General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsModels and Body Types - On DU?
For the most part, fashion models are exceptional body types. Not exceptional as in extraordinarily desirable or extraordinarily typical. They're exceptional in the sense that they are an exception to the norm. Very exceptional, actually.
That the ultra slender human female body has become an ipso facto standard of beauty is also extraordinary. Extraordinary in the same sense. As an exception to the norm, it's an odd standard of beauty, indeed. An unattainable standard in most cases, since only a tiny percentage of women look that way.
Yet, that is the image displayed in the pages of Glamour and Vogue and even on the cover of Sports Illustrated when that publication attempts to show scantily-dressed women in order to boost subscriptions.
I sort of remember some slender teenage girls with that sort of body type, way back when I was also a teenager. At least I guess they might have looked something like those models, had I ever seen any of them unclothed. My own girlfriend did not have that body type, nor have any of the other women I have loved in my 68 years. I've seen some women with that body type from time to time, here and there, but have not formed relationships with any of them.
And yet, that exceptional body type is what is held out to us as a standard of beauty. It's held out as that to men, and to women as well. That is what someone supposes we should look like, or should strive to look like. But, that's not what women look like, except for a rare few for a few years of their lives, if they work very hard at maintaining that look.
I reject that look as the standard. It's far from standard. It's not even attainable, except for a very few people. I don't see it as desirable, even for those few, frankly. It speaks of deprivation and straining for something that isn't natural. It isn't attractive to me, because it's artificial.
And now, on DU, we're having a gender war over atypical body types being displayed on a magazine cover. Isn't that silly I'll wager that roughly none of the women who are on DU look like those models, and would be willing to bet a fairly large sum. Similarly, I'll wager that approximately none of the men on DU look like the male models and sports figures we see from time to time in publications.
As DUers, we look like a lot of things, I have no doubt. We probably run the gamut of human appearance, but vanishingly few of us resemble anyone who would be on a magazine cover. I've seen myself in a mirror, naked, and I can say most definitely that I would not be suitable for any magazine cover. And yet, I am loved and desired by someone, who also would be any unlikely photo on a magazine cover.
But who cares, really? It is not in physical appearance where we measure the attractiveness of those we love, in most cases. It's somewhere else. To me, all of the women I have loved in my life have been beautiful. Others might differ, but that's of no matter. And I suppose they've found me attractive, as unlikely as that seems to me.
On DU, we have no bodies or even faces, for the most part. Much of the time, I don't even know what sex or gender is represented by the average screen name here. So, I can't take part in any sort of gender war here. I'm here to discuss politics, not to find life or other partners. I don't put images of people in my mind when I see screen names here. I think of DUers in terms of the words that they write, and in those terms only.
Can we do that please? Can we discuss politics, please? I'd like that.
aikoaiko
(34,183 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Chimps are our closest evolutionary link. But we are different species. Our branch separated a very long time ago. There are similarities, but also many differences. Comparisons can be made, but only to a minor degree, especially behaviorally.
aikoaiko
(34,183 posts)loli phabay
(5,580 posts)as long as we shave.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)so it doesn't bother me at all...
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Didn't anybody here take biology in high school?
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)quite large, and sometimes shorter. I have not shaved since 1969.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)when I came in the door. She's never seen me without my full beard. Nobody has since 1969, including myself.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)I've grown attached to it.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)But we are apelike hominids.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Some people use the term informally to mean all humans and relatives of humans closer than Chimapanzee, but modern humans are the only extant species in such a small group. IN other words, humans ARE among the Great Apes, but the group you specify would be a sub-group of the Great Apes. The term "Great Apes" is sometimes used imformally to exclude humans, but taxonomically, that is incorrect, since in fact Chimpanzees and Bonobos are more closely related to humans than they are to Orangutans.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)I sit corrected.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)We are, as are all the apes, hominid....but we are the last of the hominin branch...
