why do women show more skin than men?

[kasia]

i dunno. why?

[SunWuKong]

because nobody wants to see some dude's hairy legs when you're walking around on the street or sitting down for a nice dinner out.

[pretense78]

Men want to see women naked more than women want to see men naked.

[mrazntre]

Perhaps in the US, but when I went to Viet Nam, the girls over there weren't wearing any revealing clothing - unless of course you went to the brothels, discotechs, modeling shoots, or the beach. But then again, at the beach I'm showing more skin than the ladies (look ma, no top). For the everyday sort of clothes, the girls were pretty much covered up from head to toe in shirts and pants or occasionally in traditional dress - ao dai.

What does this thread specifically have to do with asian women since this topic has been thoroughly discussed in mainstream media - Geraldo, Sally Jesse Raphael, Jerry Springer, Maury Povitch...

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Perhaps in the US, but when I went to Viet Nam, the girls over there weren't wearing any revealing clothing
Doesn't seem to hold true for HK either. Outside of bar districts on Saturday night, I have barely seen any female of any age (other than tourists or expats) showing bare shoulders, e.g. sleeveless shirt. (The closest thing you get with most local girls are those freakin annoying "chicken wing sleeves"). On the other hand, at any time of day you can walk around and feast your eyes on overweight construction workers and scarecrow-like newspaper vendors in tanktops, flashing around their arms, backs and bellies. Maybe even with a pantleg rolled up if you get lucky. Not to mention schoolboys with their shorts pulled up around their nuts.

I think it's only a US thing where you'll see women showing more skin than men. The US pretty much lost the taboo against women showing skin, and at the same time the meathead cult and associated media bombardment made guys embarassed about being skinny and not having the ideal body type. In contrast, in Asia, there's still a bunch of backwards-ass taboos claiming that women showing skin are slutty, and even some male friends of mine have said it's a turnoff. Whereas, weight-lifting isn't popular, so men don't have any worries about exposing more skin in order to stay cool. (I have noticed that shirt sleeves on mens' short-sleeved shirts in HK --- tshirts, polo shirts, or button-down shirts --- are way shorter than in the US, even though a lot fewer guys have arms which come anywhere near to filling out their sleeves.)

[VV o n g B a]

for the US or western culture specifically, women prolly show more skin cuz of the sexual revolution. they became freer to do what they wanted w/ their bodies. once that freedom is there, competition forced women to wear increasingly revealing clothes to grab men's attentions.

[SunWuKong]

Doesn't seem to hold true for HK either. Outside of bar districts on Saturday night, I have barely seen any female of any age (other than tourists or expats) showing bare shoulders, e.g. sleeveless shirt. (The closest thing you get with most local girls are those freakin annoying "chicken wing sleeves"). On the other hand, at any time of day you can walk around and feast your eyes on overweight construction workers and scarecrow-like newspaper vendors in tanktops, flashing around their arms, backs and bellies. Maybe even with a pantleg rolled up if you get lucky. Not to mention schoolboys with their shorts pulled up around their nuts.


yeah it's stupid. women get stared at if they even wear strapped shirts where their shoulders are showing. i don't know if other women would think of them as sluts or something, but i'm sure they at least don't like having all these men stare at them like they've never seen a female shoulder before. so what ends up happening is, for instance, my ABC friend walking around Prince Edward or Mongkok with a strapped shirt and cops stopping her thinking she's a prostitute because she was showing too much skin. (but apparently she didn't mind because she thought the cops were cute... :rolleyes: )

interestingly, Singapore doesn't seem to have taboo, or at least from pictures i've seen of girls in Singapore. it's probably because Singapore is hot as hell even compared to HK. if all the girls started showing their shoulders, it wouldn't seem to be such a big deal anymore.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

It's partially because attractive women in the US media are often shown in scantily clad clothing while attractive men don't show as much skin. Women are taught that their looks and physical assets are the key to success and acceptance whereas for men they have other shit they can work on like attitude, financial status, etc. There's some type of stigma against guys wearing tight t-shirts or shorts because they're afraid of being labeled as gay or a queer. A lot of girls have actually told me they think a guy wearing a thong is nasty. But then again, I'm not sure because arguably the media does the same thing elsewhere in Asia and people here are saying that girls don't show as much skin in other places as opposed to like....construction workers and newspaper vendors haha.

