. So basically in addition to obviously decrying this reactionary practice I think it would be helpful if we can learn about vaginas from a female perspective and the experience with vaginas. I guess I'll start with a couple things.

As some of you know I am a transwoman and during my junior year my depression came back really bad when my ex cheated on me with a couple guys, and depression tends to trigger my gender dysphoria. And as some of you might know many transpeople experience phantom limb syndrome. So one day when it was really bad I was able to used the sensation of where the vagina ought to be to have a female orgasm. It was wooonnnddeeerrrffffuulll. Seriously I envy you cis-woman, lady parts are awesome! Maybe if you are all mature enough I will share some more things. I imagine considering the maturity level of revleft there is about a 1/4th chance this won't derail but hopefully this leads to a fruitful discussion that goes beyond us simply agreeing with eachother about how reactionary this product is and can allow for an actual educational discussion.

[Petrol Bomb]

I came across this video on YouTube. I don't mean to revive an old thread, but I didn't think it should have it's own thread, as it relates closely to this.

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

In a nutshell, it talks about policy on "soft-core" porn forcing magazine publishers to only show a certain type of vagina, which makes it the norm as you'd rarely see other vaginas in literature, thus making women self-conscious of their vaginas and opting to get surgery.

[tallguy]

From my own experience and, as far as I am aware, that of my mates, none of us give a toss about all this weird cosmetic shit that some women seem to engage in. From my own perspective and those of the men I know, we are only too grateful and, frankly, surprised if a woman is nice enough to let us near her vagina, never mind what bloody colour it is.

I'll even go so far as to suggest that at least some of the fault lies with those few women daft enough to buy into this bullshit (at least in this country. I do understand in some countries/cultures that direct coercion may be involved). And it is only a few. All of the women I know wouldn't be seen dead using this kind of shite on themselves and, frankly, I'd be a bit weirded out if I found one of them did in much the same way I'd be a bit weirded out if I found out that one of my mates was bleaching his bell-end.

[Sea]

From my own experience and, as far as I am aware, that of my mates, none of us give a toss about all this weird cosmetic shit that some women seem to engage in. ...

I'm going to be contentious here and suggest that at least some of the fault lies with those few women daft enough to buy into this bullshit. And it is only a few. All of the women I know wouldn't be seen dead using this kind of shite on themselves and, frankly, I'd be a bit weirded out if I found out they did.This shite isn't because of "some women", it's a reflection of the revolting combination of racism and double-standards of "beauty" that prevail in our society. It's a sick symptom of a sickly society. If women are really conscientious about this, it is by the same social mechanisms that cause some members of minority groups to engage in self-hatred. Not only is what you're saying dead wrong, it is sexist too, as you imply that there is something inherently womanly about the "pretentiousness" that you divine out of this topic.


From my own perspective and those of the men I know, we are only too grateful and, frankly, surprised if a woman is nice enough to let us near their vaginas, never mind what bloody colour they are.I'd be lying if I said that this takes me by surprise. I shed a tear for every vagina that must endure your proximity.

[tallguy]

This shite isn't because of "some women", it's a reflection of the revolting combination of racism and double-standards of "beauty" that prevail in our society. It's a sick symptom of a sickly society. If women are really conscientious about this, it is by the same social mechanisms that cause some members of minority groups to engage in self-hatred. Not only is what you're saying dead wrong, it is sexist too, as you imply that there is something inherently womanly about the "pretentiousness" that you divine out of this topic.

I'd be lying if I said that this takes me by surprise. I shed a tear for every vagina that must endure your proximity.
Well, I guess we must hang out with different women. You appear to give the impression of viewing all women as weak, psychologically vulnerable victims who must be psychologically mollycoddled at all times to protect them. Personally, if I was woman, I'd find that attitude quite fantastically sexist.

Speaking for myself, I find all of the women I know to be strong minded and completely capable of seeing through this kind of unpleasant marketing bullshit. But, then maybe I'm just attracted to strong minded women in the same way as I am attracted to strong minded men.

[Sinister Intents]

Well, I guess we must hang out with different women. You appear to give the impression of viewing all women as weak, psychologically vulnerable victims who must be psychologically mollycoddled at all times to protect them. Personally, if I was woman, I'd find that attitude quite fantastically sexist.

I don't see how Sea said anything sexist tbh. Explain?

[tallguy]

I don't see how Sea said anything sexist tbh. Explain?
I just have done. Please read the post again carefully SI.