Here's a good link to explain: http://australianmuseum.net.au/Hominid-and-hominin-whats-the-difference
If it helps the argument (probably not, lol) we diverged from the rest of the 'great apes' several million years ago. For comparison, wolves and dogs have only been separated by 10,000 -100,000 years and I'm pretty sure my little 3.3 lbs dog would not survive outside in anything less than tropical weather, nor would she know how to hunt. And she is genetically the same species as a wolf. We are, though some don't want to admit, so VERY far removed from other ape species. This 'we are 98.6% chimp!' as an excuse to perpetuate excuses for particular sexual behaviors is bunk. We are also 80-85% dog, but as an adult I don't shit on the carpet when I'm pissed off.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)doors.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)I open doors for. I say thanks.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)for a smoking woman who wants to breastfeed while petting her pitbull.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)loli phabay
(5,580 posts)tuna.
EX500rider
(10,849 posts)Lasher
(27,632 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Yes, indeed!
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)Or I will open a door for someone.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)loli phabay
(5,580 posts)loli phabay
(5,580 posts)ive only dated women who fall within a narrow bracket that they would fall into, but i know others prefer a different body type. i dont judge their attraction parameters and frankly dont care what others think about mine. takes all sorts and i am glad we dont all like the same thing.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)This is a political forum. I don't care much about those who attract you. I can't see how that is relevant to the topics suitable for this forum in any way.
I don't even know if you're a man or a woman, and don't much care. It's also irrelevant.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)seller on du.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)But not to me.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)thats what makes life interesting.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Nor have you any idea about my choices of magazines. Does it matter when it comes to politics?
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)also who really reads magazines today, i dont think i ever bought one in years as everything is online nowadays.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Mostly fishing magazines and a magazine about collector motorcycles from England. I like magazines, still.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)in a Mad Men/ Pirelli calendar kind of way? GD has become a free for all for all kinds of stupid shit, including threads like that that were designed to be a hostile swipe at feminists. That was the intent of the SI thread, a protest against feminists here. So it is political. Care to comment on that?
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)DU is full of people of all types. I have no doubt that there are people here I wouldn't like. In fact there are people here I don't like, for various reasons. However that's true with any large group of people.
I just avoid those as much as I can and move along to discuss what is important to me. I do not have time for wars of any kind, gender or otherwise. That's why I tend to avoid threads like that one and the ones it engendered.
I don't see it as political. I see it as personal, and I'm not here for personal discussions. I'm here for political discussions in the more commonly used sense.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)to offend a great deal of politically active women should be of some concern to you. But I get it, you want to pretend it's about body types- maybe even derail further into the monkey business- and dismiss that issue.
DU has already lost a lot of great women over this. We have a lot of the same men arguing here that know one knows what rape is- so tough shit, ladies. Don't see you getting into that. It has became too embarrassing to recomend to anyone with a feminist POV, but whatever. Please don;t pretend this is about body types though- that is just assisting the derailing that goes on.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)carefully. I'm not pretending about anything. I never pretend. I'm boringly straightforward.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)what you appear to be saying is you wish it was about the sizes and shapes of women you have known, so you can gas off down memory lane, and somehow that would be relevant or helpful. It is neither.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)are those channels hostile to you when you have them on?
What about family beaches with women in bikinis? Does that make the beach a hostile environment?
I don't see how swimsuit pictures can make GD hostile.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)which I think would actually be a pretty good standard (t least in GD) for a truly progressive space that had ANY interest in making feminists welcome.
Honestly, DU has changed so much it doesn't even raise my eyebrow. There are NO standards in GD at all, except against the most blatant racism. It has become more friendly to libertarians, and less so to women. A shadow of what it used to be.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)in both SI & Vogue or any other beauty-driven magazine, don't look like they appear on/in the magazines. They're photoshopped within an inch of their lives so it's a false sense of beauty people are attracted/drawn to. And that sir, Mineral Man, is the crux of body politics.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)I don't know any of those people, don't interact with them, and am unlikely to ever interact with them. They're not important to me, so I don't care, frankly.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)so yes. it does matter to us.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)organic eating, woman jailed for not returning video, KY snake handler dies from snake bite, and so on. It's GENERAL discussion.