If only men were receptive and not oblivious to it, though.

I would honestly be flabbergasted to hear a group of adult men going on about tits and ass. — K Turner

Hmmm maybe you haven't been around many jocks on or off the playing field or nightclub bar staff or construction workers on the job or stripclub patrons ... it's always silly, subliminally dick-measuring, trash talk carried over from adolescence that many, maybe even most, hetero males (in urban America for sure) don't seem to ever fully outgrow. A friend who was a caddy for years told me how rich old dudes would tell more T&A lies out on the golf course when they weren't bitching about their wives or bratty kids.

I don't have any problems with dick jokes or dick measuring contests among groups of men. I was more talking about e.g. one of us walking into a conversation among a group of men where they're like "yeah that woman had really big, nice tits" or "yeah I love big titties."

I wouldn't be offended obviously, it would be ridiculous to the point of hilarious. It's like we're going back to the 3rd grade.

I can see men who are very comfortable with each other using T&A jokes as long as they keep it light and sarcastic.

Come to think of it, I did play rugby in college around 10 years ago and it did get quite sexually derogatory towards women. Yeah, that culture is under attack right now. In 2010 it was permitted, in 2021 it's very, very suspect. I am in favor of this cultural change -- young men (or any men, but especially impressionable young men) shouldn't be referring to women like that since it just reinforces toxic behavior and the objectification of women. There's just such a lack of positive male role models.

You really find male voices overpowering and intimidating? I am asking because when I eat out in a busy restaurant, for example, what I tend to hear is female voices. Or perhaps men are instinctively more receptive to female voices and vice versa. But I admit that some men can be very loud and even sound or actually become aggressive when they've had too much to drink. — Apollodorus

Male voices are deeper and heavier than women voices. Unless the woman is literally screaming in 'high energy banter' and the men are practically speaking in low voices which is probably what you are hearing; feminine vocal tones are almost always drowned out by male voices easy.

Men listen to other men more and will completely ignore the soft-spoken feminine voice whistling in the corner unless she adopts a more assertive and masculine communication style; and even then there is still no assurance you will even be "heard".

But sure, pipe down guys, the woman is speaking - says the man with the stronger voice that allows women to interject. I get this a lot.

Incidentally, you mention "male form" and "male beauty". How much of this would you say is physical and how important is it in comparison with other forms of beauty and/or attractiveness? — Apollodorus

It is entirely physical. Women are not blind; but as I said hypersensitive to the male form - which is paradoxically what contributes to the female choosiness (off/on) switching you see. A male can be everything; but she may not like his smell - and her blood suddenly runs cold.

"Physical" doesn't mean arms and kneecaps; it means that which is innately male - or unique to the Y chromosome. Male traits - vocal octaves and tones, male pheromones, the male gait - yes the male gait is attractive; when it protrudes his chest and walks confidently in a masculine manner - he could not have a dime to his name; but women still SEE this man - and thus react/respond.

You could say "money and status" but I stress this is not really an element of female sexuality. This female sexuality when it is suspended and rationality applied. Unless it's some weird kink, not a single woman would be aroused by 'money'.

Also, you seem to have done quite a bit of thinking on issues of sexuality and you are saying some interesting things.

I am speaking of sex and sexuality; but it is not ABOUT sex.

The point I am making is the reason the female form is 'obsessed over' is not because it is more 'beautiful' than the male; but because the female form SUCCEEDS in preying on the opposite sexes vulnerability to the female form - by bias - to favor it above the males; thus elicit behaviors, innate motivations to act, and other - onto the male NOT because this is absent in the female or that the female cannot 'obsess' over the male form too.

May I ask if all these are your own ideas or how did you come to hold these views and when? Has philosophy had any influence on any of this or is there no relation?

Sex, aesthetics, beauty, etc.. are all tied into ethics. It has a lot to do with philosophy.

I wouldn't be offended obviously, it would be ridiculous to the point of hilarious. It's like we're going back to the 3rd grade. — K Turner

Exactly. Many men need that ritual as a sublimated (soft-simulated?) "release", many don't or not very often. I tend to find those situations get old too fast and a signal to me that I need to look elsewhere for the only thing better than great music or prolonged silence: companionable dialogue.

