Vast amounts of cultural confusion is caused by women’s bullying and competing with each other having plausible deniability baked in, with the consequences always blamed on men. It’s as impressive as a good conjuring trick though!
Men are much more accepting of women and their curves, femininity and maternal nurturing. Women are vicious and degrading to other women. The same feminism that calls you fat will celebrate a man dressed as a woman.
"Many opined that these crude comments and attacks on Hewitt were the inevitable work of patriarchy, of men dominating and humiliating women by holding them to impossible ideals. These patriarchs, we are told, sexualize girls, then scorn them for aging. They dehumanize, reducing the vast subjectivity of a woman to a fleshy body—a mere ornament to be ogled."
BS. It is feminine catiness, but consider this: if she were brown or black, they wouldn't dare dis her. Commercials are full of fat black and brown women selling any manner of products.
To be fair, Bo linked to his own research on this topic carried out 14 years ago. To then suggest that he has only just 'caught on' is therefore incorrect.
After thinking some more about this article, I realised that I have always disliked the way older women, especially older married women, continue to dress as though they were still 18, single and trying to attract a mate. On seeing them the expression 'mutton dressed as lamb' always springs to mind whereas the expression 'growing old gracefully' somehow never does.
If the article is right, feminism is at least partly to blame for both the falling birthrate (by stigmatising motherhood) and the sexualisation of all women in society, not to mention the abomination of gigantic flabby arses protruding incongruously from tiny thongs on beaches.
The only bit I would have liked to read more about, without making the article so long as to put people off even starting it, would have been to show how, though the patriarchy has allegedly always been with us, the rise of feminism coincided uncannily with the permissive society, increased divorce rates, the low status of motherhood and hulking 40-year-old ladies wearing unbecomingly tiny bikinis.
I always assumed it was easier for primitive cultures to carve fat ladies from a chunk of stone than to attempt to carve sylph-like figure, which invariably broke. Or maybe they did manage it but the lithe figures didn't survive to the present day the rough-and-tumble of Stone Age life, being at some point ground into the dust by a raiding party from the next village.
Great article that has the ring of truth to it that 'the malign patriarchy' doesn't. Unfortunately this idea will probably have the same trajectory as the idea that America isn't racist. The people who only ever read the Guardian and The Nation will continue to blame the patriarchy long after the evidence against such a belief has become overwhelming.
Bo I can’t really abide all these binaries you’ve got here: maiden vs matriarch, feminist vs. traditionalist, women vs. men.
We all have an aesthetic duty to ourselves and to others to give an honest effort. And nearly all of us—health permitting—can be lean and strong and have good posture and wear clothes that fit well.
The problem with cosmetic surgery isn’t that it strives for the impossibility of youth but that it is vulgar and self-defeating. A BBL is a low-brow aesthetic monstrosity; a strong backside is a boon to appearance, health, and capability at any age.
When I could walk, I often passed beautiful people of all ages, including lovely older women and slouching teens. Attractiveness is heavily correlated with health, both mental and physical. (A woman who lies about her age or a man who wears lifts has a mental health problem.)
I’d say more vanity is in order not less, so long as our aesthetic sensibilities are in order.
As I understand, making older mothers compete with young childless women on beauty will invadiably diminish the status of the former in favor of the latter, which is undesirable. No matter how much work one puts in, it's a rigged game.
Again, I reject the premise that women are only young and childless or older mothers. More to the point, no one has ever made me compete in a status game. How about you? Is that what we're doing in the comments here?
Now as a proponent of monogamy, I will concede that there is necessarily competition for a partner, singular. But that is for the love and affection of one other person, not status. I'm wondering now whether this article and the associated comments apply not to the real world but to edgy online discourse.
According to the CDC, the average American woman is 5'4" and 170 lbs. I'd say that's about 50 lbs. above her ideal. My suggestion would be to strive for an ideal weight and the ability to do a single perfect pull-up and to keep one's hair grey, as this would prove infinitely more salubrious than cosmetics or cosmetic procedures or bimbo-posting online.
Anyway, I seem to be talking past the article and the commenters here, and also to take no joy in casual misogyny.
It is ironic that "feminists" can be characterised by a deep (wilful?) ignorance of female biology. Silly political fantasies inevitably result.
