I used to believe that, but the more I see, the more I am coming to believe that the psychological effects to both genders are nearly equal.
Men are just trained to be a lot better at *hiding* them, not to mention that male body image issues are still highly closeted. After all, that's a 'female' problem, so if you have it, you gotta be feminine or something. As society progresses, I think we'll see an equalization of gender issues, *and* people's personal issues that really have little to do with gender, but have been compartmentalized in just the same old ways.
How does that quite work, Kickaha? I'd be interested in taking a Psychology of Gender course, but I think it has a prerequisite that I'm not willing to take.
I believe that porn can alter what you think is attractive, but unless it is a big portion of your life ( not sure if it is jeffyboy ) it shouldn't alter what you think too much. I gave up the porn thing a long time ago, it's not worth what to does to your mind. I do believe that it can mess you up pretty bad. I don't let what I have seen affect what I think is attractive, or at least try my best not to.
How does that quite work, Kickaha? I'd be interested in taking a Psychology of Gender course, but I think it has a prerequisite that I'm not willing to take.
I believe that porn can alter what you think is attractive, but unless it is a big portion of your life ( not sure if it is jeffyboy ) it shouldn't alter what you think too much. I gave up the porn thing a long time ago, it's not worth what to does to your mind. I do believe that it can mess you up pretty bad. I don't let what I have seen affect what I think is attractive, or at least try my best not to.
That's just it, I think it happens on a sub-conscious level.
I noticed it with a girl I work with. Initially, I didn't find her attractive. I was sort of forced to get to know her because we work together, and now I think she's beautiful-personality, sense of humor etc fit her looks in a great way.
I look back and wonder why I wouldn't have sought her out on my own, and I think it's because of porn, and to a lesser extent the entertainment industry in general.
To combat this, if I feel the need for a fix, if you will, I visit a cool site that focuses on an alternative sort of (naked) beauty, and provides the girls with a blog and message board so you see them more as people and less as objects.
There you go. Thats the way to do it. And your right, it isn't always something we notice, but the first thing we think of when we hear the word attractive is looks. It's sad that it has to be that way. I pride myself on not doing that, although I'm only human, I do it but try to avoid it. I love talking to people, getting to know people. I am great friends with a good number of people that the world would not find "attractive" but they are the most amazing people. There is more to attractiveness than body.
I would say that Porn is what is made of it. In other words it is comparable to other concepts such as pop-culture, sports, gambling, being too religious, over-eating, the spending of money and so on.
Anything can be taken too far to a point where it is in control of us instead of us managing it in a balanced way. Again this is if we allow it to via sloppy management.
If we as individuals know what is important to us and we guard against being overtaken with obsession of any given concept and retain balance we can "manage" to stay focused on what is priority in our lives.
Knowing what we are after and why we are after it will keep us on course. Living blindly on the other hand could lead to trouble.
I know some people who like porn, I mean REALLY like porn, but they both treat their women well.
The thing is, everyone comes into contact with porn, but not everyone becomes a womanizing bastard. I would guess that the personality carries the predisposition rather than the personality being effected by the outside stimulus (porn). So some asshole that never sees porn will still objectify women while that knight in shining armor that beats off three times a day to pictures of japanese school girls will still be that knight in shining armor.
This article reminded me of a book I read a while back about the industry called "Hard Core: Power, Pleasure, and the Frenzy of the Visible" by Linda Williams. Once interesting take Williams had on porno is that the movies are setup like Hollywood musicals. Bad acting, performing a number, more bad acting, another number, etc. In other words, porn is as much a realistic "documentary" filming of life as "Singing in the Rain."
The book is highly recommended. And it was in this book that I found out the main focus in porn is "proof" that sexual gratification has taken place - "the frenzy of the visible" - the money shot. As all other sex acts can be faked, but this one is proof.
Which always made me wonder... if that's the point, then where is this market for all this soft-core stuff? Is just because of blue laws?
NOUNt1. Coitus between humans. 2. Sexual union between humans involving genital contact other than vaginal penetration by the penis.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
Ok. How does this work?
i was going on coitus meaning actual penetration, as in:
"Sexual union between a male and a female involving insertion of the penis into the vagina." (from dictionary.reference.com) interesting that my dictionary and yours have different definitions.
i'll just dispense with attempts at using unpopular words.
without a live chick, you can't actually fuck a vagina.