I will say, though, that the OP was not discussing sexuality in particular, but allure: the quality of being powerfully and mysteriously attractive or fascinating. As a woman (albeit a decade or two older), I obviously don’t find the female form distinctly ‘mysterious’ as such. My eye is, however, attracted to the potential of the female form: ie. those qualitative aspects in other women’s appearances that are suggestive of my own untapped capacity, such as fitness and strength. — Possibility

This is likely wildly personal. There is nothing attractive to me about looking at women; my eyes don't divert to them or their figures - unless you mean their cosmetics or something like that - to then it's not really about the WOMAN, but what she is doing or how she is behaving (e.g., fashion, make-up, "I want to be like her," not a part of her or within her [non-sexually penetrative or phallically speaking]) - which is more so a matter of familiarity than anything else, no different than how I gravitated toward my mother as preference of relatability, familiarity and comfort over my present good father. Yeah, sure, mom is pretty today but not because men look like shit or worse than females or something lol.

I 100x would rather watch a shirtless man chopping wood than stare at some woman at the gym workout on the treadmill. Not even because I want to have to sex with him, but just because the way men's body moves and interacts with the environment is far more interesting to look at. Hardly 'mysterious' because I can actively explain why that is - just enjoyable; probably because as someone with estrogen, I am more hypersensitive to my sexually dimorphic complimentary.

Sure I can acknowledge 'this woman is symmetrical in the face' if that's what you mean; but only when this attention is demanded of me to pay attention. I do not innately pay attention; or seek to find beauty in a female form because they are female like men do.

If you're a hetero woman that stares at other women all day; of course you'll probably have habitually conditioned yourself to prefer looking at women. But as a woman that doesn't do this, I am only sensitive to the male form in terms of being 'allured' anywhere.

As women we are bombarded with tits, ass and the female figure just as boys are as girls constantly in this society. It's no surprise most women say they prefer looking at women more.

I think this is one area where we do ourselves a disservice to mimic the limitations of the ‘male gaze’ and dismiss this attraction to our own gender on the grounds that we’re not sexually aroused by it. You’re telling Tiff that her attraction to women is sexual because it’s based on physical touch and comfort, but that doesn’t ring true for me, and I would say the same thing about men who find comfort in the sports-sanctioned physical touch of other men. Not everything is about sex.

She said herself she is physically attracted to, has be aroused by women to the point of experimenting with them [which just proved my point - women kissing other women in this clubs, etc.. are almost always sleeping with other women]; and sexist norms and nonsensical conditioning loves to devalue these interactions, but a spade is a spade. It seems she is confusing her sexual allure to the female form with aesthetical attraction [desire to be her].

Women leaving snail trails in her lap at gentlemen's club is not a behavior of hetero women and not the same as giving your bestie a hug lol.

I assure you most heterosexual women do not do this; nor enjoy it. So either this is a result of nonsensical sexist norms imposed on women to "fit in," or appease the man - or there is sexual fluidity yet to be acknowledged.

I don’t find a ‘lap-dance’ all that appealing myself, and I would actively discourage an attractive woman who thought she could entice me in this way. However, I don’t think ‘disgusted’ would be a response to the female form as such, but more to her intentions towards me, especially if she blatantly disregards my intentionality. I’d respond the same way towards a man who didn’t bother to gauge my interest, even if he were ‘objectively’ attractive. — Possibility

Sure; you just don't like lap-dances, fair enough.

Substitute "lap dance" with any type of behavior you find attractive in the male unique to his form - then picture a woman doing it.

It's going to be a large no because she is a female in form - and the female in her form elicits of revolting disgust; so you discourage her to move away. By "disgust" I do not mean vomit on yourself or gag. So long as the pursuer is male in form he is eligible or has the capacity to elicit pleasure within you that is entirely absent when it comes to another woman.

It doesn't have to be sexual in nature, but acknowledgment of these capacities and complimentary attributes are exactly what I am speaking of.

Men want everyone to hop on the bandwagon and just agree women are more beautiful or something like that; but I will push back on this because this is a very male centric way of thinking and women are used to just 'agreeing' with it - because it must be true and the way; just because its a dominant influence within our lives.

Wait. Are you claiming categorically that there is not a significant (though maybe small) number of hetero females who find other "attractive" females more alluring and beautiful than "attractive" males? :chin: Asking for a friend.

You mean the same women that typically (in my experience) have a weakness or vulnerability to the female in form - and stronger tendencies to be seduced or hypnotized by a female and all her 'attractive' non-sexual beauty, to the point where they may 'experiment' (to gauge their pleasure - or - disgust) response. Ahem, exhibit A's.

