Good for Ms Hayek. 

I never “weaned” any of my kids; they breast-fed until they didn’t want to any more.  One of them was still coming back for the occasional taste at four years old. 

Of course, I lived in a different world then.  The only time I noticed people being uncomfortable about it was when I ventured into “regular” society.  Had to see my mother now and then.  (She breast-fed us by the way, for all of about eight months.)

Selma Hayek can breastfeed me anytime!

Moderator’s note: I’m only leaving this up as a stellar example of how men who suffer from inability to read or other strong inadequacies take it out on women for being women.

If she rejects the misogynist assessment of women and reacts with anger, then she is accused of having no sense of humor or not being able to take a compliment.

And the immediate “Why are you so angry? God what a bitch!” and playing ignorant that so many men do.

Breast feeding is something that we continually try and socially discipline.  Time after time when women have attempted to feed our children in public we have been ordered into change rooms, bathrooms are asked to leave the premises.  Many have no problem expressing discomfort at the site of a woman feeding their child because breasts have become the sexualized play things of men.  The fact that breasts might have another purpose completely removed from male sexual pleasure is abhorrent to patriarchy because women are deemed property.

This of course competes with the idealized mother social construction.  Once becoming a mother the pressure to breast feed by the medical establishment is enormous.  If for some reason you cannot or won’t you are immediately judged a bad mother. The idea of judgment helps keep the exploitative wet nurse industry in business. You can still provide the best for your child, just pay some poor disenfranchised WOC to act as a milk cow,

I find the whole breastfeed because otherwise your a shitty mother and don’t breastfeed because breasts are for sex to be competing messages.  No where in either side of the debate are women humanized enough so that what we want or say about our bodies matter.

Big deal. I knew two women who breastfed to four.

Aside from the reproduction, hormonal stuff, providing a place to kick, and teabagging, testicles just aren’t all that useful.  But if I ever get tired of them, they’ll always have a place on my rear bumper.

*snort*

“Recommendations for optimal breastfeeding
The World Health Organization and UNICEF recommendations on breastfeeding are as follows: initiation of breastfeeding within the first hour after the birth; exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months; and continued breastfeeding for two years or more, together with safe, nutritionally adequate, age appropriate, responsive complementary feeding starting in the sixth month.”

I’ve heard large breasts be called ‘milk jugs’. I think men are a lot more ambivalent about big boobs than you’d think. I developed early and big, so I’ve seen a lot of the ‘attraction with disgust’ thing.

As someone whose first thought, upon seeing those pictures, was “va va VOOM!” I don’t think *all* the people who post comments like those are trying to put Salma down.  Some, sure, but not all.

Amanda:  After reading your post, I was put in mind of Jack Lemon (in drag) talking about men with Marilyn Monroe in Some Like It Hot..  “Beasts!  Big, hairy beasts”!

Sorry, I’m reminded of the Little Britain sketch with the adult child of an upper class couple wanting “bitty”...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8orUaCJ0GY

I find the whole breastfeed because otherwise your a shitty mother and don’t breastfeed because breasts are for sex to be competing messages.  No where in either side of the debate are women humanized enough so that what we want or say about our bodies matter.

I can’t remember where I saw this statistic, but apparently the #1 factor in how long a woman breastfeeds is her husband/boyfriend’s attitude towards it.  Women whose male partners are supportive breastfeed for longer than those whose aren’t.

Other that “women are public property, and most especially attractive, successful women”, what can this possibly be about?

It’s nice living somewhere that breastfeeding is just not an issue. (OK, it’s a little bit of an issue if you don’t.)

Seriously… not only is it her business, not ours, but *what phoenician said re: the world health organization & unicef.*

Good for her for standing up for the right to do what’s best for her baby!

I’ve seen a woman breast-feeding an older child only once, and it was in the sort of place (a cafe in Somerville, MA) where you’d expect such a thing to be allowed. It was a deeply disconcerting event, but I think mainly because it’s just not something you see very much in our culture.

I’m a guy. I certainly like looking at breasts; that’s a caveman thing I’m kinda stuck with. But I’d like to think I know better than to judge someone based on just feeding their child.

I’m not sure how to articulate this as precisely as I’d like to, but isn’t there a difference between something like “objectification” and “putting women in their place”?  Are all the comments working together such that the lascivious ones are _also_ attempting to demean or shame Salma Hayek?  The ones about how the baby is too old for this _are_ doing that, but are all of them? 

There’s something more than a little creepy about wishing to be a breastfeeding infant because it would enable an adult sexual fantasy, and there’s no reason why anyone’s breasts ought to be the subject of a stranger’s comments, be they approving or disapproving.  But I’m not sure I see the shaming.  Or is the idea that the sex-fantasy part arises from the idea that if Salma Hayek likes breastfeeding even when the baby is (supposedly) too old, then maybe it’s become something kinky for her?  Ugh, it creeps me out just to write that.  I’m sorry.

Couple of points I would like to make as an anthropologist.  First, breastfeeding for more than a year is far from unusual.  In nonindustrial societies two years is common, as mother’s milk is one of the best sources of nutrition, and among mobile foragers (people who live entirely off wild foods) four years is comon if not the norm.  This reaction to breastfeeding reflects the efforts of makers of artificial formula.

Second, scientists, as opposed to sexist pricks, “obsess” about the function of human breasts for the same reason as they obsess about the appendix.  The permanently enlarged breasts of human women, like the appendix, serve no discernible biologic function (unlike testicles) while imposing significant costs on the organism.  Generally, evolution eliminates or reduces organic structures which serve no vital function in order to conserve resources.  Permanently enlarged breasts are not necessary for lactation and seem not to be linked to that (our closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos do not have them).  Various explanations have been put forth, but none seems entirely satisfactory or compelling, though some sort of sexual selection seems the strongest contender.  Even that would be odd as it would represent to only example of male sexual selection of which I am aware (in other species it is the females who do the selecting).  That said, you are perfectly correct about the popular obsession with breasts.

Or, to be shorter about it, leering and shaming are both bad, and both are demonstrations of the power of the “male gaze,” but IMHO they’re differently bad, not two sides of the same coin.

I saw that post, and I thought the title that Lauredhel used summed it up beautifully: “Salma Hayek “still” breastfeeding - world can’t decide whether to jerk off or prosecute”

to make fun of her by saying that you want to suck her tits

I’m not sure that the leering comments—which are still bad, I will overcompensatorily say—are “making fun of her,” though… 

However, on second thought, the jokes involving as a premise that “if she likes breastfeeding so much maybe she’d feed me, teehee” are doing something different from the run-of-the-mill “nice tits” comment.

A bit of the Rusty Warren for ya:

Mammary Glands
Woah -oh- 0h
Mother Nature’s dairy delight!

You can make cream or butter
‘Cause it’s just a human udder!
A natural mammilian sight!

Mine weaned at 16 months of age, so, um, big deal that Hayek is actually doing what is recommended given that she has the control over her life to do it?

Warren also sang:

Bounce your boobies, let ‘em rock & roll
Nudge your knockers, keep ‘em hot, and so.
Just admit it gals, it sure feels great
to feel them swingin’, ooh and titilate!

So much for the repressed 40s, 50s and 60s!

of course they’re going to reach straight for their male privilege to lord her female body functions over her.

But wouldn’t that take the form of disgust or humiliation, rather than leering desire?  “She shouldn’t do that, it’s sick” is a different reaction than “I wish that was me,” even though both diminish the dignity of the whole person Salma Hayek.

I am still breastfeeding my son and I have had many people tell me that seeing a 2 year-old nursing is gross or sexual.  When you turn an act of nurturing a child into a sexual tableau you are making suggestions of pedophilia/exhibitionism, which is incredibly shaming for the mother you place in that position.

Sorry, as a nursing mother I find nothing complimentary about men expressing their desire to nurse from my breasts or telling me they still look beautiful despite the nursing. It is a reminder that my breasts are not my own, but sexual objects; it is a reminder that some random man has “forgiven” me for putting my breasts to any other use than as sexual playtoys.

As someone whose first thought, upon seeing those pictures, was “va va VOOM!” I don’t think *all* the people who post comments like those are trying to put Salma down.  Some, sure, but not all.

Well, yeah, the pic certainly got my attention.  But, you have to understand, I believe that what happens inside my skull is one thing, but posting demeaning comments on a forum is quite another.  Just about any woman will tell you that there’s light years of difference between being politely cruised and being creepily catcalled.  Much as I think Mrs. Hayek is looking quite nice these days, I am capable of retaining my senses of being polite, rather than contributing to a hooting chorus of primates.

I’m afraid that I just don’t get the whole breast thing.  Apparently I’m in the minority of males who just don’t find large breasts attractive (what’s next, sexy goiters?) and I find it horrifying that a woman would undergo surgery to plastic sacks crammed under their skin to try to make themselves more “attractive” to men looking for a new mama.  What really makes me shudder though is when I hear guys talking about sucking milk from a woman’s tits….WTF is THAT about??  I mean, isn’t the whole motherhood-sex connection just a wee bit Oedipal?

there’s no reason why anyone’s breasts ought to be the subject of a stranger’s comments, be they approving or disapproving.  But I’m not sure I see the shaming.

How do you feel, then, when men leer at and comment on your breasts (which I presume you have, from what you’ve written)? More precisely, because many of us are able to react with anger or dull apathy,  how do you think they want you to feel?

There are a lot of trolls here who, I imagine, engage in this kind of behavior, but I think that even they, even behind the shield of internet anonymity, would not expect anyone to believe that they want or expect the woman to respond with arousal or delight. Guys who say this stuff to women want a response, and they want it badly (just try pretending you didn’t hear, and see how they take it.) What do you suppose they want, since we know it’s not anger or pleasure or gratitude? What seems unlikely to you about shame and fear?

Idio, why is a tableu of pictures of the bodacious tatas of a beautiful woman a “visual assault” which deserves a mindless comment?  Why does that mindless comment become Amanda’s fault and not your own?

Think about it.

history_mom:  I think that’s a great concise explanation of how what I was seeing as two strands of reaction might really be one, the “sexual tableau.”  Just FYI, I hope that the second part about how it’s not a compliment wasn’t a reaction to something I wrote, because I certainly didn’t mean to suggest that any of these remarks should be considered compliments.