Intra female competition is a staple of evolutionary biology:
"Most of these images exploit men's mating psychology that evolved in a very different mating environment. The potential damage inflicted by these images affects women as well because they create a spiralling and unhealthy competition with other women. Women find themselves competing with other women to embody the images they see daily – images they believe are desired by men. The unprecedented rates of eating disorders and cosmetic surgery may stem in part from these media images. The images work by exploiting men's existing evolved standards of beauty and women's competitive mating mechanisms on an unprecedented scale." [David Buss - "Evolutionay psychology"]
Bo I was just talking about the Victorian concept of the angel in the house in a X spaces about the red pill adoption of Peter Wright'' "gynocentrism". I told Wright & Elam yeaes ago that it's more correctly ovocentism but their genuine misogyny won't have it.
I think the problem is deeper in women's culture than just feminism. When i retired i had a lot of time so i read whatever was laying around at our house. My wife had a pile of "good" Regency romance novels. One characteristic was that many of the women in the books were younger daughters. Often (sometimes?) the would mention an older sister who was claimed to be the most beautiful woman in the ton, a "diamond of the first water". These women were always still young and often had just a single child. Or no child yet. None of the diamonds were grandmothers yet. I think that thread in Regency novels is an indication of a common fear in women that as they mature they are no longer beautiful. Sigh.
A brilliant analysis. Should be seminal reading for all young men and women. This is REAL education. Bravo! Will share as far and wide as I am able (and permitted!)
Vast amounts of cultural confusion is caused by women’s bullying and competing with each other having plausible deniability baked in, with the consequences always blamed on men. It’s as impressive as a good conjuring trick though!
Men are much more accepting of women and their curves, femininity and maternal nurturing. Women are vicious and degrading to other women. The same feminism that calls you fat will celebrate a man dressed as a woman.
Bo, your conclusion is spot on.
"Many opined that these crude comments and attacks on Hewitt were the inevitable work of patriarchy, of men dominating and humiliating women by holding them to impossible ideals. These patriarchs, we are told, sexualize girls, then scorn them for aging. They dehumanize, reducing the vast subjectivity of a woman to a fleshy body—a mere ornament to be ogled."
BS. It is feminine catiness, but consider this: if she were brown or black, they wouldn't dare dis her. Commercials are full of fat black and brown women selling any manner of products.
Glad you're catching on! https://www.paulawrightdysmemics.com/p/debunking-the-myth-of-the-uks-low
To be fair, Bo linked to his own research on this topic carried out 14 years ago. To then suggest that he has only just 'caught on' is therefore incorrect.
He also linked to me. We've known each other a long time. I know he has a sense of humour;)
I hope you both know Dani Sulikowski.
https://www.danisulikowski.com/publications
She has a Substack, too.
Ah, I see. An in-joke. Sorry to have butted in.
After thinking some more about this article, I realised that I have always disliked the way older women, especially older married women, continue to dress as though they were still 18, single and trying to attract a mate. On seeing them the expression 'mutton dressed as lamb' always springs to mind whereas the expression 'growing old gracefully' somehow never does.
If the article is right, feminism is at least partly to blame for both the falling birthrate (by stigmatising motherhood) and the sexualisation of all women in society, not to mention the abomination of gigantic flabby arses protruding incongruously from tiny thongs on beaches.
The only bit I would have liked to read more about, without making the article so long as to put people off even starting it, would have been to show how, though the patriarchy has allegedly always been with us, the rise of feminism coincided uncannily with the permissive society, increased divorce rates, the low status of motherhood and hulking 40-year-old ladies wearing unbecomingly tiny bikinis.
Has anyone ever had the theory that early sculptures of "fertility goddesses" like the Venus of Willendorf are actually motherhood sculptures?
That they're intentionally not sexually alluring and celebrate the older women?
They perpetuate/ celebrate fecundity - so, presumably, also reproduction - in a harsh and challenging world.
I always assumed it was easier for primitive cultures to carve fat ladies from a chunk of stone than to attempt to carve sylph-like figure, which invariably broke. Or maybe they did manage it but the lithe figures didn't survive to the present day the rough-and-tumble of Stone Age life, being at some point ground into the dust by a raiding party from the next village.