Or, "in my hay day, I've tried a few women and it just didn't do it for me, something was missing... not the disgust, just the pleasure."

Sure. Very 'hetero', eh? I wish a woman would, I would file a harassment complaint like more men should be doing. Yes, not finding your sexually dimorphic counterpart more alluring in a non-sexual way visually speaking as a sexual species designed to be hypersensitive and receptive (whether we like it or not) to these specific traits of the XX and the XY, is certainly bizarre.

But I may just be biasing it with my own self. How these women are talking just doesn't compute to me.

What's most interesting is the first 2 pages of this thread are entirely about sexuality and sex reproduction when answering the OP as well; not some woman's non-sexual beauty.

So why is it when a woman speaks on sex and sexuality toward the male in accordance to the OP, there is suddenly a problem and a circus of skepticism and "it's not all about sex.." unless it's a bunch of men saying it is and all of a sudden I am 'mimicing the male' because I am expressing an aspect of female sexuality. This is precisely the stifling I was talking about.

OP cleverly says, "most men watch porn," but doesn't acknowledge that many women watch gay male porn and prefer porn with no women in it; men get up in arms about this and uncomfortable, shutting this discussion down in my experience.

Everything is about sex. Sex sells. Beautiful people sell to, but only because many people want to subconsciously mate with them or be them so we can go forth and multiply easier with others - and it is much easier to fantasize non-sexually about a beautiful human because of their wonderful genes we all want to snag a piece of to go forth and multiply. All innate biological reactions like digestion.

We are sexual species; unless 'birthing hips' and 'women are all curves and men all angles," and so forth are all equally irrelevant to the OP just like my own.

I think what you are saying makes a lot of sense, actually, and I agree with you.

Personally, I tend to react negatively more to people’s actions than to physical things, for example, when someone is telling lies or trying to manipulate me like making me buy something that I don’t want, join an organization that I have no interest in, or generally making me do things that serve their own agenda.

This is why I don’t buy into stuff like the shows of Madonna and others. I have nothing against them as a person, but to me it looks totally fake and like a form of mass manipulation and control like in some weird cult or sect. But people apparently get upset when they hear this and they start lecturing you and trying to tell you that you are wrong and that you should do as you are told and not dare resist the mass trend or movement that is being imposed on you by “society”. A bit like what is happening on some online forums.

Regarding male and female voices, apparently, nearly half of Americans think that male voices are more powerful, so I’m guessing that the other half don’t think so?

In any case, for some unknown reason, I tend to hear female voices more clearly than male voices, especially when they are in a group. It doesn’t bother me at all, and it isn’t a criticism, it’s just that I tend to notice them over male voices. Maybe the female voice sounds more “musical” to male ears and you instinctively notice it before you notice the more “dull” male voice.

But I do agree that voice is very important, it tells you a lot about a person, for example, if they are being honest or telling you stories for some ulterior reason.

So, voice and sound in general seems to be as important as sight, perhaps even more important because to see something you need to keep your eyes on it, whereas sound is closer to you and tends to surround you from all sides and is in a way similar to feeling by touch.

Maybe this is why, in addition to visual images, music is used to evoke a certain response from the public.

I have no qualms with this movie as it depicts the intensity of female desire (regardless toward another female - nonetheless, applies to men as well). — Cobra

I did watch it and I enjoyed the music and the scenery. Just a bit emotional, maybe. Other than that, I can't see much difference to a story about a guy and a girl, to be honest.

This is why I don’t buy into stuff like the shows of Madonna and others. I have nothing against them as a person, but to me it looks totally fake and like a form of mass manipulation and control like in some weird cult or sect. — Apollodorus

Madge isn't performing for people like you. You're not her target audience. Yeah, we're going to get kind of defensive when you come in as an outsider and you're like "oh this is fake" or "why does she gotta do all of this?"

A certain kind of pop music is kinda campy and ridiculous - that's just what it is. It's a space for certain types of people to express themselves.

Do you like MMA or masculine sports like football? Think of a sport or a masculine activity that you like.

Now imagine a group of women or gay men come in and start saying "why do men need to be this aggressive?" or "why can't they be cuter and express their feelings more, it just feels so repressive!"

You know what football could use? More gay love stories.

You'd probably start to get a little annoyed after a while, no?