[Sea]

Well, I guess we must hang out with different women. You appear to give the impression of viewing all women as weak, psychologically vulnerable victims who must be psychologically mollycoddled at all times to protect them. Personally, if I was woman, I'd find that attitude quite fantastically sexist.

Speaking for myself, I find all of the women I know to be strong minded and completely capable of seeing through this kind of unpleasant marketing bullshit. But, then maybe I'm just attracted to strong minded women.I'll give you one more try after this. Nowhere did I imply that women are weak, and strength and weakness are nothing more than a reflection of social positions anyway. Women are not inherently strong and weak any more than fat black people are good tuba players. Any way you cut it, it boils down to a comparison between two separate concepts, like how "fair wage" boils down to a comparison between labor-time and productivity. Whenever you talk about alleged attribute X of group Y, you're pulling some serious apples-verses-oranges shit. That said, patriarchy does have a weakening (well, 'weakening' is an awfully broad term in this case) effect.

[Quail]

Well, I guess we must hang out with different women. You appear to give the impression of viewing all women as weak, psychologically vulnerable victims who must be psychologically mollycoddled at all times to protect them. Personally, if I was woman, I'd find that attitude quite fantastically sexist.

Speaking for myself, I find all of the women I know to be strong minded and completely capable of seeing through this kind of unpleasant marketing bullshit. But, then maybe I'm just attracted to strong minded women in the same way as I am attracted to strong minded men.

This "unpleasant marketing bullshit" doesn't happen in a vacuum though, and it's more complex than "strong minded women see through it" and "weak minded women who buy into it who deserve to be blamed for feeling inadequate in a society that demands so much of them". You can see through it while at the same time feel unable to challenge it and that you have to, to some degree, do certain things that you don't like to adhere to beauty standards.

I actually think it demonstrates a lack of awareness for you to say

I'll even go so far as to suggest that at least some of the fault lies with those few women daft enough to buy into this bullshit (at least in this country. I do understand in some countries/cultures that direct coercion may be involved).
Sure, some women do enforce social norms which oppress them. But at the same time, dismissing women who feel they have to live up to unrealistic standards of beauty as all being "daft" is a generalisation which shows little understanding of the social pressures that many women face to look a certain way.

[tallguy]

This "unpleasant marketing bullshit" doesn't happen in a vacuum though, and it's more complex than "strong minded women see through it" and "weak minded women who buy into it who deserve to be blamed for feeling inadequate in a society that demands so much of them". You can see through it while at the same time feel unable to challenge it and that you have to, to some degree, do certain things that you don't like to adhere to beauty standards.

I actually think it demonstrates a lack of awareness for you to say

Sure, some women do enforce social norms which oppress them. But at the same time, dismissing women who feel they have to live up to unrealistic standards of beauty as all being "daft" is a generalisation which shows little understanding of the social pressures that many women face to look a certain way.
I am quite aware there are societal pressures to conform to certain fucked-up ideals of physical beauty. For example, men who take cow-steroids and pump iron all day because they think that looking like a muscle-bound idiot makes them more attractive to women. Equally, women who shave every scrap of hair from their bodies so they look like pre-pubescent girls, or who scrub their vaginas with bleach because they think men will find them attractive. It's all fucked up.

However, the first thing I would say is that most men don't fall for that bollocks and neither do most women. And, by the same token that I feel perfectly at liberty to take the piss out of those men daft enough to fall for it, I take equal liberty to take the piss out of those women who are also daft enough to fall for it, whilst simultaneously recognising that there are larger societal forces at work here. For me, it serves no purpose and is, in fact, counter productive to encourage men or women into a perpetual state of infantile victim-hood. Of course, I do understand how such promotion of victim-hood gives all of us bourgeois lefties something to whine about, but it's not really helping the victims to develop the cultural strength to say fuck off to all this shite is it?

All of the above is said with the obvious serious qualification of knowing full well that there are certain parts of the world and certain cultural groups who directly coerce women to conform to ghastly physical ideals.

[Quail]

However, the first thing I would say is that most men don't fall for that bollocks and neither do most women. And, by the same token that I feel perfectly at liberty to take the piss out of those men daft enough to fall for it, I take equal liberty to take the piss out of those women who are also daft enough to fall for it, whilst simultaneously recognising that there are larger societal forces at work here. For me, it serves no purpose and is, in fact, counter productive to encourage men or women into a perpetual state of infantile victim-hood. Of course, I do understand how such promotion of victim-hood gives all of us bourgeois lefties something to whine about, but it's not really helping the victims to develop the cultural strength to say fuck off to all this shite is it?