Amanda -
As I indicated in my post, I agree entirely about the leering and jeering.  Have to say I have never quite understood the American male obsession with breasts (too the exclusion of all else).  I certainly find them attractive, but that is hardly the primary feature I look for in a woman (which would be intelligence and humor).  American society does significantly seek to biologize women and thereby naturalize their social subjugation.  Worth noting that among the !Kung San (a mobile foraging society with gender equality), women frequently publicly ridicule men for their “shortcomings” and poor sexual performance.

It’s obscene! once a kid has TEETH, the breastfeeding can stop! THey can eat mushy food now!

This is so ignorant ... my kids DID NOT have teeth at 13 months.  They were also unable to drink cows milk and most formulas because they could not handle the lactose levels.

Traditionally, women nursed children for 18 months to 4 years depending on local circumstances.  My pioneer female ancestors cranked out kids almost exactly every 2 years like clock work because of nursing surpressing fertility for a time, no doubt.

Apparently I’m in the minority of males who just don’t find large breasts attractive (what’s next, sexy goiters?)

Yeah, but don’t worry, you’re in the majority of males who think expressing a visceral contemptuous disgust for the normal range of female bodies is the best way to get attention. And you’d be right, except there’s just so many of you that you tend to blend together after a while.

Oops, Mammary Glands was actually Kristin Lems: http://www.kristinlems.com/music-3.html

@ sophonisba* : Actually I’m male, and would self-identify as a straight male unapologetic feminist.  In this discussion I was more interested in trying to figure out where the lascivious comments (hot!) overlapped with the judgmental ones (gross!).  It initially seemed contradictory to have both be subsets of “shame” or “putting women in their place.”  But history_mom’s explanation clarifies it for me quite well.

* Where does your nickname come from?  I’ve just been researching plays about Africa and Rome, and Sophonisba comes up a fair amount.

This is one of those times where cultural scripts screw over everyone.

It’s at the point where some men grow up thinking that this is an OK/appropriate way of complimenting a woman. Even if they use these kinds of responses as legitimately sincere praise, the cultural baggage of the hidden message is still there.

It’s a shame, because I’d love to see a world where people in general were comfortable enough with bodies and sexuality to be able to make these sorts of comments with sincerity and with no risk of backlash or negative objectification—towards their own sex or opposite, regardless of orientation.

I remember when I was a lonely teenager, someone commented to me that I had lips that girls would kill for. I wasn’t sure if she meant that I had particularly feminine lips or that girls would find my lips attractive, but either way I actually took some solace in it. I had a very poor self image at the time, and the comment was a positive experience for me. Even now, I like being objectified from time to time… but I also recognize that I can enjoy this in large part because I am a man and objectification for men doesn’t come with the hidden power messages that it does for women.

I hate this whole “I’m a caveman, that’s my caveman reaction!”  Bullshit.  Yeah, because we womenz know nothin’ about teh science, and you’re a caveman!  Yikes…

It’s too bad the assholes who maks comments in bad faith have to ruin it for all the horny guys who know how and when to compliment you on your tits.

Raspberryjamba, I don’t think the commenter was using that for an excuse ... he was just differentiating his “ooh la la drool” unthinking and visceral response from his exercise of his greater and more mature ability to tell that part of himself to STFU.

Found this interesting, from a biological POV:

To make the case for natural selection operating on these fat stores, it is necessary to explain how fat deposition might increase the capacity of individuals with this trait to reproduce more successfully or produce more viable offspring than those without fat deposition. What, in other words, accounts for the selection of increased fat stores? And why did they grant some hominid females increased chances of survival?

Rose Frisch has demonstrated that it takes a certain amount of fat in relationship to lean body weight for the onset and maintenance of regular menstrual cycles (Frisch and McArthur 1974). In addition, studies show that there is a complex interaction between energy balance, body composition, and reproductive function (Huss-Ashmore 1980:82). The ability to store energy as fat has adaptive consequences both for maintaining physiological reproductive ability and for the successful rearing of offspring: both confer enhanced fitness (Huss-Ashmore 1980:84).

Females with greater reserves of adipose tissue were better able to satisfy the energy needs of their offspring through the fat laid down in the fetus, which could serve as a metabolic fuel in the newborn. Increased fat could allow a mother to produce a more adequate and abundant supply of milk for infants up to three years after birth. This may have been necessary as the period in which infants became dependent on their mothers for food increased. 

Although we do not completely understand the actual mechanisms of converting fat reserves to milk, there is indirect evidence that suggests that there is a conversion of internal fat stores to milk during nursing as well as the replenishment of these stores from subcutaneous deposits during childbearing years (Cant 1981:201). If increased infant dependency and scarce resources occurred in tandem, the contribution a mother would have to make to her child’s diet would have become proportionately more important.<u>The evidence from contemporary hunter-gathers, such as the !Kung San, is that mothers often nurse their infants for up to three years after birth, significantly longer than among any other primate. Such long periods of nursing in our evolutionary past would have placed a considerable energy drain on the lactating mother</u>.

Women in hunting and gathering societies today often have high workloads. If hominid females did as well, as is likely,  the pressure for selection of fat storage would have increased.  Studies indicate that during periods of high workload, fat individuals use adipose stores while lean individuals are forced to sacrifice muscle just at the time when muscle is most needed for work. Sparing muscle during periods of high workload would enhance the work performance of an individual and the productive capacity of the entire society. The combination of a female’s high workload and increased energy demands from prolonged lactation could have exerted considerable stress for the selection of increased fat deposition.

As a breastfeeding mother (my daughter is 10 months old, and we have no intention of stopping yet), I find those comments sickeningly offensive.  Putting the feeding of a small child in the same sentence as something sexual is pretty sick.

The stigma against women breastfeeding in the west is a fascinating, if depressing, study in sciencists attempting to control and better female biology (by telling women initially that fomula was “better” and breastfeeding was somehow barbaric) followed by pressure to get back to it, once they realised quite how wrong they were - but in the meantime, the social damage was done, so that now that pressure is unrealistic and unhelpful.

It’s a veritable cornucopia of mysogyny.

Part 2:

To Every Season

    Selection for fat deposition would have been most intense where energy resource fluctuation was large, regularly recurring, and of sufficient duration to invoke a physiological response. Such conditions are commonly encountered in seasonal habitats (Huss Ashmore 1980:87). A study by John Speth (1984), using geologic and ethnographic data, shows that the early hominid environment of east and south Africa exhibited just such seasonality. One indicator of seasonal stress would be loss of body weight. Speth points out that Gombe male chimpanzees experience up to 15% weight loss in the dry season and contemporary !Kung have been documented as experiencing approximately 6% weight loss during the late spring. It is highly probable that early hominids who possessed a much less well-developed technology than the !Kung, would also have faced periodic seasonal food stress and weight loss.

These conditions may have made fat reserves critical for hominid survival by acting as a buffer against caloric and nutritional deficiencies. And indeed, both human males and females exhibit exaggerated deposition of adipose tissue in comparison to the other primates. This fat deposition accounts for the great difference in birth weight between newborn humans and newborn living great apes. Nursing infants for longer than six months, the length of one plentiful season, would have placed stress on females, and it is likely that increased adipose tissue in the female, as compared to the male, is related to their role in child bearing and lactation.

    Given the adaptation of early hominids to seasonal environmental conditions, it is extremely likely that the potential for some males and females to store fat increased their reproductive success. In other words, they would have been more likely to survive as well as bring their offspring to reproductive maturity. This is clearly natural selection at work, not sexual selection.

One last note of interest, which is in need of further investigation, is the relationship between estrogen and loss of estrus. Females with higher levels of estrogen reflecting increased fat deposition may have lost a discrete period of estrus. Although the physiological processes associated with loss of estrus are complex, experiments have indicated that the female motivation to mate is influenced by circulating levels of estrogen and testosterone. With increased levels of circulating estrogen, due to increased fat deposition, hominid females may have become willing to mate more often. It would become increasingly possible for females, lacking a discrete breeding season, to be pregnant at times of the year not necessarily correlated with plentiful environmental resources. This would have increased the selective pressure for fat stores even more. 

Alternative Scenarios

Since the publication of our article outlining our natural selection scenario, other researchers have built upon our ideas and expanded our model. For example, Pawlowski has recently argued that fluctuating food resources were not the only selective pressure operating on early hominids. In addition, he suggests that the large difference between daytime and nighttime temperatures characteristic of the open environment of early hominids might also account for the importance of fat storage to early hominid survival. Those individuals with decreased amounts of fur were able to withstand very high daytime temperatures, but would be vulnerable to the very cold nights of this environment. Those individuals with more fat were better able to withstand these hypothermic conditions. Pawlowski, too, argues that permanently enlarged breasts are a side effect of fat storage. Under conditions of early hominid development, fat storage would increase the likelihood of the survival of individuals possessing this trait.

Conclusions

Whatever the exact selective advantage of fat, it is clear that the evolution of permanent breast enlargement in human females need not be explained through their erotic appeal to men. What my colleagues and I hoped to show by presenting our explanation is that a reasonable argument based on natural selection could be developed. Our model is not as “sexy” as the explanations that see breasts exclusively as erotic attractors of men. But it avoids relying on such poorly substantiated concepts as differential parental investment, female dependency, and sexual selection, ideas that may reinforce twenty-first century notions about women and gender roles but have little, if no, empirical evidence to support them.

Link

I used to teach “Mommy and Me” classes, and one day this new kid who was four years old RUNS to where his mother was, RIPS her blouse up and starts trying to breastfeed in the class.  It was very uncomfortable for the mother.  I think the kid saw a baby being breastfed on the other side of the room and just went for it. 
Not to say children shouldn’t be breastfed until they’re ready to move on, I think it’s good for the mother and the child, but in this case, I could see how ncomfortable it was for the mother.  It almost felt like the objectification was coming from her son.  It made ME feel uncomfortable about my breast…  Like I was some kind of vending-machine-in-waiting, or something. 
Maybe the objectification comes from early childhood, and we all objectify our mothers?

Sorry if my writing is not so great.  Amanda, I love your blog!