[moser]

At least in the US, women are more sexualized than men (meaning women are more likely to be seen in a purely sexual manner).

[Kuchana]

Attention and to achieve success are some of the reasons I can think of at the moment. Frankly I don't care for it.

At least in the US, women are more sexualized than men (meaning women are more likely to be seen in a purely sexual manner).

See I don't like that. Why are women more sexualized? And why do we have to objectify ourselves to achieve success or to get attention? Why are we more likely to be seen in a purely sexual manner and nothing else? Who cares abour brains when you see skin? I guess that's why I try to avoid objectifying myself because I don't feel comfortable doing it and I don't like to have people see me in that way (other than my husband of course).

I wonder if a woman would think that objectifying herself is liberating? I don't.

[nola]

because men sees better than they thinks, women thinks better than they sees, except this chica, i like a good-lookin' man.

do men want a hot chick or a brainy one? usually they want to date the hot one.

[John0101]

i dunno. why?

Simple - they want to attract attention from men. They do it for the control.

[nola]

for men and women sex is about control and power. women like to feel control and power through their sexuality and men like to feel power.

[BigLew]

I show skin all the time.

[heykitten]

It is culturally (and I mean in western society) more accepted for women to bare their skin, in fact it's encouraged it seems, even for little girls with the miniskirts and boob tubes that is in fashion, with their idols influencing their decisions. The Bratz dolls commercials frighten me, really. Which is a really sad fact to think over and over again females are taught that only their appearance and body matters. And if they dress nicely, look pretty with minimum coverage, they get the message they will recieve attention and that's what counts, right? I don't think it's because women have more freedom or to be liberated, although it is cruel if someone is punished for showing skin.

Really it's a superficial society based on appearance as status and acceptance regardless of their personality and who they are as a person. That's my opinion anyway. :smile:

Oops I haven't answered the question completely and I don't know how to edit. Unless it's a fitness magazine, guys seem to assume other men will assume they're not masculine for wearing body bearing clothes.

[Kuchana]

It is culturally (and I mean in western society) more accepted for women to bare their skin, in fact it's encouraged it seems, even for little girls with the miniskirts and boob tubes that is in fashion, with their idols influencing their decisions. The Bratz dolls commercials frighten me, really. Which is a really sad fact to think over and over again females are taught that only their appearance and body matters. And if they dress nicely, look pretty with minimum coverage, they get the message they will recieve attention and that's what counts, right? I don't think it's because women have more freedom or to be liberated, although it is cruel if someone is punished for showing skin.

Really it's a superficial society based on appearance as status and acceptance regardless of their personality and who they are as a person. That's my opinion anyway. :smile:

Oops I haven't answered the question completely and I don't know how to edit. Unless it's a fitness magazine, guys seem to assume other men will assume they're not masculine for wearing body bearing clothes.

i agree. i think it's not only superficial but degrading and dangerous as well to teach girls that we have to show skin to get what we want in society.

and yep it is frightening that the girls are getting taught this lesson younger and younger. goodness, when i was 12 or 13 i did not dress anyway like girls do now. actually i think they dress like that even younger! what say that for role models for them?

sex sells and i hate it. women are being victimized by it. can we get anymore superficial? i hope not.

[nola]

You such a nice girl, Kuchana.

[kasia]

for the US or western culture specifically, women prolly show more skin cuz of the sexual revolution. they became freer to do what they wanted w/ their bodies. once that freedom is there, competition forced women to wear increasingly revealing clothes to grab men's attentions.

and isnt' this ironic? i mean - i think it's an accurate perception - but just rereading it over and over baffles me. we dress more provocatively to liberate ourselves. but then we continued to dress more and more provocatively to appease men and compete with our own team members.

so does dressing less...

- liberate us?

- make us hate one another, thereby preventing the formation of a group consciousness?

[Shuriken]

Interesting thread.

According to John Berger's book Ways of Seeing, women are usually judged by their appearance, while men are usually judged by the power they wield. So, it makes sense that women's fashions would largely emphasize uncovering her body seductively and men's fashions would cover it up protectively to avoid the impression of vulnerability. Add to this the relatively recent fashionability of a worked-out body, and it makes sense that clothing (casual clothing, at least) would show off more of the physique.