It's not "being daft" to feel unable to fight against societal/cultural norms. There is a lot of pressure to look a certain way, and it's not "encouraging people (women in particular) into a perpetual state of infantile victimhood" to acknowledge that it exists and it is hard to stand up to - due to both internal and external factors. When you're constantly bombarded with the message that a part of your body is gross or ugly it is damn hard not to internalise that. Even more so when it seems that everybody else is reinforcing that message. If you think it's a case of "something for us bourgeois lefties to whine about", a) speak for yourself and b) you're completely fucking wrong because it's not just about unrealistic beauty standards. It's just one of the many ways in which society constantly tells women that they are not good enough and that they're not equal to men, and if you fail to place it in a wider context then maybe you need to do some reading.

[Kaoxic]

I'm rarely conscerned because I will fuck just about any of her three main orifices as long as I am sufficietly attracted to her but as far as eating it goes it won't happen unless it looks the way I want.

[Quail]

I'm rarely conscerned because I will fuck just about any of her three main orifices as long as I am sufficietly attracted to her but as far as eating it goes it won't happen unless it looks the way I want.

You're disgusting.
Infraction for sexism.

[Rosa Partizan]

I read about this product long time ago and didn't find it surprising at all. I kinda get the impression that a lot of this starts with porn, where anal and vaginal bleaching are nothing unusual, even with white actresses, who make up the majority of actresses in this business. The POC in porn are fetishized in the most disgusting ways and I don't let anyone tell me that all of this has no influence on our attitude and mindset and beauty standards. As a woman of color, you're only valued if you're (depending upon your ethnicity) especially shy/humble, exotic, sultry and much more. Being POC and not fitting in those racist stereotypes won't get you far, unless you're willing to bleach the shit out of your skin. And even then, you'll never be considered a "real white". Somehow, women of color just can't win in this fucked up society.

[Kaoxic]

You're disgusting.
Infraction for sexism.

How is it being sexism? I'm not saying any woman should conform or care about my preferences. I wouldn't complain if she didn't want to polish my man-stick for whatever reason.

I think this bleching stuff is bullshit too btw.

[Decolonize The Left]

How is it being sexism? I'm not saying any woman should conform or care about my preferences. I wouldn't complain if she didn't want to polish my man-stick for whatever reason.

I think this bleching stuff is bullshit too btw.

Dude. This isn't 4chan. "Polish your man stick"? Are you so insecure that you need to talk like this?

[Kaoxic]

Dude. This isn't 4chan. "Polish your man stick"? Are you so insecure that you need to talk like this?

Never been to fucking 4chan and don't intend to? I use only language that is nonjudgemental or clinical. Keep your politics off my body I can describe it the way I want to!

[Conscript]

Mental. Arab women are beautiful, why'd they wanna look more European?

lol'd hard

[synthesis]

I recently read an article which aggregated perceptions of the physical attributes of "the ideal woman" by women and perceptions of "the ideal woman" by men - I believe it was via choosing the most enviable features of various celebrities' anatomy. It also did the same for "the ideal man" as perceived by men and women.

Here's what they found:

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1733202/thumbs/o-PERFECT-570.jpg?1

This is contrasted with the converse: men's ideas about "the ideal man," physically speaking, and women's ideas about "the ideal man," physically speaking, are basically the same:

http://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/screen-shot-2014-04-16-at-3-58-38-pm.png?w=560

I think this speaks to a major disconnect between male and female perspectives, based on their life experiences, of female beauty. Men grow up with onanistic Playboy fantasies whereas women grow up with "10 Ways to Achieve a Totally Flat Belly." Neither gender is regularly inundated with the information that the other gender receives regarding the societal "ideal woman." Many times in my life, I have seen total confusion from males about certain body image issues many women have. The thought is, "Where would they ever get the idea that men would care about that?" Of course, tying self-esteem to male opinion is the major problem, but on a microsocial level I think it has a lot to do with this disconnect of information receipt.

edit: Wow, okay, the survey was done by a lingerie company. Super scientific. But I think the point still stands.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Whatever the case, I don't think the social standard of female beauty can be reduced to what men desire, and I don't think women's desire to conform to the standard can be reduced to a desire to attract sexual partners. Homosexuals of both genders often conform to norms of beauty, as do asexuals and others who are not actively pursuing sexual contact. Moreover, men and women are often just as harsh to others of their own gender and sex. That of course doesn't mean that norms of beauty aren't based on or at least influenced by various patriarchal notions.