I believe that what happens inside my skull is one thing, but posting demeaning comments on a forum is quite another.

Well, I wouldn’t say anything like that if I thought Salma Hayek were reading this board.

Generally, evolution eliminates or reduces organic structures which serve no vital function in order to conserve resources.

I wouldn’t say breasts serve no function.  They get their size from fat deposits and fat is pretty useful.  And anyway, when a physical feature no longer serves a useful function it is as likely to start varying wildly in form as to atrophy; for instance, human height is not related to biological success, so we see a wide range of human height.  I’m not convinced that larger breasts resulted from sexual selection because I don’t think our ancestors ate enough fat to have large ones.  Yes, this is something I’ve thought a great deal about.

Sounds as if the mother you are describing was socially uncomfortable, not physically uncomfortable.  The problems there lies with the people around her, not the breastfeeding.

Dark Avenger -
I agree that there are strong evolutionary pressures on women to store body fat, but that does not adequately explain why that fat is concentrated, in part, in the breasts rather than elsewhere.  Among the !Kung San and some other African, southeast Asian, and Melanesian populations large amounts of body fat are deposited in the buttocks producing a condition known as steatopygea.  I also agree, as I indicated, that the sexual selection theory is inadequate and problematic as well.  At present we simply do not know why women have enlarged breasts.  It may well be a combination of factors rather than a single cause.  None of which justifies male objectification of female bodies.

I believe that what happens inside my skull is one thing, but posting demeaning comments on a forum is quite another.

Well, I wouldn’t say anything like that if I thought Salma Hayek were reading this board.

But you would say it where she wasn’t reading?  Or if it were ‘just us guys’ around to yuk it up over teh cleavage?  A big part of being a feminist man, I believe, is holding other guys to account and upholding some basic standards of behavior when women aren’t around to let the others know that they’re being pigs.

What really makes me shudder though is when I hear guys talking about sucking milk from a woman’s tits….WTF is THAT about??

John Doe (and anyone else questioning combining breastfeeding and sexuality), there is a community of adults that do engage in breastfeeding as a way of bonding with another human being and sometimes as a part of, or prelude to, sex.
There ARE people out there who genuinely desire this.  I’m sure it’s difficult to engage in this without some degree of objectification (after all, it is centered around an organ), but like all things sexual, it exists and those that seek it will continue with or without the approval of the public at large.

Sophonisba, I’m not keen on anorexia or obesity either, and apparently my pointing that out is a bid for attention.  We all (including you, probably) have a built-in “ideal of beauty” that is at slight variance with one other, and my own is pretty plebeian (mirroring ideals of western beauty that have fluctuated only slightly in a couple of thousand years).  Am I imperfect I don’t find the entire range of human physicality beautiful?  Yes, admittedly, I am.  In my own defense, however, I find real beauty to be something else altogether.

The current cultural obsession with breasts is a temporary one.  A walk through a decent museum will show that the fixation on hyper-tatas is a recent development and in my mind, equates to a rapid infantilization of males.  What, in our society, is the seed of this?  I’m not well versed enough in Jungian symbolism to break it all down, but women + huge breasts = food to many modern males, implying some sort of desperate hunger at some very deep level.

As creepifying as this is, even worse is that fact that women are being brainwashed into surgical options in order to act as enablers in this twisted shadow-play.  As anthropology, this is fascinating but as real world actions, the whole concept is bizarre and unpleasantly perverse. Yes, sexual body props have been in existence well before codpieces and bustles, but surgery to satisfy a psychological defect in males?  We all express ourselves in myriad ways, so if this works for you, go for it.  However, I’d suggest that the motivations behind such an expression need considerable reflection before such action is taken.

Yes, definitely socially uncomfortable.  But I don’t think the problem was the people around her… we’re very beastfeeding-friendly.  I think the discomfort came from having this child be so bratty about the breastfeeding.  A total little tyrant who wanted it then and there. 
Kinda turned me off of having children altogether. 

Yeah, the guys who catcall are just communicating with other guys, not with you.  Including the internet catcallers.  They just want to make like-minded friends, or impress the friends they already got.  Like yelling at the TV during footbal games.

raspberryjamba:

Breasts feed babies. Breasts also attract men. Sexual dimorphism—it’s a lizard-brain thing, and it’s also the elephant in the room that people are trying to suppress. I don’t think it’s sexist or disrespectful to say that as a man who likes women, when I see breasts, I think OMG BOOBIEZ!!!1!! However, neither do I believe that gives me license to disrespect or objectify the owner of said breasts or to make immature comments about them.

Look at it this way—have you ever seen any of the videos of GoGreen18 on YouTube? GoGreen/Laci is a young woman of 19, very beautiful, with very large breasts. She is also a top-notch vlogger with a great sense of humor and a lot of good stuff to say from the perspective of a college-age liberal atheist. There were two threads on Pharyngula about her, most of which seemed to revolve around whether or not dressing to accentuate her natural beauty damaged her credibility. Can we at least agree that it shouldn’t, and that smart and reasonable people should know better than to dismiss someone’s worth based on their looks?

We can’t delete sex from our daily interactions any more than we seem to be able to do so with race (cf Avenue Q, “Everyone’s A Little Bit Racist”). What we can do is understand when such things are clouding are judgement inappropriately and compensate.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I have several friends who, for a variety of medical reasons, couldn’t produce enough milk or any milk, and had to supplement with formula. They were excoriated by the La Leche League folks who populate most hospitals. My best friend was in floods of tears, saying she was a bad mother because she didn’t have enough milk (her baby was a preemie, and she was recovering from a painful c-section), and some horrible instructor told her her baby was going to be stupid and ugly (yes, really, because their mouth muscles don’t develop the same way if they suck from a bottle) because she had to supplement with formula.
My mom, a social worker in a neonatal intensive care unit, would tell me horror stories about her patients with HIV (the virus can be transmitted to an HIV neg baby by breast milk) being harangued by lactation experts who obviously had no idea (and had no legal right to know) that was the last thing they should be bugging these poor terrified women about.
Bottom line—a woman’s breasts are never her own, whether she’s been cast as sex object or milk truck. Gaah.

Notorious P.A.T. -
Again, as I said above, storing fat has important advantages, but the problem is why is it stored in the breasts.  For a variety of reasons, a more even distribution of body fat over the entire body or in the hips and buttocks would seem to be more advantageous.  One of the major biological differences between women and men is that women distribute fat more evenly around the body (it is what gives women generally softer contours than men).  They also store larger concentrations in the buttocks and hips while men store it in the belly.  Enlarged breasts, like enlarged bellies (speaking from experience in the latter case), are more obstructive to daily activities than storing it in the buttocks or evenly about the body.

Brian X:  That’s exactly what is wrong with you!  YOU think that because breast feed babies and are attractive to you, then of course, THAT’S what breasts are for, and we breast-havers should feel flattered that babies want to nurse and men want to catcall. 

But the breasts are stuck to me, and in my view, you and your leering and the babies and their pawing are like flies swarming a cow.  To the flies, the cow is there for their sustenance and nothing else.  To the cow, the flies are a nuisance while it is trying to graze.  I imagine that if the flies had more power than the cow, then the cows would have to feel flattered by the flies that swarm her.

FlipYrWhig: The second half of my comment was not specific to you. I guess with the recent troll infestations I am starting to make preemptive comments to address the inevitable “but it was meant as a a COMPLIMENT, you are just a humorless feminist” rant.

Raspberryjamba:  I’m sure the mother was uncomfortable with her child’s display, but more likely because he was a little tyrant in general rather than that the breastfeeding was an issue.  Of course, she may have been one of the mothers who desperately wanted to stop BFing but did not want to “hurt” their child by refusing the breast.  One of the nasty side effects of the “breast is best” campaign is that it has given some women license to insult and/or judge other mothers as insufficiently sacrificing/nurturing for their child’s benefit if they don’t practice child-led weaning.  These are often the same women that shame other women for choosing not to have a natural labor.  As others have pointed out, the patriarchy gets you from both sides.

John Doe (and anyone else questioning combining breastfeeding and sexuality), there is a community of adults that do engage in breastfeeding as a way of bonding with another human being and sometimes as a part of, or prelude to, sex.

I’m aware of this and differentiate between individual sexual expression and societal movements.  What I object to is the way this “fashion” (and it really has to be regarded that way) is being pushed throughout our society.  We aren’t talking about hairstyles here, we’re talking about unrealistic body images that seem to become more exaggerated with each passing day.  Males are being encourage to idealize a feminine form that is well out of natural balance (and has a disturbing underlying psychological component) and females are being brainwashed into a sense of inadequacy, followed by increasingly common surgery to address that “inadequacy”.

As far as adult breast-feeding goes, to each his/her own.  I personally find the notion rather repulsive, but people find sexual satisfaction in all kinds of ways that differ from one another.  As I see it though, breast-feeding and large breast mania are bound up together and it is difficult to separate them in the way you imply they should be.

One of the reasons La Leche sprang up in the first place was because medical professionals, unlike my mothers’ doctor almost 50 years ago, didn’t discuss the benefits of breast-feeding with their patients.

“One-size-fits-all”  approaches are the downside of advocacy groups, if they get to the point where every problem is perceived as a nail in need of righteous hammering.

Dark Avengger -
Thanks for the link by the way.  I will have to integrate this material into my anthropology of gender class this spring.  May even have the students read it (will have to see how it downloads).

Breast feeding is also a pretty effective natural birth control, as a having a breast feeding infant is fairly good (but imperfect) at limiting ovulation.  It helps space births, which has a lot of evolutionary advantages for a species like ours that puts a tremendous amount of resources into each offspring.

One of the very frustrating aspects of talking about evolutionary function, especially around sex and gender, is that we as a culture have a habit of reducing explanations of function into some weird singular purpose that has to circumscribe the totality of our behavior.  Thus ‘large breasts provided an evolutionary advantage because of X’ means ‘breasts are for X only.’  Which doesn’t make a lick of sense.  Evolutionary function explains why we inherited certain traits, not what they’re ‘for.’  Hell, the well endowed nurses my partner works with sometimes warm saline bags under their breasts.  (Always good for a laugh!)  Their breasts are ‘for’ warming saline bags as much as their breasts are ‘for’ sexual attraction or feeding infants (if they’ve ever had one).