I wonder if a woman would think that objectifying herself is liberating? I don't.

This may be all PR, but some Playboy models, such as celebrity model Kiana Tom, insist that posing nude is something "empowering." I agree that women should rely on talents other than their sexuality (when not appropriate) to move up in the world. And I respect Kuchana's belief in not "objectifying" herself.

But as I have said before on other threads, there is indeed something powerful about a person, male or female, taking pride and satisfaction in their appearance. "When you look good, you feel good" is more than just a marketing slogan. And how "good" you look ought to be up to you.

I don't think it's any accident that some of the most repressive regimes — the Taliban in Afghanistan, for example — have insisted that women cover their bodies. Isn't this kind of a "reverse objectification" that's even more oppressive than showing a little skin?

And what exactly does Kuchana mean by "objectification"? Did she think about what to wear this morning? Does she wear make-up? If so, doesn't that show concern for how others view her appearance? How, then, would this not be a kind of "objectification"?

Granted, I see a huge difference between "taking pride in your appearance" and using your sexuality to get what you want. The latter usually involves underhandedness and not getting ahead on your merits. I also think that concern about appearance can be taken to negative extremes that can result in harmful things, like bulimia, anorexia, or — in a different context — rape. So, the issue of appearance is not an innocent one and, it is vulnerable to corruption and co-optation.

But I don't see anything inherently wrong with a woman showing off her body in one way or another, whether she is a conservative dresser or a nude model, to express satisfaction with her appearance and comfort with her sexuality.

[nola]

It's liberating for women to dress any way they want, scantily or whatever, without fear of ridicule, censure or rape.

It would be liberating for men to dress as scantily in public as they wanted to also without ridicule or censure.

[missmeow]

Women show more skin because it gets them more male attention. Also, you can get a lot more out of a man with a titty top on than a suit.

Sometimes though, you just want to wear something sexy and feel sexy.

[heykitten]

i agree. i think it's not only superficial but degrading and dangerous as well to teach girls that we have to show skin to get what we want in society.

and yep it is frightening that the girls are getting taught this lesson younger and younger. goodness, when i was 12 or 13 i did not dress anyway like girls do now. actually i think they dress like that even younger! what say that for role models for them?

sex sells and i hate it. women are being victimized by it. can we get anymore superficial? i hope not.


*nods* It only amounts to girls equating their selfworth to their appearance or what
others perceive them to be. The way they dress also mean they're sexualized at a much younger age, even if they're seen as older and treated as such. They are still undeniably little kids, talk about a confusing time for them!

[Kuchana]

You such a nice girl, Kuchana.

No really I'm mean in real life :P :biggrin:

and isnt' this ironic? i mean - i think it's an accurate perception - but just rereading it over and over baffles me. we dress more provocatively to liberate ourselves. but then we continued to dress more and more provocatively to appease men and compete with our own team members.

so does dressing less...

- liberate us?

- make us hate one another, thereby preventing the formation of a group consciousness?

Yep I find it ironic. Maybe it turned out to be a curse in disguise? While we women were proclaiming for equality and all that, maybe it backfired on us.

I find it baffling as well. Some of us women may feel it's liberating but it also can make us hate each other because we differentiate in how we perceive ourselves and whether it's liberating or not.

[nola]

The sexual revolution in the 60s did indeed backfire on women in that it lead to men not taking responsibility for unplanned pregancies, child care and child support so many women ended up raising children themselves. (I read that somewhere and didn't make it up).

The women's movement was a different movement which did empower women.

[Kuchana]

According to John Berger's book Ways of Seeing, women are usually judged by their appearance, while men are usually judged by the power they wield. So, it makes sense that women's fashions would largely emphasize uncovering her body seductively and men's fashions would cover it up protectively to avoid the impression of vulnerability. Add to this the relatively recent fashionability of a worked-out body, and it makes sense that clothing (casual clothing, at least) would show off more of the physique.

That sounds like a good assessment. Thanks for posting that. I've already posed this but with that, why are women usually judged by their appearance? Isn't that well...superficial?

This may be all PR, but some Playboy models, such as celebrity model Kiana Tom, insist that posing nude is something "empowering." I agree that women should rely on talents other than their sexuality (when not appropriate) to move up in the world. And I respect Kuchana's belief in not "objectifying" herself.