Wait. Are you claiming categorically that there is not a significant (though maybe small) number hetero females who find other "attractive" females more alluring and beautiful than "attractive" males? :chin: Asking for a friend — 180 Proof

The claim may be made but that doesn't make it true. I'm one of those ladies who fall into that small group.
@Cobra
Snail trails.
Wow! How cool are you? :cool:

Madge isn't performing for people like you. — K Turner

I never said she was. And even if she was, I'm not interested, period. There is no legal requirement for me to justify not liking her shows.

Now imagine a group of women or gay men come in and start saying "why do men need to be this aggressive?" — K Turner

I can't imagine anyone saying that. People are doing it for fun or for money and it's not illegal.

Plus, the OP is about the female form, not about MMA.

You really find male voices overpowering and intimidating? I am asking because when I eat out in a busy restaurant, for example, what I tend to hear is female voices. Or perhaps men are instinctively more receptive to female voices and vice versa. — Apollodorus

There is a physiological difference, e.g.

According to several studies, two hearing assessment tools—auditory evoked potential and oto-acoustic emissions tests—show differences between men and women. These tools are objective tests, meaning that the variations suggest an innate physiological difference in the male and female auditory systems. Neuroanatomic studies have also found that speech perception tends to be treated bilaterally in female brains and unilaterally in male brains. In other words, speech generally activates neurons in both hemispheres for women, but predominantly in one hemisphere for men. Finally, some studies suggest that women make greater use of visual cues in understanding speech, especially as they age. These studies all suggest that the auditory system and speech perception are different in men and women.
https://www.lobe.ca/en/blog/adulte-hearing/Do-Men-and-Women-Hear-Differently

The agreeableness of women and the lack of interest, desire and intimidation to compete with the robust social dominance of men - even down to the very fact that men have more powerful and louder vocal cords, is largely absent in women — Cobra

Are you American? I find that American women in general have much louder voices, speak in a lower tone register with less tonal and dynamic variation than women elsewhere. So that gives them the effect of being dominant, aggressive, intimidating.

I will say, though, that the OP was not discussing sexuality in particular, but allure: the quality of being powerfully and mysteriously attractive or fascinating. — Possibility

Did anyone bother to read the Buddhist text I posted earlier?

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/574131

Unfortunately, self-interest tends to come first and this happens at individual, national, and international level. — Apollodorus

I don't think self-interest is the culprit. Rather, it's contempt, hostility. The normalization and preference of contempt and hostility.
The oppsoite of caring for others isn't selfishness, it's contempt/hostility.

These studies all suggest that the auditory system and speech perception are different in men and women. — baker

Yes, I think something along those lines is probably true.

I find that American women in general have much louder voices, speak in a lower tone register with less tonal and dynamic variation than women elsewhere. So that gives them the effect of being dominant, aggressive, intimidating — baker

I don't think I quite agree with that. Louder than other English-speaking women, e.g., English, Irish, maybe. But definitely NOT aggressive, they are just being themselves.

I would say Japanese and Chinese women can sound aggressive. And, above all, Arabs. But none of them sound as aggressive as the men.

I don't think I quite agree with that. Louder than other English-speaking women, e.g., English, Irish, maybe. But definitely NOT aggressive, they are just being themselves. — Apollodorus

By my dinosaur standards, they _are_ aggressive, and this isn't mutually exclusive with "being themselves".

I would say Japanese and Chinese women can sound aggressive. And, above all, Arabs. But none of them sound as aggressive as the men.

I find that generally, it's the women who are more aggressive.

:up:

We'll have to disagree on that then :grin:

Nothing wrong with being loud if they are being themselves, is there? Even Spaniards and Italians can be loud but, again, because they are being themselves.

Japanese women may sound aggressive because of their language and Arab women possibly because of both language and culture. But definitely not Americans.

Nothing wrong with being loud if they are being themselves, is there? Even Spaniards and Italians can be loud but, again, because they are being themselves. — Apollodorus

So this is not an aggressive dog, he's just "being himself"?

Being loud doesn't count as "aggressive" in my view. You sometimes get groups of teenage girls that have had a few drinks and are a bit loud, and sometimes women or girls may start a fight with other girls but that's very rare. I just don't think you can extrapolate from this that women in general are "aggressive".

I am a heterosexual male and find the female form to be amazing. — Maximum7

Beauty is in the eye of the bone holder.

Being loud doesn't count as "aggressive" in my view. You sometimes get groups of teenage girls that have had a few drinks and are a bit loud, and sometimes women or girls may start a fight with other girls but that's very rare. I just don't think you can extrapolate from this that women in general are "aggressive". — Apollodorus

?
The extrapolation was never that women in general are aggressive. That's all on you.