Loneoak -breastfeeding is even more effective in pre-industrial societies where women re less well fed and have lower proportions of body fat.  (Breastfeeding inhibits ovulation both through hormonal mechanisms and through reducing body fat reserves).  In many of these societies women do not menstruate every month even when they are not lactating.

Is breast feeding effective birth control, or is that a myth perpetuated by the catholic church so women will end up having more children?
I know lots of people who are less than one year apart from siblings, and I know my mom got accientally pregnant while breastfeeding. (Just look at Britney’s little sister!)
So, is breast feeding effective birth control, or is it like when the nuns at school say the rhythm method is the best?

I just want to also point out that breast size may or may not be correlated with the amount of fat inside said breast.  In some cases it’s fibrous tissue that contributes to size.  Breasts can be dense with this tissue, or they can be more adipose.  I’m sure there’s a lot of anecdata about women who lose a lot of weight but don’t lose weight in their breasts, which wouldn’t make sense if they were mostly fat.

raspberryjamba -
Breastfeeding inhibits, but does not prevent ovulation.  The effects arise from multiple sources including hormonal action and reduction of the mother’s store of body fat.  It is quite clear that the better fed (not necessarily nourished) the mother is, the less the effects on fertility reduction.  Rose Frisch (cited above) and others have shown that among mobile foragers and some subsistence cultivators it has a significant impact and contributes to lengthening birth spacing.  It does not seem to have a comparable effect for women in intensive agricultural or industrial societies.

dmliddy -
It is worth noting that many, but not all, competitive women body builders experience significant breast reduction.

Honestly…What kid could give those up?

sooo hot

and people fight to ban breastfeeding in public…

Suddenly , I’m in the mood for chocolate-chip cookies… etc. etc.

What fascinates and disturbs me are the men who seek any and every opportunity to revel in the Othering of the female body, through the traditional form of the back-handed compliment.  It’s hands down the favorite way to harass women and put them in their place in our culture….

I think this type of behavior might represent some kind of struggle between attraction to the woman’s body, hatred of the woman’s body for the potential loss of control that this attraction could cause, and a generalized misogyny/hatred of women. It’s basically a crappy way of dealing with sexual attraction.

No comment from Amanda about Salma Hayek’s decision to constantly wear clothing that can’t help but bring attention to her ample bosom (see photos above) or her taking acting roles that play up a sexy image.

As an infertile who has spent too much time looking at fertility charts and knows several breastfeeding women who were trying to conceive, overall nursing makes ovulation come later than it normally would, or erratically, and decreases the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. For those of you who don’t know, the luteal phase is the period between ovulation and menstruation, where progesterone fluffs up the lining of the uterus to make it fit to accept a fertilized egg. If your luteal phase is too short, or you don’t have enough progesterone, the zygote doesn’t implant OR the lining sloughs off before implantation is complete, causing an early miscarriage.

It is a reminder that my breasts are not my own, but sexual objects;...

??? Can’t they be both?  Is there some kind of legislation that removes your title to them?

I think it’s perfectly okay to react “hubba hubba” to a PHOTO of someone, male or female.  When you encounter the person, it’s a different story.

Dan - who cares what she wears or why?  Her wearing low cut blouses does not make it OK to say disgusting, immature, offensive things about her.  You’re a goddamn grown-up.  Control yourself around an attractive woman.

Sophonisba, I’m not keen on anorexia or obesity either, and apparently my pointing that out is a bid for attention….  Am I imperfect I don’t find the entire range of human physicality beautiful?

John Doe, of course it is OK to not be attracted to everybody.  I’m not particularly attracted to lots of different types of guys.  But I don’t feel that it is OK to denigrate their unattractive features by comparing them to things people think are “gross”.  Some men (and some women) have this nasty habit of saying what boils down to “I’m not a sexist jerk because I hate skinny girls/girls with big boobs/blonde girls/stupid girls.  They’re gross!”  They don’t seem to realize that its just as demeaning to women to hate the skinny ones with big boobs as it is to hate the curvy chicks or the ones with A-cups.  The solution is to not hate them at all.  Just go with what attracts you and politely decline that which doesn’t.

Dan, there’s no good reason why being sexually attractive in a public kind of way warrants demeaning comments or anything to be said about breast feeding.  Breast feeding does not exclude one from sexiness and sexiness does not exclude one from breast feeding.  That’s kinda the whole point about Amanda insisting that women are full human beings and only sexists try to enforce behavior as if they weren’t.

Is breast feeding effective birth control, or is that a myth perpetuated by the catholic church so women will end up having more children?

According to the OBGYN in my living room*, exclusive nursing every 4-6 hours is approximately 70% effective as birth control.  So better than nothing (or the rhythym method), but not nearly as good as actual birth control.

*okay, I’m actually in his living room

Breastfeeding is pretty decent birth control for some women (at least for a while), and totally ineffective for others.  If I relied entirely on breastfeeding to space my children, they’d be born 2.5 to 3 years apart, which isn’t too bad so far as it goes.  I’d have a whole lot more than two, though.  I know other women whose cycle returns pretty much as soon as the post-childbirth bleeding quits; I’m very lucky in that mine stayed away until 18 months with kid#1 and 22 months with kid#2.  (I breastfed #1 until she was 2 1/2 and #2 until she was a little over 3.)

One of the things that always blows me away about these discussions is how intensely regional the attitudes are.  I live in Minneapolis.  I breastfed my children in public when they were toddlers and did not use a shawl or a drape because the kids would pull it off; I was reasonably discreet, I think (I mean, I was wearing a shirt, and I would arrange the shirt around the kid to cover skin), but if someone got an occasional flash of nipple as the kid popped off I was not going to lose sleep over it.  I was never harassed or even stared at, though a few strangers did randomly stop to give me props.  Women in other states talk about being hassled for nursing newborns under a shawl or blanket and it boggles my mind.

There are so many other body parts that are both functional and recreational and we seem to be able to cope with that fact.  I think some of the weirdness surrounding breasts is that there was a period of several decades when almost no women breastfed, and so it makes some men profoundly uncomfortable that something they think of as a sexual part is used to feed babies.  (It kind of reminds me of that article from years ago about the men who saw their babies born and were SO TRAUMATIZED that they were NEVER ABLE TO HAVE SEX WITH THEIR WIVES AGAIN.  I thought those men sounded like whiny drama queens, and I’d say that the men who get all “hubba hubba ack eek!” over breastfeeding are cut from the same cloth.)

Hey Dan,
You’re saying that Salma is wearing clothes that call attention to her boobs, but at least in one of those pics, she’s wearing a brown sweater, and her boobs still look great.  I don’t think there is anything she COULD wear that would not call attention to her boobs.  Maybe this is great for guys like you who like to blame women and their bodies for anything from rape, catcalling, and domestic violence, to men’s stupidity, traffic jams and bad grades in high school.

I don’t think any of the comments are demeaning, except to the commenter. They are just stupid comments. They don’t threaten anyone, they don’t harm anyone. They are just dumb. Moronic, sophmoric, silly, foolish comments.

No one is trying to “enforce” any “behavior”.

Ay yi yi.

And if a man sees a woman as a sexual object it does NOT mean that he also does not appreciate her as a human being. It is not an either-or proposition. To say that a man sees a woman as a “piece of meat” really oversimplifies things in a grotesque way. It is more complicated than that.

Denise, for what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure you’ve mischaracterized what I was saying. I could find a large breasted woman perfectly attractive, but it wouldn’t be the size of her breasts attracting me (where did “hate” enter this conversation, by the way?).  To my way of seeing it, I’m not denigrating anyone, I’m simply pointing out a difference in personal taste to a societal trend.

Pepito, I’m not about to start acknowledging people’s value based on whether I find them attractive or not.  That’s pretty ridiculous. Everyone has some opinion on physicality, particularly stylistic options (you may have no qualms in telling people that you find a handlebar mustache absurd, for example), yet this is no comment on the value of anybody.

I’ve noticed something interesting and telling in many threads like this about women’s bodies on feminist blogs: men like to show up (by “show up” I mean they’re not always regular commenters) and pontificate about what they find attractive and what they find gross, even though nobody (as far as I can tell) asked. I think that’s what sophonisba may have been getting at in terms of wanting attention. Yes, you’re technically free to tell us what you like and don’t like, but it’s not really what we’re talking about. A less nice way to put this would be that no one cares.

To the uninformed person who made the comment above about kids with teeth being able to eat mushy food…  yes, my little girl with cerebral palsy was able to eat purees when she was one, but not enough to get all the nutrients she needed.  We made up the rest with breastmilk until she weaned (at fourteen months), and then she moved on to formula.

Every parent makes the nutrition decisions that are best for their child and themselves, and they shouldn’t be subject to public censure unless they’re doing something abusive.  Breastfeeding a one year old is NORMAL.

Also, when I saw the pictures of Salma Hayek I did admire how beautiful she is and I love her figure, but I don’t at all understand how that would shut down anybody’s ability to relate to her primarily as a human being.  I’m mostly attracted to men, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen any man so compellingly attractive that I had to immediately drop everything and act like a total asshole.

I read an article a while back that linked to a youtube video that showed a woman who was still breastfeeding her daughters, one was 5, and one was 8. She was an old hand of doing it discretely, but it felt sorta strange to look at, and I breastfed one of my children.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxv6R9fUO74

The comments are about what you’d expect, too….

Annejumps, the normal reaction to an opinion you don’t care about is….not to comment.

No, but I totally see what annejumps is saying.  Why do guys do this?  Do they want us to say: “Oh, good for you!”, or maybe they think they’re better because they don’t like big boobs?  Who knows…

What gets me is that if you take the misogyny at face value, you will not want to have very much to do with males.  There are very many males who delude themselves that women are attracted to the misogynist, but I am not, and those who think clearly are certainly not.  So you have these men who seem to want to persist in a direction that will only draw to them the sick and the dying among women.

raspberryjamba - rape and domestic violence is not the same as a stupid comment on a blog. Really. It is not the same. Different. Different as cheese and an airplane. Excusing a dumb sexual comment is not a slippery slope to justifying rape.