I'm rarely conscerned because I will fuck just about any of her three main orifices as long as I am sufficietly attracted to her but as far as eating it goes it won't happen unless it looks the way I want.


How is it being sexism? I'm not saying any woman should conform or care about my preferences. I wouldn't complain if she didn't want to polish my man-stick for whatever reason.

I think this bleching stuff is bullshit too btw.

I was looking for a "Bro" meme for this cat but none of them quite fit.

I think we can be open about our sexuality without descending into the kind of language that might make some uncomfortable.

[Rosa Partizan]

Whatever the case, I don't think the social standard of female beauty can be reduced to what men desire, and I don't think women's desire to conform to the standard can be reduced to a desire to attract sexual partners. Homosexuals of both genders often conform to norms of beauty, as do asexuals and others who are not actively pursuing sexual contact. Moreover, men and women are often just as harsh to others of their own gender and sex. That of course doesn't mean that norms of beauty aren't based on or at least influenced by various patriarchal notions.


Some (completely subjective) observations of mine would back that (not only my observations, but also those of female friends). When going out, women among themselves seem to compare and rate each other much harsher than men would do. The vast majority of guys is more like "she's somewhat attractive? Ok, let's go!" while women tend to pay attention to details guys would never notice. I'd leave open WHY many women are like that, cause indeed, this could have to do with outdoing the competition to get the best guy.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I'm rarely conscerned because I will fuck just about any of her three main orifices as long as I am sufficietly attracted to her but as far as eating it goes it won't happen unless it looks the way I want.

let's be honest though, nobody who has either experience with other people in terms of sex, nor respect for their lovers, would ever talk like this.

I'm guessing your mouth has never gotten near a woman's sexual organs not because you refuse, but because no woman would want a mouth that can utter such disgusting words near them.

[synthesis]

Whatever the case, I don't think the social standard of female beauty can be reduced to what men desire, and I don't think women's desire to conform to the standard can be reduced to a desire to attract sexual partners. Homosexuals of both genders often conform to norms of beauty, as do asexuals and others who are not actively pursuing sexual contact.

Was this in response to my post?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

let's be honest though, nobody who has either experience with other people in terms of sex, nor respect for their lovers, would ever talk like this.

I'm guessing your mouth has never gotten near a woman's sexual organs not because you refuse, but because no woman would want a mouth that can utter such disgusting words near them.

I honestly think the vast majority of internet tough-guy misogynists who talk about sex like that have never so much as seen a bare breast that wasn't their mother's. It all reeks of weird desperation.

Misogynists with an actual sex life tend to be a bit more subtle and sleazy.

[Rosa Partizan]

I honestly think the vast majority of internet tough-guy misogynists who talk about sex like that have never so much as seen a bare breast that wasn't their mother's. It all reeks of weird desperation.

Misogynists with an actual sex life tend to be a bit more subtle and sleazy.

so much this.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Some (completely subjective) observations of mine would back that (not only my observations, but also those of female friends). When going out, women among themselves seem to compare and rate each other much harsher than men would do. The vast majority of guys is more like "she's somewhat attractive? Ok, let's go!" while women tend to pay attention to details guys would never notice. I'd leave open WHY many women are like that, cause indeed, this could have to do with outdoing the competition to get the best guy.

It is interesting being a man with a woman, and hearing the woman complaining about features of herself which you weren't aware of and generally find her to be beautiful still.

Nonetheless, some men (in my everyday experience, a seeming disproportionate number of alpha male types but also a number of incredibly sexually unsatisfied men too, and some somewhere in between) seem to flaunt their one-dimensional physical desire and superficial judgment of women.


Was this in response to my post?

Not specifically ... although I did find your study sponsored by underwear companies to be amusing.

[synthesis]

Not specifically ... although I did find your study sponsored by underwear companies to be amusing.

Word, I just misinterpreted the phrase "Whatever the case..." And it wasn't sponsored by lingerie companies, as far as I know, it was actually done by a lingerie company, which, in my defense, I don't believe was mentioned in the piece I originally read.