The original claim was that American women tend to be more aggressive than other women.
Also, where I come from, being loud is generally considered aggressive.

The original claim was that American women tend to be more aggressive than other women.
Also, where I come from, being loud is generally considered aggressive. — baker

I get that. However, I believe that this in itself is an unwarranted generalization.

When I said that personally I tend to hear female voices over male ones I meant this only in the sense that my brain notices or registers them NOT that I find them "aggressive" or in any way "annoying".

Different people see things differently. To me, European women do not sound aggressive at all. Some may be loud, e.g., Italian and Spanish women, and others may be more softly-spoken, e.g., French, English, Irish.

Outside Europe, I would say that Indian women are similar to Europeans; Japanese women sound "aggressive" (due to language and the way sounds are articulated) without being aggressive; Chinese women sound aggressive and can be aggressive (due to more aggressive culture than the Japanese); Arab women sound aggressive and are aggressive (due to both language and culture), etc.

Having said that, it depends on a wide range of factors such as culture, language, class, education, upbringing, individual character and personality, situation, etc.

In any event, I put Americans in the same category as Europeans. They may be louder than some Europeans, but I fail to see how this translates as "aggressive". Being loud does not mean that they are going to start a fight or attack you, does it?

Unless you do something to upset them, in which case you can't really complain that they are aggressive toward you .... :smile:

https://media2.zuza.com/c/c/ccefe190-e407-42cc-99da-6d20340d415d/femalefitnessAsset_02.png

Interesting…

When I said that personally I tend to hear female voices over male ones I meant this only in the sense that my brain notices or registers them NOT that I find them "aggressive" or in any way "annoying". — Apollodorus

Sure.
Wait till you get age specific hearing loss. If you're the typical male, you'll lose the high frequencies first, so that you won't hear female voices so well anymore. heh.

In any event, I put Americans in the same category as Europeans. They may be louder than some Europeans, but I fail to see how this translates as "aggressive".

Being loud does not mean that they are going to start a fight or attack you, does it?

It could mean that. A trajectory is loudness -- verbal aggression -- physical aggression. In fact, many people here already class loudness as verbal aggression.

Unless you do something to upset them, in which case you can't really complain that they are aggressive toward you ....

Americans tend to be upset by the very fact that other nations exist at all. That's why they feel justified to invade other countries and teach them to submit to 'murica.

I think I understand what you are trying to say. However, personally, I have zero experience of aggressive American women. Loud, compared to some Europeans, yes. But definitely not aggressive. On the contrary, the ones I know are polite, well-mannered, and very friendly. To me, this is sufficient evidence that being loud does not equate being aggressive.

In fact, as a general rule, I find that if you are courteous, respectful, and friendly to people, they tend to be nice in return.

I am not aware of Americans invading more countries than other nations. If I am not mistaken, Slavic people invaded the European territories they occupy at present. The same is true of Germanic peoples. They invaded most of Europe and founded great nations like Germany, England, and France. There were Germanic kingdoms in Italy and Spain, not to speak of Scandinavian countries. And don't forget the Romans.

Age specific hearing loss? Well, I think I'll have to wait a long time for that to happen. And when it does happen, I can always get a hear aid, can't I? I mean one of those where you can turn down the volume when it gets too loud .... :grin:

I think I understand what you are trying to say. However, personally, I have zero experience of aggressive American women. Loud, compared to some Europeans, yes. But definitely not aggressive. On the contrary, the ones I know are polite, well-mannered, and very friendly. — Apollodorus

Toward you, perhaps, because you're male.
There's a saying: Nobody can hate a woman as much as another woman.

In fact, as a general rule, I find that if you are courteous, respectful, and friendly to people, they tend to be nice in return.

As long as you make the first step, right?

I am not aware of Americans invading more countries than other nations. If I am not mistaken, Slavic people invaded the European territories they occupy at present. The same is true of Germanic peoples. They invaded most of Europe and founded great nations like Germany, England, and France. There were Germanic kingdoms in Italy and Spain, not to speak of Scandinavian countries. And don't forget the Romans.

But Americans are doing it now, when we are supposedly civilized. Most other nations stopped invading other countries long ago.

Age specific hearing loss? Well, I think I'll have to wait a long time for that to happen. And when it does happen, I can always get a hear aid, can't I?

And women as they age tend to lose the lower frequencies, ie. their hearing for male voices deteriorates.
A match made in heaven!