Carol, I think you've been blessed with an easy-to-manage body. My mother has been overweight her entire life (including her early childhood) and yet she eats better and exercises more than just about anyone else I know. Where does weightlifting, jogging, spinning, biking, aerobics, and yoga get her? Under 200 pounds, that's where. I don't know exactly how much she weighs but it's around there, and that's with a very healthy lifestyle. I am similar. It's not possible for EVERYONE to get in shape and look thin and fit just with diet and exercise.
Carol, I think you've been blessed with an easy-to-manage body. My mother has been overweight her entire life (including her early childhood) and yet she eats better and exercises more than just about anyone else I know. Where does weightlifting, jogging, spinning, biking, aerobics, and yoga get her? Under 200 pounds, that's where. I don't know exactly how much she weighs but it's around there, and that's with a very healthy lifestyle. I am similar. It's not possible for EVERYONE to get in shape and look thin and fit just with diet and exercise.
Some people are big, full stop. Some people are small, full stop.
By your impossibly simple logic, an old friend of mine should be immensely obese. He eats like a horse. He's also a little guy who looks perpetually starved.
A lot of the current health advocates forgets that, for people in cold climates, there are distinct advantages to being fat. A lean body won't get you through lean times. A longer theoretical lifespan is a small consolation if you fail to make it through winter.
Some people are big, full stop. Some people are small, full stop.
By your impossibly simple logic, an old friend of mine should be immensely obese. He eats like a horse. He's also a little guy who looks perpetually starved.
A lot of the current health advocates forgets that, for people in cold climates, there are distinct advantages to being fat. A lean body won't get you through lean times. A longer theoretical lifespan is a small consolation if you fail to make it through winter.
Somebody doesn't understand metabolism. It is physically impossible to not lose weight if you are burning more calories than you are eating.
Burning calories = daily metabolic rate + exercise. Some people have to eat a lot less or can eat a lot more based on their metabolic rates. However, what I said is a fact that is indisputable.
No, simply 'eating less' does not equal losing weight.
Don't be a fool. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight. It's a fact. You explain where the calories magically appear in your body if you don't consume more than you burn. Does the tooth fairy inject your ass with lard?
Somebody doesn't understand metabolism. It is physically impossible to not lose weight if you are burning more calories than you are eating.
Someone is still stuck in bizarro world, where no-one's body mandates a certain amount of fat, and a normal diet with a modest number of calories will maintain that weight. Such people have to starve themselves to lose weight because that's not a natural state for them, and deprivation has the usual consequences - lack of energy, depression, susceptibility to illness, etc. If they start eating a healthy amount of food they regain their natural weight.
Quote:
Burning calories = daily metabolic rate + exercise. Some people have to eat a lot less or can eat a lot more based on their metabolic rates. However, what I said is a fact that is indisputable.
However, it's also indisputable that your rule is too simple to be descriptive in any meaningful way. What I'm describing, precisely, is metabolism. The fact that you can't understand it is revealed in the fact that you don't even recognize its effects when they're described.
Comments
Originally posted by bunge
Proportionately it is though.
I used to believe that, but the more I see, the more I am coming to believe that the psychological effects to both genders are nearly equal.
Men are just trained to be a lot better at *hiding* them, not to mention that male body image issues are still highly closeted. After all, that's a 'female' problem, so if you have it, you gotta be feminine or something.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
How does that quite work, Kickaha? I'd be interested in taking a Psychology of Gender course, but I think it has a prerequisite that I'm not willing to take.
Eh? Do explain.
Originally posted by DMBand0026
I believe that porn can alter what you think is attractive, but unless it is a big portion of your life ( not sure if it is jeffyboy
That's just it, I think it happens on a sub-conscious level.
I noticed it with a girl I work with. Initially, I didn't find her attractive. I was sort of forced to get to know her because we work together, and now I think she's beautiful-personality, sense of humor etc fit her looks in a great way.
I look back and wonder why I wouldn't have sought her out on my own, and I think it's because of porn, and to a lesser extent the entertainment industry in general.
To combat this, if I feel the need for a fix, if you will, I visit a cool site that focuses on an alternative sort of (naked) beauty, and provides the girls with a blog and message board so you see them more as people and less as objects.
Jeff
I would say that Porn is what is made of it. In other words it is comparable to other concepts such as pop-culture, sports, gambling, being too religious, over-eating, the spending of money and so on.
Anything can be taken too far to a point where it is in control of us instead of us managing it in a balanced way. Again this is if we allow it to via sloppy management.