And annejumps - I didn’t realize that Pandagon was a feminist blog. Is it, Amanda? I’ve been reading (and enjoying) it for months. If it is, does that make me a feminist? Gay? A spy from the male-dominated, oppressive society?

Yeah, but don’t worry, you’re in the majority of males who think expressing a visceral contemptuous disgust for the normal range of female bodies is the best way to get attention. And you’d be right, except there’s just so many of you that you tend to blend together after a while.

sophonisba, this “mammarily gifted” lady thanks you from the bottom of her heart for that.  I was trying to think of a withering response to that guy’s asshattery but nothing was forthcoming.

You know, it IS possible to love, respect and appreciate a woman as an equal adult human being while simultaneously saying to her, “Hey, nice rack”.

I think some of the boys in this thread are trying to describe the inner conflict between the “hubba hubba” conditioned reaction and the conscious mind that knows that women are people.

Again, speaking only for myself, I like looking at those pictures above because they are pictures of a person.  If someone made a rubber or wax copy of Salma that looked exactly like her, I wouldn’t be interested because I’m into people, not things.

storing fat has important advantages, but the problem is why is it stored in the breasts

I had a professor who hypothesized that women’s chests evolved over the years to look like/remind men of buttocks.

Oh, and if big chests provided such a great evolutionary advantage, then just about all women would have big chests.

Notorious P.A.T. -

I have heard that one about breasts and buttocks as well (comes from the notorious sexist asshat Desmond Morris), but never really bought it.  You also make a good point about variability of breast size.

annejumps, exactly.

And as for you “I don’t like X on women” guys—not only do we not care what you like, we don’t want to know.  It’s an overshare.  By sharing your opinions on women’s bodies you imply that we’re supposed to be interested in every man’s assessment of our bodies, no matter who he is or where he is or whether we would ever ourselves want to date or fuck him, and…no.

I’m built like Calista Flockhart (not quite as thin, but then who is) and I don’t like hearing from men that skinny girls are ugly.  I know it’s supposed to make heavier women feel better, but it really isn’t cool.  There’s no reason to dump on women who look like me.  If you don’t find me attractive, don’t date me.  Jeez.

No comment from Amanda about Salma Hayek’s decision to constantly wear clothing that can’t help but bring attention to her ample bosom (see photos above) or her taking acting roles that play up a sexy image.

*headdesk*

Look, dude, you don’t get to make disgusting comments about a woman just because she wears sexy clothes, especially when discussing something that has NOTHING TO DO WITH her clothes.

dick jokes resemble, to my mind, lolcats

I was reminded of the wistful limerick in a Kurt Vonnegut book:

There was an old man from Stamboul,
Who soliloquized thus to his tool:

‘‘You took all my wealth

And ruined my health

And now you won’t pee, you old fool.”

What ties erotic attraction and baby-nourishing together, in my opinion, is that the shapes of young women’s bodies signal their fertility. Attraction leads to sex, which leads to babies, who need sustenance. There’s nothing inconsistent about that.

The thing about guys like Dan is that they’ll tell us to lighten up about the disgusting comments made about Hayek.  Then, and often in the same breath, they will piteously bemoan all the “male-bashing” in the media because women go on Dr. Phil and complain about their husbands being messy or because the dude on King of Queens is portrayed as a buffoon. 

BTW, the Google ad on the bottom of this page features “Elite Online Dating” - Dating for financially stable men and attractive single women.  Join us.

John Doe, here is what you don’t seem to be getting:

You are telling every woman reading this thread that you assume that if their breasts are over a certain size (whatever means “large” to you), we look gross, we probably engage in kinky adult breast-feeding, and you will assume on sighting us that we had maiming surgery because we are so insanely desperate to please men who lack your sophisticated tastes.

HEAR ME! I hit a C cup at age 12 and they slowly continued to grow.
Nevertheless, I am intelligent and a feminist. I hate being thought of as sexy or worse, too sexy, because I have a body that triggers judgmental attitudes. I am a serious person. The only plastic surgery I have seriously considered is breast reduction.
And you are every bit as bad, or worse than, the men who leer and catcall.
You want me to know I am UGLY and should feel nothing but SHAME that these animal mammary glands are stuck to me. You let me—and every large breasted woman here—know that you have smugly judged us to be kinky.
Well, hell, the gay men here don’t try to cause us women the body shame you flung in our case, and they don’t find any of us sexy. So it’s not just that you don’t find us attractive—it’s that you are shaming us—the exact thing that the original post was about. You just found a different way to phrase it.

You know, it IS possible to love, respect and appreciate a woman as an equal adult human being while simultaneously saying to her, “Hey, nice rack”.

Dude, most of us here are aware of context.  I don’t think anybody has suggested that you shouldn’t talk dirty to your girlfriend. 

Salma Hayek is not your girlfriend.

Elaine Morgan, in her book “The Descent of Woman”, suggests that larger breasts come from the need of babies to reach the breast. An ape baby holds on to the mother’s fur to hang on around her nipple to feed. But human women don’t have body hair to grip, and a mother either holds the baby, or sets it on her lap. A baby may have trouble holding itself up to nurse long, but if a breast droops down closer to a comfortable level, will get a chance to drink more and thrive.

And annejumps - I didn’t realize that Pandagon was a feminist blog. Is it, Amanda? I’ve been reading (and enjoying) it for months. If it is, does that make me a feminist? Gay? A spy from the male-dominated, oppressive society?

In response to a thread with the feminism tag.

Obvious troll is obvious.

The fascinating thing about these conversations is that only very rarely is there any discussion about how and when it is appropriate for a man to see - and respond to - a woman in a sexual manner.

Selma Hayek is a very attractive woman, and probably a very nice person.  I have no reason to believe that I’ll ever be within 100 meters of her, much less have a chance to become a close personal friend.  If I did happen to meet Ms. Hayek and become a close personal friend I would undoubtedly be pleased simply because Ms. Hayek is probably a very nice person.

But, how does one move from simply being a friend to someone whose romantic interest is valued and appreciated?  In posts like this I see no approval for responding to a woman as sexually desirable, and lots of preference for dealing with men who do not respond to women sexually.  Since the world is full of intelligent women with wonderful personalities, strong leadership skills, and other traits that I like my friends to have this state of (lack of) affairs is fine most of the time….but I would like to get married someday….

(Saying ‘just treat women like human beings and they will be falling all over you’ is not useful.  Getting lots of female attention is, as the previous sentence describes, quite easy to do by being polite, respectful, and interested in what she has to say - but knowing when it is acceptable to assume that the interest is sexual is very very unclear.  And, in particular, if I have developed a good friendship with a woman I do not want to risk that friendship by being inappropriately sexual…..but apparently many women think that a man should ‘make the first move’.)

raspberryjamba:

You seem to have this conception that men aren’t allowed to be sexual beings without the explicit approval of the person they’re fantasizing about. You seem to think that a mechanism that evolved before the dinosaurs existed is not what it it evolved to be. Above all, you seem to think that you somehow have the right to exist in a bubble of perfect rights and complete comfort and that any attempt to defend or even explain what you see as an unconscionable encroachment on your personal space is an attack on women. I have a right to like boobs. So do you, if you happen to swing that way. What neither one of us has is the right to treat the owner of said boobs as equivalent to the objects on her chest. As a man of minimal social skill, that’s very difficult for me sometimes, but I try. I feel safe in saying that pretty much all men (even, I’m sure, a lot of gay men) have to deal with this, and some are better at it than others. Please direct your dislike to those who don’t even try.

dan, you must not read this blog ever if you have to question whether it’s got a feminist angle. and you’re saying that straight men can’t be feminists. hm. i guess that tells us all we need to know about you right there.

Donna - I am not telling you to “lighten up about the disgusting comments made about Hayek.”  I am trying to explain the mindset that will make those comments and I sincerely believe that there is no animosity, just stupidity. And it is disconcerting when comparisons are made to rape, etc. or people feel the need to explain why breasts exist.

“Then [Dan] will piteously bemoan all the “male-bashing” in the media because women go on Dr. Phil and complain about their husbands being messy or because the dude on King of Queens is portrayed as a buffoon.” No, because a) I don’t look for evidence of male-bashing in every comment I hear, and b) my self-esteem isn’t based on what I see on TV. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone seriously bemoan male-bashing. If Samantha or Carrie make some snide comment about a man or men in general, I am not personally insulted.

Women in hunting and gathering societies today often have high workloads. If hominid females did as well, as is likely, the pressure for selection of fat storage would have increased.  Studies indicate that during periods of high workload, fat individuals use adipose stores while lean individuals are forced to sacrifice muscle just at the time when muscle is most needed for work.

I’d have a problem with that idea - the female breast imposes significant problems for movement, whereas fat deposits elsewhere (such as the buttocks or waist) are easier to deal with.  Unless there was a significant benefit to having breasts, why wouldn’t female fat deposits be more like those of males?

It almost felt like the objectification was coming from her son.

Er, I’d say it was pretty much a given that four year olds regarde their parents as “objects” rather than “people”.

No, but I totally see what annejumps is saying.  Why do guys do this?

Possibly because what (mostly) women are saying in these threads jars with their internal experience, and since this is a discussion thread, they’re trying to convey that what you are saying just doesn’t add up.

Hey chibi - like I said, I read it every day. A feminist angle is not the same thing as a feminist blog. And as a straight guy, I can handle a feminist take on things. But this post seems to boil down to: men like boobies and make stupid comments, so men are evil.

I know that is not exactly what Amanda and most of the commenters are saying, but it comes across that way.

Hooray for Salma. She’s made a good choice for her baby. I don’t see why breasts can’t be seen in some contexts as sexual, and in other contexts as nutritional, and at times a little bit of both. No big deal here. I’m mature and confident enough to understand the difference and react appropriately one way or the other.

And I think the whole “breasts are feeding babies, they are not sex objects” line is a bit puritanical. Why can’t we (both men and women) have it both ways? I understand the difference, why can’t all these assholes commenting about Hayek understand it too.