But as I have said before on other threads, there is indeed something powerful about a person, male or female, taking pride and satisfaction in their appearance. "When you look good, you feel good" is more than just a marketing slogan. And how "good" you look ought to be up to you.

I've heard the argument that it is liberating/powering for a woman in this respect to show skin in her perspective and others but do you think it's worth it in the end if society is so consumed with sexuality - specificully women in general? I think the liberating factor doesn't amount so much as the negative but that's just my opinion.

I don't think it's any accident that some of the most repressive regimes — the Taliban in Afghanistan, for example — have insisted that women cover their bodies. Isn't this kind of a "reverse objectification" that's even more oppressive than showing a little skin?

You bring up an interesting point. Frankly, I wouldn't want anyone to tell me how to dress so of course I don't have a problem with women having the freedom to show skin but more with how society focuses so much on the need to show it. Maybe I'd rather see a balance of the two? I just think it sends the wrong message that showing skin = success. Of course some people may view it differently but when this message is constantly hammered on by the media?

And what exactly does Kuchana mean by "objectification"? Did she think about what to wear this morning? Does she wear make-up? If so, doesn't that show concern for how others view her appearance? How, then, would this not be a kind of "objectification"?

When I say objectifiy, as I've mentioned, I'm referring specificully to how society says sexuality sells/we feel pressured to objectify ourselves by society and men. In order to gain attention, success, etc. And I do think about what to wear every morning in fact:) No I don't wear make-up. But aren't they mild versions of objectification? I can definitely see where you're coming from because I do show concern for how I look but without over objectifying myself you could say:)


Granted, I see a huge difference between "taking pride in your appearance" and using your sexuality to get what you want. The latter usually involves underhandedness and not getting ahead on your merits. I also think that concern about appearance can be taken to negative extremes that can result in harmful things, like bulimia, anorexia, or — in a different context — rape. So, the issue of appearance is not an innocent one and, it is vulnerable to corruption and co-optation.

But I don't see anything inherently wrong with a woman showing off her body in one way or another, whether she is a conservative dresser or a nude model, to express satisfaction with her appearance and comfort with her sexuality.

You presented some good points. I do agree with some of them. It's more of the using your sexuality to get what you want, society emphasizing more and more on selling sexuality, and both men and women who promote this that I have a problem with.

The sexual revolution in the 60s did indeed backfire on women in that it lead to men not taking responsibility for unplanned pregancies, child care and child support so many women ended up raising children themselves. (I read that somewhere and didn't make it up).

The women's movement was a different movement which did empower women.

So how can it be turned around?

[nola]

Clothes or even lack of clothes can be a celebration of oneself but if it's about manipulating men it's bad for women and society as a whole.

[Kuchana]

*nods* It only amounts to girls equating their selfworth to their appearance or what
others perceive them to be. The way they dress also mean they're sexualized at a much younger age, even if they're seen as older and treated as such. They are still undeniably little kids, talk about a confusing time for them!

Exactly. When there's so much to our selfworth than focusing on our apperance and caring too much how others think of us.

I fear for the future.

[YuheiCarreau]

What I find strange is the line people draw between which areas of the body are acceptable to 'show skin'. I remember in HS there was a big thing about spaghetti-strap tank tops. For some reason, the heaviest criticism came from the female teachers, especially those 30 and up. They didn't blink an eye at girls wearing halter tops, tube tops, a T-shirt with no bra, form-fitting blouses, or shirts that crept up their belly if they so much as inhaled, but a shirt that showed her bra straps was just too much!

[nola]

So how can it be turned around?Women should find other means to attract men, men should find brains attractive rather than just looks, find other ways of feeling better about themselves than by conquering women sexually and take responsibility for their sexual acts.

[VV o n g B a]

Women should find other means to attract men, men should find brains attractive rather than just looks, find other ways of feeling better about themselves than by conquering women sexually and take responsibility for their sexual acts.
it'll be a bit difficult to simply throw away societal norms. not to mention millions of years of evolution. this view is too idealistic. in everyday life, a man would have to constantly check his thinking whenever he saw a woman. passing judgement on a woman's physical attractiveness is innate. when considering attraction, if a guy is looking for a long term relationship, i'm sure most of them will consider brains. otherwise, the next items of importance are: do i have any chance w/ her and does she have STDs? intelligence level means less than diddly squat unless it's somehow related to a fetish if ur talking about one night stands.

how many guys would like a shot at jessica simpson vs how many guys would like a shot at madeline albright? the answer to that question simply isn't going to change overnight.