Great article that has the ring of truth to it that 'the malign patriarchy' doesn't. Unfortunately this idea will probably have the same trajectory as the idea that America isn't racist. The people who only ever read the Guardian and The Nation will continue to blame the patriarchy long after the evidence against such a belief has become overwhelming.
Bo I can’t really abide all these binaries you’ve got here: maiden vs matriarch, feminist vs. traditionalist, women vs. men.
We all have an aesthetic duty to ourselves and to others to give an honest effort. And nearly all of us—health permitting—can be lean and strong and have good posture and wear clothes that fit well.
The problem with cosmetic surgery isn’t that it strives for the impossibility of youth but that it is vulgar and self-defeating. A BBL is a low-brow aesthetic monstrosity; a strong backside is a boon to appearance, health, and capability at any age.
When I could walk, I often passed beautiful people of all ages, including lovely older women and slouching teens. Attractiveness is heavily correlated with health, both mental and physical. (A woman who lies about her age or a man who wears lifts has a mental health problem.)
I’d say more vanity is in order not less, so long as our aesthetic sensibilities are in order.
You can measure it any way you choose but at the end of the day the piano either will or won’t go through the door. In the real world binaries rock.
I get the metaphor, but I don't know what you're meaning to suggest either descriptively or normatively.
As I understand, making older mothers compete with young childless women on beauty will invadiably diminish the status of the former in favor of the latter, which is undesirable. No matter how much work one puts in, it's a rigged game.
Again, I reject the premise that women are only young and childless or older mothers. More to the point, no one has ever made me compete in a status game. How about you? Is that what we're doing in the comments here?
Now as a proponent of monogamy, I will concede that there is necessarily competition for a partner, singular. But that is for the love and affection of one other person, not status. I'm wondering now whether this article and the associated comments apply not to the real world but to edgy online discourse.
According to the CDC, the average American woman is 5'4" and 170 lbs. I'd say that's about 50 lbs. above her ideal. My suggestion would be to strive for an ideal weight and the ability to do a single perfect pull-up and to keep one's hair grey, as this would prove infinitely more salubrious than cosmetics or cosmetic procedures or bimbo-posting online.
Anyway, I seem to be talking past the article and the commenters here, and also to take no joy in casual misogyny.
Bravo, Dr. Winegard!! I've made this same sort of argument to my feminist relatives, which immediately makes their heads spin and explode...
It is ironic that "feminists" can be characterised by a deep (wilful?) ignorance of female biology. Silly political fantasies inevitably result.
Intra female competition is a staple of evolutionary biology:
"Most of these images exploit men's mating psychology that evolved in a very different mating environment. The potential damage inflicted by these images affects women as well because they create a spiralling and unhealthy competition with other women. Women find themselves competing with other women to embody the images they see daily – images they believe are desired by men. The unprecedented rates of eating disorders and cosmetic surgery may stem in part from these media images. The images work by exploiting men's existing evolved standards of beauty and women's competitive mating mechanisms on an unprecedented scale." [David Buss - "Evolutionay psychology"]
Bo I was just talking about the Victorian concept of the angel in the house in a X spaces about the red pill adoption of Peter Wright'' "gynocentrism". I told Wright & Elam yeaes ago that it's more correctly ovocentism but their genuine misogyny won't have it.
As Frank Wright says - ‘feminism - liberating women from womanhood’.
Interesting article. Interesting problem.
I think the problem is deeper in women's culture than just feminism. When i retired i had a lot of time so i read whatever was laying around at our house. My wife had a pile of "good" Regency romance novels. One characteristic was that many of the women in the books were younger daughters. Often (sometimes?) the would mention an older sister who was claimed to be the most beautiful woman in the ton, a "diamond of the first water". These women were always still young and often had just a single child. Or no child yet. None of the diamonds were grandmothers yet. I think that thread in Regency novels is an indication of a common fear in women that as they mature they are no longer beautiful. Sigh.
One of the most beautiful and moving things I've ever read. I deeply mourn everything we've lost.
Keep Hewitt posting
A brilliant analysis. Should be seminal reading for all young men and women. This is REAL education. Bravo! Will share as far and wide as I am able (and permitted!)