[4thInter]

Why in wide wide lands of Lenin is this a thread.-.http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/061/664/1275937249093s.jpg

[Noa Rodman]

As some of you know I am a transwoman and during my junior year my depression came back really bad when my ex cheated on me with a couple guys, and depression tends to trigger my gender dysphoria. And as some of you might know many transpeople experience phantom limb syndrome. So one day when it was really bad I was able to used the sensation of where the vagina ought to be to have a female orgasm. It was wooonnnddeeerrrffffuulll. Seriously I envy you cis-woman, lady parts are awesome! Maybe if you are all mature enough I will share some more things. I imagine considering the maturity level of revleft there is about a 1/4th chance this won't derail but hopefully this leads to a fruitful discussion that goes beyond us simply agreeing with eachother about how reactionary this product is and can allow for an actual educational discussion.

Wilhelm Reich had a whole theory of orgasm energy as is well known, but relevant here is an example he gave of a male patient who had difficulty with orgasm and the reason Reich says was because the patient associated the overwhelming/having to let go feeling with orgasm as feminine. I would just say that like the cerebral palsy scene in Wolf of Wall Street shows, it's not a totally wrong idea to see orgasm as a moment of weakness (certainly in animal kingdom I imagine that would be ideal moment to attack your prey):F_Qj8VYizN8

Besides this stereotype image of what a man should be (always in control), also anatomically the difference between men-women in orgasm could be reduced to at most a matter of degree (ie prostate and Skene's gland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skene%27s_gland) are equivalent).

Also, a movie reference to Videodrome by David Cronenberg which deals specifically and graphically with 'male vagina' (this scene is very similar to how in the Matrix agent Smith puts his hand into Neo): http://www.anyclip.com/movies/videodrome/open-up/#!cast/

The videodrome system can control James Woods through his vagina, but in the end Woods learns to control his vagina and turn it against the system.

[Noa Rodman]

I was able to use the sensation of where the vagina ought to be to have a female orgasm. It was wooonnnddeeerrrffffuulll. Seriously I envy you cis-woman, lady parts are awesome! Maybe if you are all mature enough I will share some more things.

If you feel this thread is worth saving, it would be interesting if you could say more than what usual sex advice books say, which is always disappointingly little.

Eg The Multi-Orgasmic Man: Sexual Secrets Every Man Should Know is allegedly just some expansion on the methods of Tao.

I think there's also a political issue here. Thalheimer discussed the teaching of Laozi/Lao-tse in this way:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/thalheimer/works/diamat/14.htm



The nucleus of his philosophy in its social and political aspect is the concept of Wu-wei, of "inaction." This concept of inaction, of letting things go their own way with the least possible interference, is equivalent to the concept that the state should interfere as little as possible in the affairs of the peasant masses, in the self-government of the tribal villages. Lao-tse says that that government is best of which the people are least aware. He is against urban and courtly culture; he is for a simple, primitive life and against knowledge and erudition, which under the existing conditions was impossible without the exploitation of the people. ...

Lao-tse is made most clear when compared with a modern thinker, Leo Tolstoy, whose doctrine resembles his in its essential features. The doctrine of Tolstoy, as you know, likewise opposes the use of force. It is inspired by hate and enmity against the state and the great feudal landowner. Leo Tolstoy was a penitent nobleman. Himself a landowner, he sided with the peasantry against the landowners. As Lenin has shown, Leo Tolstoy reflects the peasants' resistance against feudalism and against the feudal state. The village, according to Tolstoy, should govern itself. The state should not interfere. Tolstoy's resistance, however, was of the passive sort; he rejected conflict, the use of force. This is consistent with the fact that at this time the peasant revolution was not yet joined with the revolution of the urban proletariat and that Tolstoy himself had no understanding of the proletarian revolution. But the position of the peasant class is such that it alone can never combat the centralized power of the state, because rustic life is not congenial to close-knit organization. The peasantry, although it comprises many millions, is divided, split into countless small units. Here one peasant family, there another; here one village, there another, without organized alliance.
...
Through comparison with Tolstoy the historical role of Lao-tse will become apparent. Lao-tse embodies the passive protest, the passive resistance of the peasant village against the feudal state and the feudal landlords. The state should keep its hands off the village. The village should govern itself and supervise its own farming. This attitude of Lao-tse does not correspond to a revolutionary position; it corresponds to a position of passive resistance, of non-co-operation, withdrawal, separation from the state.


Also, there is doubt that female G-spot exists in all women (or even as such). Apparently the criticism is that it could be some mystic construction. This could be discussed here in all maturity. After all, some feminists argue as political position that focus should be only on clitorial orgasm.

[Luís Henrique]

the perfect vagina would be something that's not a vagina at all

Of course; the perfect vagina would be a penis. Is that news?

Luís Henrique