[Kuchana]

it'll be a bit difficult to simply throw away societal norms. not to mention millions of years of evolution. this view is too idealistic. in everyday life, a man would have to constantly check his thinking whenever he saw a woman. passing judgement on a woman's physical attractiveness is innate. when considering attraction, if a guy is looking for a long term relationship, i'm sure most of them will consider brains. otherwise, the next items of importance are: do i have any chance w/ her and does she have STDs? intelligence level means less than diddly squat unless it's somehow related to a fetish if ur talking about one night stands.

how many guys would like a shot at jessica simpson vs how many guys would like a shot at madeline albright? the answer to that question simply isn't going to change overnight.

how is it too idealistic? as long as you strive for it then hey why not? being how men seem to focus on women so sexually? and it doesn't help when women help in the process.

so just because it's a social norm or because we've spent millions of years of evolution makes it right? the point is it's just sex, sex, sex. you hear it, you read it, and you see it.

if you have a balance then i think that's an ideal to pursue and one that's obtainable.

oh so let's see...how many guys would prefer a shot at a hottie who's a ditz vs a not so hottie but still attractive girl who's got brains at least? i think for a lot of guys, the former would be more preferable.

What I find strange is the line people draw between which areas of the body are acceptable to 'show skin'. I remember in HS there was a big thing about spaghetti-strap tank tops. For some reason, the heaviest criticism came from the female teachers, especially those 30 and up. They didn't blink an eye at girls wearing halter tops, tube tops, a T-shirt with no bra, form-fitting blouses, or shirts that crept up their belly if they so much as inhaled, but a shirt that showed her bra straps was just too much!

That is baffling. I don't get her reasoning.

[VV o n g B a]

how is it too idealistic? as long as you strive for it then hey why not? being how men seem to focus on women so sexually? and it doesn't help when women help in the process.

so just because it's a social norm or because we've spent millions of years of evolution makes it right? the point is it's just sex, sex, sex. you hear it, you read it, and you see it.
i'm not saying it's right. i'm saying it is. if u can get guys to strive to overcome how they view women, i welcome it. but i think overcoming racism will be a cakewalk compared to overcoming this.
oh so let's see...how many guys would prefer a shot at a hottie who's a ditz vs a not so hottie but still attractive girl who's got brains at least? i think for a lot of guys, the former would be more preferable.depends on what type of relationship u're talking about, but i agree that a lot of guys would find the former more preferable. i don't see how that helps ur argument.

but whatever. i think we're off topic b/c the subject has switched from women to men.

[Shuriken]

*nods* It only amounts to girls equating their selfworth to their appearance or what others perceive them to be. The way they dress also mean they're sexualized at a much younger age, even if they're seen as older and treated as such. They are still undeniably little kids, talk about a confusing time for them!

I believe that a sense of self-worth ought not to be utterly dependent on looks. But the flip side of that is that you need to at least be presentable to attract others, either on a romantic or non-romantic level. I spoke to a woman in a bar last night. She was a bit heavier than a typical beauty contestant would be. But she seemed comfortable with her weight and wore it well. She obviously had a sense of inner beauty and self-worth that made her attractive — to me, at least, and probably her boyfriend as well. If she didn't have this sense and spent most of her time obsessing about her weight, she would likely come across an an unattractive person.

But one thing that I don't like is beauty pageants for children. The whole idea repulses me. Give these kids a childhood, for Pete's sake! I think that the Jon-Benet Ramsey case showed what an ugly underbelly the whole child-pageant industry brings with it. I don't follow the Ramsey case for this very reason, but I understand that Jon-Benet was raped before she was murdered. This is precisely one of the negative extremes regarding appearance that I was talking about. If the Ramsey case doesn't function as a cautionary tale and illustrate the need to shut down beauty pageants for children, I don't know what else could.

The sexual revolution in the 60s did indeed backfire on women in that it lead to men not taking responsibility for unplanned pregancies, child care and child support so many women ended up raising children themselves. (I read that somewhere and didn't make it up).