If we as individuals know what is important to us and we guard against being overtaken with obsession of any given concept and retain balance we can "manage" to stay focused on what is priority in our lives.
Knowing what we are after and why we are after it will keep us on course. Living blindly on the other hand could lead to trouble.
Fellowship
The thing is, everyone comes into contact with porn, but not everyone becomes a womanizing bastard. I would guess that the personality carries the predisposition rather than the personality being effected by the outside stimulus (porn). So some asshole that never sees porn will still objectify women while that knight in shining armor that beats off three times a day to pictures of japanese school girls will still be that knight in shining armor.
The book is highly recommended. And it was in this book that I found out the main focus in porn is "proof" that sexual gratification has taken place - "the frenzy of the visible" - the money shot. As all other sex acts can be faked, but this one is proof.
Which always made me wonder... if that's the point, then where is this market for all this soft-core stuff? Is just because of blue laws?
Originally posted by Blue Shift
NOUN
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
Ok. How does this work?
i was going on coitus meaning actual penetration, as in:
"Sexual union between a male and a female involving insertion of the penis into the vagina." (from dictionary.reference.com) interesting that my dictionary and yours have different definitions.
i'll just dispense with attempts at using unpopular words.
without a live chick, you can't actually fuck a vagina.
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno
Carol, I think you've been blessed with an easy-to-manage body. My mother has been overweight her entire life (including her early childhood) and yet she eats better and exercises more than just about anyone else I know. Where does weightlifting, jogging, spinning, biking, aerobics, and yoga get her? Under 200 pounds, that's where. I don't know exactly how much she weighs but it's around there, and that's with a very healthy lifestyle. I am similar. It's not possible for EVERYONE to get in shape and look thin and fit just with diet and exercise.
Input < Output = Weight loss.
Calories In < Calories Out = Weight Loss.
Tell your mom to eat less.
Originally posted by BR
Input < Output = Weight loss.
Calories In < Calories Out = Weight Loss.
Tell your mom to eat less.
No luck there, because it's not that simple.
Some people are big, full stop. Some people are small, full stop.
By your impossibly simple logic, an old friend of mine should be immensely obese. He eats like a horse. He's also a little guy who looks perpetually starved.
A lot of the current health advocates forgets that, for people in cold climates, there are distinct advantages to being fat. A lean body won't get you through lean times. A longer theoretical lifespan is a small consolation if you fail to make it through winter.
Originally posted by running with scissors
i'd really like to add to the discussion, but i'm to busy downloading porn.
shit! you can download porn??
cya
g
Originally posted by Amorph
No luck there, because it's not that simple.
Some people are big, full stop. Some people are small, full stop.
By your impossibly simple logic, an old friend of mine should be immensely obese. He eats like a horse. He's also a little guy who looks perpetually starved.
A lot of the current health advocates forgets that, for people in cold climates, there are distinct advantages to being fat. A lean body won't get you through lean times. A longer theoretical lifespan is a small consolation if you fail to make it through winter.
Somebody doesn't understand metabolism. It is physically impossible to not lose weight if you are burning more calories than you are eating.
Burning calories = daily metabolic rate + exercise. Some people have to eat a lot less or can eat a lot more based on their metabolic rates. However, what I said is a fact that is indisputable.
Originally posted by BR
However, what I said is a fact that is indisputable.
No, simply 'eating less' does not equal losing weight.
Originally posted by bunge
No, simply 'eating less' does not equal losing weight.
Don't be a fool. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight. It's a fact. You explain where the calories magically appear in your body if you don't consume more than you burn. Does the tooth fairy inject your ass with lard?
Originally posted by BR
Somebody doesn't understand metabolism. It is physically impossible to not lose weight if you are burning more calories than you are eating.
Someone is still stuck in bizarro world, where no-one's body mandates a certain amount of fat, and a normal diet with a modest number of calories will maintain that weight. Such people have to starve themselves to lose weight because that's not a natural state for them, and deprivation has the usual consequences - lack of energy, depression, susceptibility to illness, etc. If they start eating a healthy amount of food they regain their natural weight.
Burning calories = daily metabolic rate + exercise. Some people have to eat a lot less or can eat a lot more based on their metabolic rates. However, what I said is a fact that is indisputable.
However, it's also indisputable that your rule is too simple to be descriptive in any meaningful way. What I'm describing, precisely, is metabolism. The fact that you can't understand it is revealed in the fact that you don't even recognize its effects when they're described.