You might as well say the same thing about women’s hips and butts. Their hips are angled a little outward to accomodate a successful birth, and they have a little more fat there as part of their genetic heritage to sustain a successful pregnancy. Am I therefore required to abstain from noticing that a woman has a nice ass because it is “for” her reproductive fitness? I think not! I merely have not to be a jerk and not stare too long or make unwanted comments.

Ditto Bacopa

Oh, I meant to add this too. Back when Dettwyler was at TX A&M;she published a study comparing dovelopmental milestones in other mammals to human development to try to see what might be a “natural” age to wean. 13 months is very much on the low end and 4 years is not that odd by her reckoning. Link to her original paper can be found here:

http://www.kathydettwyler.org/

The fascinating thing about these conversations is how they always devolve into anxious male hand-wringing about how best to get laid.

You mean I can’t just say “Nice tits?” What do I do, feminists? OH GOD WHAT DO I DO?

Samantha, your claim that I’ve stated that big breasts are gross, that big breasted women are involved in kinky breastfeeding and that they are big breasted due to surgery because of their insane desire to please men….implies that you have a serious reading comprehension problem. Read my posts again and sound the words out if that helps.

I’m perfectly willing to debate my position but not to satisfy someone’s need for recreational sophistry.  Allow me to condense and clarify: I am objecting to something societal, not personal.  I feel the same way about the pressuring of young women to have breast enlargement as I do about pressuring them to be ultra-thin.  It’s perverse and destructive.  How this is twisted in your mind into me attempting to shame you (and all large breasted women) for having large breasts is something I’ll turn over to you to explain.

You mean I can’t just say “Nice tits?”

You mean hearing those words doesn’t make you leap directly onto the speaker’s cock? Come on, it can’t just be me.

WTH is going on with this infestation of guys who want to be able to publicly exclaim over a woman’s breasts, and then get in a huff when we tell them that such things are unacceptable, especially in a feminist space?

No one here is saying you can’t find breasts attractive.  No one is saying you can’t have (private) fantasies about women you find attractive.  But to publicly comment about how the photos shut down your brain, especially when the attractiveness of Salma Hayeck is not the subject of conversation, is stepping over the line.

What is it about a thread about breastfeeding and the pressures women face that makes you think that your comments about the sexiness of women is appropriate?

(Discussions of why breasts evolved the way they did is an interesting tangent, and completely different than the ZOMG BOOOBZ!!! feel from some of these idiots.  Just to clarify.)

I sincerely believe that there is no animosity, just stupidity.

And there’s just stupidity in many people who joke about how n*ggers are shiftless or orientals are inscrutable, or jews are always interested in money. But all of those comments function to enforce racism, and all of them come from (perhaps ignorantly) buying into a belief system based on animosity.  Same with sexism and comments assuming that women’s breasts are about men’s interest in them.

And in 2008, almost 2009, it’s pretty hard to claim that you’ve been living in a monastery on Iapetus all these years, which is why you had no idea about proper behavior.

But, how does one move from simply being a friend to someone whose romantic interest is valued and appreciated?

My favorite trick is to treat women as a monolithic bloc, rather than as individuals. That normally goes down really well.

Brian and Dan - it’s OK to have fantasy lives. It’s not OK to tell strangers about your fantasy lives. Really not fair on the strangers.

As a non-breeding male, I have no dog in this fight.

But I want attention.
So thanks for reading

You mean hearing those words doesn’t make you leap directly onto the speaker’s cock?

Hmm - are we talking about the soft porn “I just can’t seem to keep my clothes on today” sense, or the hobnailed boots “and stomp his little goolies too!” sense?  You have to work on this ambiguity, JS.

WTH is going on with this infestation of guys who want to be able to publicly exclaim over a woman’s breasts, and then get in a huff when we tell them that such things are unacceptable, especially in a feminist space?

I’m guessing there were a lot of new readers after Jesse came back.  I believe both Atrios and Kos linked to Pandagon during Jesse’s Blackazoid series, and those new people may be unaware that this was an almost exclusively feminist blog for 2-ish years beforehand.  Or, maybe they were aware, but couldn’t resist being tools.

John Doe - the concept you are having difficulty with is that the pressure on women to be ultra thin is bad NOT because you think ultra thin women are unattractive, but because not eating enough is bad for the woman herself, irrespective of whether it enhances her fuckability in your eyes.

Given this, talking about how you don’t find “anorexia” attractive is problematic because there are plenty of women out there who are very thin without starving themselves, and plenty of women out there starving themselves who are not ultrathin.  Conversely, there are plenty of women out there who are naturally obese, and plenty of obese women out there starving themselves.  Your boner has absolutely nothing to do with the problem of women being taught to hate their bodies.  See, it’s not about you.  At all.  Once your realize that women are human, you will be able to overcome the tendency to default back to the only person you currently recognize: yourself.

I hope this clears up any remaining confusion on your part.

Pepito:

If you’re roping me in with what Dan is saying, you’re not really reading my posts. I agree perfectly. The issue here is that some men don’t realize that “ZOMG BOOBS!!!!” is neither civil nor respectful, and that some women don’t realize that most men do try to be respectful.

Yes, getting laid is sometimes part of the equation. But so is basic civility, respect, and the need to accept women as equals. Really. It’s possible to have it both ways, but only if the guys can hold back their lizard brain instincts and let intellect take over most of the time, and only if the women can avoid reflexive hostility. Most on both sides do exactly this, and that’s the way it should be. But there’s plenty who don’t, which is why it’s still a problem.

Jess D. Ripper comments: “The fascinating thing about these conversations is how they always devolve into anxious male hand-wringing about how best to get laid.”

      Indeed.  Men are told that we ‘have the responsibility to initiate sex’, and we are also told that if we are to be respectful towards women we must not admit that women are sexual beings.  And women are still taught that they must not be sexually assertive.  So what are men to do?

“You mean I can’t just say “Nice tits?”

        We understand that saying ‘Nice tits’ will not do it.  There are some men, too many men, who do not understand that, but there are a lot of us who do and we are getting pretty freaking tired of being lumped in with those idiots.

“What do I do, feminists? OH GOD WHAT DO I DO?”

        Quite frankly, yes, what do I do?  I want a woman who is a wonderful friend and equal partner.  But over and over and over I keep hearing that men who enjoy looking at a woman because she is a woman, or who would enjoy her company both because of who she is and because of what her gender is, are absolute jerks that no decent woman would give the time of day to, much less spend her life with.

          I am good at making friends.  I have a lot of friends and acquaintances who are women.  I like women.  If I had a choice between getting all of the physical sex I could possibly want and not having any friendships with women, or having many many women friends and no sex-life I would choose the latter in a heartbeat….but, like I said earlier, I would like to get married someday.

          How does a nice guy go about asking a woman on a date, hug her, kiss her, or proposition her without risking being seen as a complete asshole?  Becoming a good friend is obviously a prerequisite, but how does one move from ‘friend’ to ‘more’ without risking being told to go to hell for being lower than scum?  (And if she is suspicious about the possibility of a man being a friend, how do I reassure her that I do want a friendship without having to give up on, or, worse, lie about, the crush I may be experiencing?)

          It would help if there was a respectful way to admire someone’s sexual nature, but that is not how sex is seen in American culture.  Instead, I live in a country where I have learned that if a woman is aware that I like her general appearance, her cleavage, or other physical/sexual characteristics she is going to think that I am absolute scum, and probably dangerous to boot.

          If there is a way for a man to be seen as respectful, loving, caring, supportive and sexual I would love to know about it.  Until that day I will continue to be friendly, warm, appreciative and supportive - but I will keep my mouth shut, my hands to myself, and no matter what ‘body language’, ‘non-verbal clues’ or other ‘signals’ I am perceiving (or hallucinating) I will always always always assume that no matter how friendly a woman is she is not sexually interested in me.  The danger of being considered an asshole is just too severe to take any risks.

“You know, it IS possible to love, respect and appreciate a woman as an equal adult human being while simultaneously saying to her, “Hey, nice rack”.”

Really?  So, would you say it to your mom?  Your mother in law?  Your boss?  A cop?  A judge?  Your doctor, or professor?  Of course not, you know why?  Because it is DISRESPECTFUL.  If you are extremely close with a woman, and you have an agreed upon level of mutual irony that allows you to make comments like that knowing that you’re joking in a playful way, no problem.  Otherwise, you’re being a giant douchebag.

“But this post seems to boil down to: men like boobies and make stupid comments, so men are evil.

I know that is not exactly what Amanda and most of the commenters are saying, but it comes across that way. “

Seriously?  The post and commentators are saying that men are evil even though you know that’s not what they’re saying?  Can you explain that?  I mean, if you’re able to hold such perfectly contradictory thoughts in your brain at the same time, surely you can hold the relatively simple concept in your mind that no one cares what you do and do not find attractive and that sharing those opinions in spite of no one caring is irritating and juvenile.  We get that you’re straight.  Super duper straight.  You’re not in high school and no one’s “accusing” you of being gay if you don’t tell people how often you stare at tits.

The fascinating thing about these conversations is that only very rarely is there any discussion about how and when it is appropriate for a man to see - and respond to - a woman in a sexual manner.

The internal fantasy of a man is his own business. The stuff he chooses to share on the internet about this aspect of himself, though – that’s everyone’s business, so he should try his hardest not to be a sleazy fucking douchebag.

“I’m guessing there were a lot of new readers after Jesse came back.  I believe both Atrios and Kos linked to Pandagon during Jesse’s Blackazoid series, and those new people may be unaware that this was an almost exclusively feminist blog for 2-ish years beforehand. “

Seriously?  Jesse is responsible for these douches?  I feel so vindicated in being annoyed by his presence on this blog.  What the fuck is he talking about half the time?

oscar, I’m assuming you’re asking all this in good faith and not to bait anyone, so I’ll address you politely. If you like a woman, just ask her out. The line between “Would you like to go on a date with me” and “Nice tits” is not fine and not easy to cross. The woman may say yes or no. There is no way to eliminate the risk that she might reject you. There’s no way to guarantee that she won’t think you’re an asshole just for asking, although most normal women won’t. Consider how you might like to be asked out on a date yourself, and go from there.