The women's movement was a different movement which did empower women.

I don't know if Nola is writing expressly to discredit liberal views or not, but whatever she read was probably written by one of those "blame the '60s first" conservatives. Pregnant women have been abandoned by the men who impregnated them since time immemorial.

The "sexual revolution" of the '60s was ignited because 1960 was the year that the FDA first approved birth-control pills, enabling women to indulge in a certain sexual freedom that they had never experienced before. For the first time for women of child-bearing years, sexual intercourse did not necessarily mean the possibility of getting pregnant. And, in the opinion of many, this greater equality in the bedroom directly led to the push for greater equality outside the home. So, it was the sexual revolution, which supposedly "backfired," that enabled the women's movement, which empowered. It was not "different."

[nola]

It was a radical feminist piece and the end result of the sexual revolution, to be distinguished from the women's liberation of the 60s, was alot of unplanned pregnancies. Women had more uncommitted sex and men didn't feel that they had to own up to the responsibilties of uncommitted sex.

[Shuriken]

It would be liberating for men to dress as scantily in public as they wanted to also without ridicule or censure.

Have you ever hung out around a gym? Men dress scantily there and sometimes wear their gym apparel to other places as well. Also, there is quite a bit of male skimpy dressing in the gay community, as my frequent drives through West Hollywood have shown me in the past.

[nola]

Public as in out in the street, not in the gym. Gay men does not equal heterosexual men.

[Shuriken]

That sounds like a good assessment. Thanks for posting that. I've already posed this but with that, why are women usually judged by their appearance? Isn't that well...superficial?

I don't have any applicable books on biology at my fingertips, so I could be wrong, but interest in appearance is probably hard-wired into our biological makeup. Andrea Dworkin notwithstanding, as our society (and our species) has evolved, men have been the initiators of romantic relastionships. For a woman to initiate dialogue in a blatant way still smacks (however unfairly) of unbecoming "aggressiveness."

So, women's social behavior and their fashions have largely functioned to attract a man to initiate exchange (I'm sure that there must be some exceptions to this). Consequently, we have the stereotype — with some basis in reality — of a man always being "on the prowl" with his "wandering eye" for a potential mate, while women are more selective about who initiates contact with them. As our society has changed, this social behavior has changed to a certain degree, but it has also remained remarkably consistant over time.

Whether this is more biological or social, we may never know. But the idea of the profligate seed and the discriminating soil seems like a good way for nature to balance itself.

And when you consider that attracting a mate is an extremely important element in human reproduction and perpetuation of the species, is it really that superficial?

[AliBabaIncorporated]

For some reason, the heaviest criticism came from the female teachers, especially those 30 and up.
I don't really find it that surprising at all. Here in HK girls are the most critical of other girls who dress skimpy. I think it's cartel behaviour --- they're trying to keep the "price" of seeing some skin high, so girls who are showing it off for free are undermining their efforts at "price-fixing".

[yoMAMA]

because men are superior to women.......

:wink:

[robotic]

showing bare skin; at the same time as it does not liberate or empower a woman's right to express her sexuality through other means, it also creates a wide drift between people - encouraging jealousy (a girl in a tight-top vs. a girl in a t-shirt? winlosewin~), inferiority, a show-case of ones wealth/popularity/coolness (although however indirectly)

and above all, outfits and the way you can dress can be a representative of, you, 'yourself'. although girls who show bare skin have always been stereotyped as such; i've never felt comfortable around a person who felt confident and sexually superior.

where's the equality and celebration of the beauty within yourself, man?!

._. i'm not so sure, maybe it's really just me.

[heykitten]

An interesting book to read that I recommend is Survival of the Prettiest by Nancy Etcoff. A well constructed book on the research of beauty, concluding that be beauty is not created to keep women in line. Whereas The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf argues that it is. I haven't read The Beauty Myth yet but I'll be looking for it in the library soon.

[Shuriken]

It was a radical feminist piece and the end result of the sexual revolution, to be distinguished from the women's liberation of the 60s, was alot of unplanned pregnancies. Women had more uncommitted sex and men didn't feel that they had to own up to the responsibilties of uncommitted sex.

I haven't read the article, so I can't really comment on it.

