Coincidence?

Coincidence?

John Bayko
John Bayko

April 30th, 2005, 3:51 am #1

Women wear make-up, and women wear bras.

Men don't wear make-up, and don't wear bras.

Coincidence? Or conspiracy?

Discuss...
Reply
Share

michaela
michaela

April 30th, 2005, 2:30 pm #2

I have always thought it was interesting that this is so. Woman also wear high heels, pantyhose, dresses, shave their legs and underarms, and men don't. It seems women are doing a lot, and spending an enormous amount of time and money to change the way they look. While men don't do anything but maybe shave their face. Any thoughts on all this?
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

April 30th, 2005, 3:04 pm #3

Well, not to be sexist here, but isn't it still a fact that we expect men to initiate relationships- ie- the man is the selector- hunting his mate- and so women try to appear as 'attractive' as possible- to increase their chances of being 'selected'?
Reply
Like
Share

michaela
michaela

April 30th, 2005, 3:39 pm #4

Yes, I believe this is so. So here are my questions, why do we think this way? I mean, why do men have to be the selectors and women wait to be selected? And Why do both men and women think that the way women are in their natural state isn't good enough? Why is a mans natural face fine but a woman must mask hers in layers of make up? Why is it that curly haired women want straight hair and straight haired women want curly hair and brunettes want to be blonde? And why does every woman (except me) think that when they reach the age of thirty five they must cut their hair? Why do men cut their hair?

John, What is the conspiracy you mention? Isn't it the conspiracy to make woman feel like they aren't ever good enough so they will spend money buying products that men own and make men rich?
Reply
Share

Pat
Pat

April 30th, 2005, 4:26 pm #5

This might be simplistic, but I think one reason is that women are smaller than men, on average. Women rarely have ruled in civilizations around the world because they were smaller. (How many great pygmy empires have their been?) With being smaller comes oppression. If women were the same size and strength, on average, I think civilization would be much different. I read an article a few years ago on various animal species. The ones in which males and females were the same size were monogamous; the ones with a huge difference in size were typically polygamous; humans are near the same size but women are a bit smaller and humans are considered by some scientists to be "predominately" monogamous. Some species, like black widow spiders, have substantially larger females than males, and well, suffice it to say they are polygamous.

As for your specific questions, wow, those are some good ones. I hope some of our forum members have some good answers. I'll take a crack at a couple..

-"So here are my questions, why do we think this way? -- Millennia of oppression (see above)

-"Why is a mans natural face fine but a woman must mask hers in layers of make up?" -- For much of history, men have obtained as beautiful a wife as his wealth could afford him and women have obtained as rich a man as their beauty could afford them. I don't like this either, but it appears to be true much of the time, as women have necessarily depended on the wealth of men for much of history.

Fortunately, in parts of the world, especially parts of western civilization, the concept of gender equality has taken hold (especially in places like Scandinavia), and women have gained more rights. It's changing, but reversing a long history is taking a while, longer than most of us think it should be.
Reply
Share

Pat
Pat

April 30th, 2005, 4:30 pm #6

oops, I meant to say black widow spiders are polyandrous.
Reply
Share

peter
peter

April 30th, 2005, 4:53 pm #7

This might be simplistic, but I think one reason is that women are smaller than men, on average. Women rarely have ruled in civilizations around the world because they were smaller. (How many great pygmy empires have their been?) With being smaller comes oppression. If women were the same size and strength, on average, I think civilization would be much different. I read an article a few years ago on various animal species. The ones in which males and females were the same size were monogamous; the ones with a huge difference in size were typically polygamous; humans are near the same size but women are a bit smaller and humans are considered by some scientists to be "predominately" monogamous. Some species, like black widow spiders, have substantially larger females than males, and well, suffice it to say they are polygamous.

As for your specific questions, wow, those are some good ones. I hope some of our forum members have some good answers. I'll take a crack at a couple..

-"So here are my questions, why do we think this way? -- Millennia of oppression (see above)

-"Why is a mans natural face fine but a woman must mask hers in layers of make up?" -- For much of history, men have obtained as beautiful a wife as his wealth could afford him and women have obtained as rich a man as their beauty could afford them. I don't like this either, but it appears to be true much of the time, as women have necessarily depended on the wealth of men for much of history.

Fortunately, in parts of the world, especially parts of western civilization, the concept of gender equality has taken hold (especially in places like Scandinavia), and women have gained more rights. It's changing, but reversing a long history is taking a while, longer than most of us think it should be.
As you well point out that males historically have been in the dominant position as a result of tradition, wealth, physical stauture, etc.... All of this is now turned. Women do have the opportunity to far exceed men should they choose to in the wealth dept, tradition has been for the most part ignored and placed on the back burner so to speak and when all else fails women know that men have to go to sleep some time ..... so the playing field becomes considerably leveled as far as physical dominance goes.

With all the gains made by women, the strengths gained and the confidences obtained, they should be equally the aggressors, and quit hidding behind the masks and binding expectations of the "male dominating" mentality.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

April 30th, 2005, 6:05 pm #8

Well all this sounds good in theory, but as one who well remembers the strident "Women's Lib" movement of the 1960s, I think remarkably little has changed in 40 years. Yes, sexual discrimination is less "institutionalized" now- we have women in the army and unisex terms and laws which are suppose to prevent discrimination, but according the one survey I saw there are now less women in corporate management then there was 20 years ago. I can count the number of women CEOs I know of on one hand. Young women of today seem very much like those of the '50s- more concern with finding a husband and having a family then climbing the corporate ladder.
Reply
Like
Share

michaela
michaela

April 30th, 2005, 6:57 pm #9

Let me pose a hypothetical question having to do with the externals I was asking about before...

If I were going on an interview in some big corporate office and I walked into my interview wearing a nice suit consisting of slacks and matching jacket cut in a womans style with a blouse and a nice pair of flat shoes, my long hair is pulled back into a nice single braid, and i am wearing simple jewelry, no make up or nail pollish, and I have all the qualifications and education required. I am dressed bacically like the men there except for the tie and big shouldered suit jacket.

I have my interview, and then another woman comes in for an interview wearing the peach suit with the above the knee tight skirt and matching jacket with a lacy cami for a top under her jacket, hose, high heels, make up and power hair cut bleached blonde. She has the same credentials as I.

Depending on who it is conducting the interview, who do you suppose will be hired? And why?
Reply
Share

JB
JB

April 30th, 2005, 10:55 pm #10

I have always thought it was interesting that this is so. Woman also wear high heels, pantyhose, dresses, shave their legs and underarms, and men don't. It seems women are doing a lot, and spending an enormous amount of time and money to change the way they look. While men don't do anything but maybe shave their face. Any thoughts on all this?
It kind of seems as though women do those things at least in part to seem attractive either to themselves or to others. If a man does that, at least in an obvious way, he might be seen as a fop.
Reply
Share