How did this become “How can I praise a chick for her tits in a way that makes her like me”?  Straight dudes are weird.  And I say that as a straight dude.

oscarzoalaster, you really come across as a guy a lot of woman aren’t interested in, for whatever reasons, and so you’re playing the “nice guy victim” card.  there’s a whole lot of straw man arguments in your post, a lot of “men are told this, women are told that” kind of crap that really isn’t true. 

trust me, there are plenty of men out there who know how to woo women in a way that is playful, intelligent, sexy, and respectful.  talk to women that are in happy relationships, find out what their husbands did in the courtship and actual relationship that worked.  you might also try soliciting some honest feedback about how you are coming across that is causing you to be so unsuccsessful with the ladies.

Jesse is responsible for these douches?

This is utterly unfair to Jesse, who founded this place and has never to my knowledge been anything other than feminist.  I’ve been coming by before Amanda was invited on board, and remember vividly the sparring over Jesse’s too-middle-of-the-road liberal co-blogger, Ezra Klein.  Jesse is not “responsible” for infestations from Dude Nation.

@ Oscarzoalaster: Christ on a cracker, dude; just ask her on a date! Women are human beings, and not some alien species. Do to her as you’d want her to do to you if the situation were reversed. It’s simple. 

And it’s not like you can *accidentally* slip from polite conversation into a screaming frenzy about what nice tits your date has and how you wish you could SUCK ‘EM DRY – AGAGAGAGAHH…HUBBA HUBBA1!1111111111111111!!!

I feel so vindicated in being annoyed by his presence on this blog.

Well, you shouldn’t, because it’s his blog. Jesus.

For that matter, Amanda’s posts seem to attract a passive-aggressive or just regular-aggressive Dude element, but it’s always been that way, and the long-running “Nice Guy (tm)” series testifies to that.

And, I should add, Amanda is in no way “responsible” for those infestations either.  Pitting Jesse against Amanda, The Guy vs. The Feminist, would be a sad, sad thing to do.

How did this become “How can I praise a chick for her tits in a way that makes her like me”?  Straight dudes are weird.  And I say that as a straight dude.

Flip, didn’t you get the Asshole Straight Guy Newsletter this month? We’re derailing threads on the objectification of women to be about us, our fantasy lives, and what we want. Because Asshole Straight Guys are the only real people.

I’ve never seen a news item about a celebrities testicles - perhaps the closest we’ve come to that is Michael Jackson’s penis birth marks and that was probably only because he had already been so profoundly othered and exoticized.

But Dan’s whole “I’m not gay” schtick points towards the extent to which we only discuss men’s sexuality and not their bodies. Consider conversations around Tom Cruise and his daughter. While it wouldn’t shock me to learn that the rumors that he is a closet case are true, the relentless speculation and interest in his production of a biological child were unusual.

am trying to explain the mindset that will make those comments and I sincerely believe that there is no animosity, just stupidity.

Trust me, we understand the mindset very well. Explanation not necessary. It may be a good idea for you to sit back and listen for a while, until you work out the vibe here. I suggest the feminism 101 FAQ too.

didn’t you get the Asshole Straight Guy Newsletter this month?

Must’ve missed it.  But I’ll catch up.  Thanks, Breeder’s Digest!

Oh, and if big chests provided such a great evolutionary advantage, then just about all women would have big chests.

The evolutionary advantage of ‘large’ breasts does not mean all women should have D cups, only that all physiologically modern female Homo sapiens have larger breasts than all of our hominid precursors. 

But this post seems to boil down to: men like boobies and make stupid comments, so men are evil.

Ah, the classic “you can’t say anything bad about the patriarchy because then you said something bad about all men” defense.  Dudes who are new to this blatantly feminist blog: patriarchy =/= all men.  The patriarchy is evil, ‘men’ as a category of human beings are not evil.  Men who actively support the patriarchy through stupid-ass blog comments are supporting evil at least a tiny bit though.

but knowing when it is acceptable to assume that the interest is sexual is very very unclear.

Here’s a tip for you Nice Guys ™: Stop assuming and fucking ask. Seriously, this is not hard. If you are sexually interested in a woman, tell her that you are attracted to her. I promise, she knows what “I’m attracted to you” means. It isn’t ambiguous and yet it doesn’t include “Nice rack”.

John Doe, you say that you never denigrated women with large breasts but here is your first post:

I’m afraid that I just don’t get the whole breast thing.  Apparently I’m in the minority of males who just don’t find large breasts attractive (what’s next, sexy goiters?) and I find it horrifying that a woman would undergo surgery to plastic sacks crammed under their skin to try to make themselves more “attractive” to men looking for a new mama.

You compared large breasts to goiters. As a large-breasted woman, when I read that comment I felt the disgust emanating from it.  Guess what?  Feminist women do not need your so-called approval of small breasts or ample, non-anorexic bodies. You know why? Because it isn’t feminist to degrade the physical characteristics idealized in mass culture as disgusting in order to appreciate other female qualities.  It isn’t either/or—attraction to particular types of women does not mean all other women are disgusting.  Moreover, unless someone asks what type of woman you are physically attracted to, sharing that information unprompted is just another reminder that all women primarily exist for the male gaze, to be sized-up and evaluated for our fuckability.  The fact that men vary in their tastes means that all women get to experience the soul-crushing moments of having some man tell them they are disgusting simply for daring not to meet their personal fuckability standards.

And Dan: stop being a disingenuous asshat.  Nobody is saying men are not allowed to find breasts sexually appealing or calling them evil for seeing breasts as sexual.  Read the fucking post.

Oh, for FSM’s sake.

OIIP.

My guess is that posters, in general, at HuffPo are not terribly misogynist.

I consider the ability to laugh at one’s self and the human condition a very accurate predictor of one’s humanity and ability to introspect. 

Selma is a beautiful woman, with large breasts.  Many men (sadly?) would like to “be with” Selma Hayak.  BFD.  And here’s to women who want Liam Neeson, or any other man they find sexually attractive.  A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, if you ask me. 

I’m not much of a “breast” guy.  But that doesn’t make me think of jokes about great breasts.  I also can’t see a Hummer without thinking how small the dick of the owner must be.  Sheesh. 

I don’t see pure sexual attraction going away any time soon, nor do I see joking about it the impending death of women’ rights, attitudes towards women, or much of anything else. 

Patriarchy is bullshit.  And even though I know it won’t happen in my lifetime, trust me when I say if/when we ever become matriarchal, the same nonsense would happen.

As for her breast feeding, count me in as one who can only muster a huge *YAWN*.  That’s her business, not ours, period, end of story.

Amanda, I love you, I really do.  I think you are brilliant, pretty, articulate, strong and self-confident.  A perfect mix, in many ways.

I apologize for finding you sexually attractive.

Jesse is responsible for these douches?

This is utterly unfair to Jesse

It wasn’t Jesse’s fault - it was BLACKAZOID’S!

Man, tough crowd tonight.

How this is twisted in your mind into me attempting to shame you (and all large breasted women) for having large breasts is something I’ll turn over to you to explain.

Um, I think that was when you called big breasts “sexy goiters.” Let me go back and double check…Yup, it was the goiters comment.

You also said women who get breast enhancements just want “to make themselves more “attractive” to men looking for a new mama,” as if the only reason big breasts could be attractive is in a weird incest fetish situation, so that would be where you implied “that big breasted women are involved in kinky breastfeeding.”

But keep trashing our reading comprehension skills if it makes you feel better!

See?  That last line there, John?  That’s where you crossed over the line from decent to creepy.  Compliments?  Fine.  ‘I apologize for finding you sexually attractive. ‘?  Creepy.

Amanda’s attractiveness, your response to her subjective attractiveness, and whether or not she holds it against you that you think she’s hot?  Not even a little bit the topic of this post or this comment thread.  Bringing it up out of nowhere?  Creepy.  Thinking that it’s somehow on topic?  Creepy.

Patriarchy is bullshit.  And even though I know it won’t happen in my lifetime, trust me when I say if/when we ever become matriarchal, the same nonsense would happen.

This reminds me of a comment that Amanda made in a blog post recently about how some folks can only see the world in terms of violent hierarchies. Feminism is not about matriarchy at all. Matriarchy is a non-sequitur in this conversation.

I also like this comment: I didn’t realize that Pandagon was a feminist blog. Is it, Amanda? I’ve been reading (and enjoying) it for months. If it is, does that make me a feminist? Gay?

Yup, guys who read feminist blogs are gay. Straight guys would never do that, because it might make them feminine. That would be disgusting, like strapping on a big old pair of sexy goiters.

Compliments?  Fine.  ‘I apologize for finding you sexually attractive. ‘?  Creepy.

Yeah. It’s the self-pity that’s so off-putting. As if it’s not enough to appreciate someone’s attractiveness and even compliment them; you have to make it about you and your whine.

Good lord.

No one is taking boobs away from you, or sexual attraction. I think it’s safe to say everyone here likes boobs and sex. They’re nice.

The whole point of this thread was that some men make women’s bodies all about them. Unsurprisingly a bunch of dudes made this thread all about themselves. But maybe you’re onto something. Maybe the next time there’s a post about the economic crisis, or something else that isn’t sufficiently about me, I’ll butt in and be like “Guys, how can I get a date?”, or “Let me tell you what gives me a ladyboner!”, or “I do not like large cocks.”

“I do not like large cocks.”

Well, who the hell does? You might as well slap a big fat goiter on your crotch.

I’m totally loving the “sexy goiters” line.  It’s one of those transcendently douchy comments that are too good to leave behind.  I hope Amanda & Co. find a way to work it into future posts.

Well, as we all know, there are a lot of mind-readers on the intertoobs.

I don’t consider my attraction to Amanda “subjective” at all.  I’ve been reading her for years, and have met her.  I DO consider her brilliant, pretty, strong, self-confident, etc., etc.

I was trying to make a joke along the lines of the commenters on HuffPo, with a tad of irony.  Obviously, most jokes don’t go over well with 100% of the audience.  Sue me.

Amanda is a wonderful voice in the national discourse, and I respect her above all, even if I don’t agree with her all the time. 

I just don’t consider every man who expresses a wish to get close to Selma’s breasts, as I don’t consider a woman’s sexual attraction on nothing more than a particularly attractive (to her) physical characteristic of a man to be especially worthy of discussion, much less a broader indictment.