But by the way that you describe it, it sounds like the author's intent was to divorce the women's movement from the role that sex and sexual pleasure played in it. A critic who would do this might have as her (or his) goal to deny that sex ever played a significant role in the women's movement. In this way, the author might try to encourage progressive women to side against pornography, or something like that.

But again, I haven't read the article.

[nola]

Sex and pleasure are an important part of the womens' movement but single motherhood is the untold story of the sexual revolution. It may have been Ruth Sidel because I was summarizing her book Women and Children Last in Women and Public Policy class when this fact came up during the discussion.

[Shuriken]

I just want to make clear that I don't mean to be flip or sarcastic about any of these issues. As an adult male who stands under five-feet tall, I have given a lot of thought to the role of appearance in society, and one would think that I ought to have a vested interest in overturning the automatic assumptions made about the way people appear — or "looksism."

But I think that the role of the way people appear in society is a complex one that can't always be reduced to such notions of prejudice as "looksism."

[Shogun Empress]

Doesn't seem to hold true for HK either. Outside of bar districts on Saturday night, I have barely seen any female of any age (other than tourists or expats) showing bare shoulders, e.g. sleeveless shirt. (The closest thing you get with most local girls are those freakin annoying "chicken wing sleeves"). On the other hand, at any time of day you can walk around and feast your eyes on overweight construction workers and scarecrow-like newspaper vendors in tanktops, flashing around their arms, backs and bellies. Maybe even with a pantleg rolled up if you get lucky. Not to mention schoolboys with their shorts pulled up around their nuts.Uhh. Thanks for the visualization...

[achtungbaby]

i dunno. why?
Because men want them to. Duh.

[Commando_turned_MD]

Only hot girls show skin.

[applehead]

Only hot girls show skin.

so you find street prostitutes hot?

[Commando_turned_MD]

so you find street prostitutes hot?


You got me...

Okay..Most hot girls show skin. A few ugly ones are unware of their lack of physical beauty, but show skin any way...No class...Just an eyesore.....

[truMp]

how much skin do you want to see?

[nonamerasian]

I just read that around the world it is typical for both sexes to look at a man's body first and then his face, but do the opposite to women.

Perhaps this is a reason for the skin thing.

[princess]

im pretty conservative when it comes to dressing. its hard to shop for things that dont bare all, though. i HATE IT! i dont like going to clothing stores that feel like slut shops.

[Faithless]

Confidence in one's own skin. Or conceit.

I saw this man and woman jogging together. He was dressed in a tee and shorts.

She was dressed in a small, red jog bra and short bike pants like shorts. She had a very athletic body, and flat tummy. She had tan skin. So, I'm sure she had enough confidence to want to show it off. Either that or less inhibition.

[KooLJaP]

they just wanted men to look at them and stare with wonders...

[Autotech169]

people wear what they can buy , stores sell what they can buy, manufacturers make what they can make look good on a model, model wears what gets her in the magazine, magazine sells what people want to see, people want to see skin. ergo: sex sells ...

[Napoleon Chynamite]

they just wanted men to look at them and stare with wonders...

A lot of female friends have told me that more often than not women are dressing up for other women rather than for attention from men due to the sometimes judgmental nature that individuals of the female sex seems to have toward each other for whatever reasons (biology, societal factors, etc.). One of them told me to pay attention next time...if a girl is hanging out with a bunch of guys, she's less likely to be as well primped than if she was going out with a horde of girlfriends. I haven't really taken the time to try to validate or invalidate her points, so I really have no idea.

If she's right, it just validates my theory that the urge to be accepted or seen as worthy or successful in society is often so strong that it surpasses even primal or physical wants...kinda like how some men value the bragging rights after sex with a hot girl even more than the sex itself.

[eos]

^i agree. although i do care how i look in front of guys, it's a lot worse when i go out with girls. even when it's just me and my best friend, who couldn't care less how i look, i feel the need to dress just as nice as her. it's probably insecurity and self-consciousness.

[FuNkY CaSaNoVa]

we don't!

men walk around topless with shorts.. IN PUBLIC!!

we don't!!

:P

[sageb1]

I dunno - a naked girl looks better than a naked boy.

[Space_Cabbage]

Women choose to show more skin. They like the attention.