It is life.

It will never stop.  And it isn’t a bad thing.

Sign me,

Creepy in IL

I love this place.

Honestly.

You all make me a more thoughtful person.

As strident as many of you are. 

I’m not trying to be all philosophical here.  “Matriarchy” to me implies some sense of the feminine being in control of things.  At least a little, by definition, feminist.

It has been at least 15 years since I first said, “I wish women ran the world.”

At the risk of sounding all sexist again, I don’t think women would start stupid wars as joyfully, I don’t think they would tolerate unequal pay for equal jobs, and I think for a while, at least, the world would be a better place.

But then you’d start treating men like sex objects. 

Junk Science, I apologize for finding you sexually attractive right now. Actually, I apologize for sarcastically apologizing, because I’m not sorry at all! I can’t help it, I’m just a caveman. I read it in a book. It’s science, pillowy soft science! You are smart and funny and many good things, but it’s important that you know that I, an internet stranger, will be jerking off to the thought of you and you can’t stop me! Nyah!

I’m sorry, Jess D. Ripper. I was too busy staring at your breasts to hear a word you said. Please don’t repeat it, because I won’t hear it this time either. BOOBS.

Elaine Morgan, in her book “The Descent of Woman”

Oooooh yeah, I forgot about that.  And she’s one of my favorite science writers, too.  “The Scars of Evolution” is a must-read.  I think I gave my copy of “Descent of Woman” to my sister (hope she read it, grumble grumble).

The rest of us don’t count?  I mean, I’m not Salma Hayek, but that puts me in an uncomfortable situation of being pitted against other women

That’s a good point.  I’ve always thought it was low-class to talk about how pretty a woman is in front of other women.  It’s another case of “typing something on the internet that you wouldn’t say in real life”.

*sigh*

Jess/Karnac, please.  Don’t reduce either of us to a moron. 

I won’t be “jerking off to the thought” of Amanda ever.

Now that is assholitude. 

She is not an “object” to me.  She is all the things I said she was.  Added up, it makes her sexually attractive to me, even though I know she would find me beneath her, when it came to her deeply held beliefs.  I would share the feeling, to certain degrees.

Have I ripped on anyone personally out here?  I hope nobody has thought so. 

One of my favorite things about Amanda is her combativeness.  We share that characteristic.  When people do their mind-reading impressions of me, I dig it. 

So Jess, yeah, as a believer in evolution, I suppose there are certain “caveman” aspects to both man and woman I believe probably still linger, like “survival,” and “procreation,” and “community.”

Don’t be an ass.  I have time, and have not called anyone else here one.  That’s because I don’t pretend to know the fullness of your soul by what you post here.

No, not being superior.  Trying to be human.

John Doe, you’re a douchebag. That you cannot even see what is wrong with what you said is a big part of the problem. You come here and think that anyone gives a shit what kind of breasts you find more attractive? You want a cookie for preferring small tits? Fuck you.

Maybe PJ Harvey can make “Sheila Na Gig 2008” with these trendier lyrics at the end :

He said wash your breasts, I dont want to be unclean
He said please take those sexy goiters away from me

I am really offended by all of you jerks implying goiters aren’t sexy.  I happen to have a thing for grotesquely enlarged thyroid glands, you thyroxiarchs.

I like tits, period.

Thank you for your declaration that I’m a “douchebag,” chingona. 

I know you know.  Just like I know you’re a goat-fucker.

(See, I don’t.  Get it?)

Also, down with iodine!

Okay on rereading the thread I think some people need to stop digging.

John O, are you or are you not the same person as John Doe? I am confused on this point.

I have only posted here, or anywhere, as John O.

I haven’t seen a “John Doe” up there, and since I was more or less quoted I figured we were one and the same.

How can you tell a woman you find her good looking?  How about, “Hey, wow, you look amazing.”  Can’t think of a way to work that into the conversation (or lake thereof)?  Then you probably have information she doesn’t care about, so don’t be too upset.

If the most strident thing the commenters had been saying in response to the pictures of Hayek was “hubba hubba,” then this post wouldn’t exist.  Because that’s a pretty reasonable response to some pictures of a very attractive person.

PWI, I am laughing so fucking hard right now. You just took one of my favorite songs and made it even better.

There is no possible way, Punditus.

That’s because you’ll reveal yourself to be a shallow lookist sexist misogynist. 

And because women never have the same impulse.

Loneoak, I find your goiters very attractive. Now love me back, you heartless harridan.

A Guide To Keeping Your Johns Straight:

John Doe is the guy who compared large breasts to goiters. Sexy, sexy goiters.

John O just finds Amanda sexually attractive in a non-creepy, non-masturbatory way and it’s important that we all know that.

A Guide To Keeping Your Johns Straight

I don’t have enough to worry about with cops and STDs, now I have to remember the bastards’ names?

Thank you, Jess.

I would dispute my own need for anyone to understand the importance of my finding Amanda sexually attractive (what smart man wouldn’t?), but it wasn’t me who brought up said alleged importance.

Just to be clear, is their something inherently wrong with finding Amanda sexually attractive?

(Christ, Amanda, I’m sorry about this.  It’s just good dialogue to me, and I think it is healthy.  Please consider yourself, from my perspective, a metaphor for all smart, strong, self-confident, pretty, articulate women everywhere.)

Lame, Jess.  You can do better.

I rather like the turn this thread has taken. I’m giggling my butt off right now.  Parody away, Pandagonians!! (or would it be satire… )

Ugh.  Did somebody use the wayback machine to transport this whole thread to the mid-70s?

Because both sides of this argument, with minor updates, would fit right in there. 

Perhaps defining the parameters of what sort of breast-related humor/commentary might possibly be acceptable here would be a good starting point.  If the point of one side is that certain commentary is disrespectful and intended to perpetuate an overall effort to control the behavior/esteem of one gender, at what point does correction/adaptation/curtailment of that behavior begin to edge into an overall effort to control the behavior/esteem of the other gender?

Patriarchy is bullshit.  And even though I know it won’t happen in my lifetime, trust me when I say if/when we ever become matriarchal, the same nonsense would happen.

Has anyone ever advocated for that? Ever?

I think I am close to Bingo.

All humor of any kind, sincerely delivered, is good.

And history_mom, to whatever extent you’ve enjoyed my contribution, thank you.

Humans are the animal who laughs.

No, pepito, but we are hierarchical creatures.  It isn’t an unreasonable assumption that SOMEONE will take control/power.

Go, broads!

*duck/cover*

All humor of any kind, sincerely delivered, is good.

Because her dad is Janet Reno!

John O - I wasn’t talking to you. I was talking to John Doe, of sexy goiters fame. That’s why I addressed my comment to John Doe, not John O. But if the shoe fits, feel free to wear it.

Aww, c’mon, Lauren.  That was a crappy and mean joke.  But it doesn’t mean it wasn’t delivered to be funny.  Intelligent people could find it both funny and offensive.

You know, like walking and chewing gum.

Presumably if you’re in a room of 100 people, speaking, and you tell a joke that 1, or even 30, don’t find funny, you’re in the wrong.

I’m a free speech absolutist, to the point of wanting to repeal the fire-in-the-theater interpretation (high-tech fire alarms and all), and I support the rights of the ACLU and Nazi’s to protest, hoping that we all shout them down as a huge majority if that’s the way we feel.

America.  I love the concept.

Sorry, chingona, us John’s are used to being confused in the masses.

It was once a pretty common name. 

No offense (to that one) taken.

Intelligent people could find it both funny and offensive.

You know, like walking and chewing gum.

Even more intelligent people would find it unfunny and offensive.

You know, like walking and talking, or walking and thinking.

I’m not sure what your views on free speech have to do with anything that anyone is talking about. No one is even remotely hinting at legally punishing people for saying offensive or misogynistic things. Free speech has nothing to do with the sentence, “All humor of any kind, sincerely delivered, is good.” And is your definition of good really just “delivered to be funny”? Because I think that’s just linguistically inaccurate.

junk science begins with “oscar, I’m assuming you’re asking all this in good faith and not to bait anyone, so I’ll address you politely.”

  Thank you.  Although I am curious as to how you could have the misimpression that I was trying to ‘bait’ someone.  But then my not anticipating such an impression may be part of the phenomena.

and continues with “If you like a woman, just ask her out. The line between “Would you like to go on a date with me” and “Nice tits” is not fine and not easy to cross.”

  I disagree.  Because a date, ideally, eventually culminates in marriage and a long happy relationship – which includes a sexual relationship – asking for a date is an indication of sexual interest.  (I’ve been told twice by women that they did not want to continue to go out with me because I have not tried to kiss them, which even the second time it happened I had no idea how to respond to.)  “Nice tits” is far less elegant than “Would you like to go on a date with me”, but both – among other things – indicate a sexual interest.  And over and over and over, when I hear women complaining about men who say “Nice tits” it is expressed as, again, among other things, dismay that men express a sexual interest in women.

And notes that “The woman may say yes or no. There is no way to eliminate the risk that she might reject you. There’s no way to guarantee that she won’t think you’re an asshole just for asking, although most normal women won’t. Consider how you might like to be asked out on a date yourself, and go from there.”

  It is a nice idea.  But I do not think that I should arrogate to myself to decide which woman is ‘normal’ (and therefore potentially ‘safe’ to ask for a date) and which are ‘not normal’ (i.e. potentially likely to think I’m an asshole for asking her out).  I think it is better in the long run to simply try to do everything I can to avoid giving any woman a reason to be annoyed with me.  A polite deference seems better than labeling women ‘normal’ or ‘not normal’, even if I find that deference chaffing.

Re the whole “breasts as fake ass” theory:

Are these people kidding? How could breasts have evolved to remind men of a woman’s ass when, in their natural (i.e. braless) state, they don’t look anything like buttocks? Without artificial support, medium to large breasts tend to hang so that they slope away from each other, and small breasts sit somewhat apart from each other in their entirety. Either way, you don’t get the cleavage that would be necessary to create the impression of an extra butt on a woman’s chest.

Also, do men—even cavemen—really have such short attention spans that if a guy saw a woman’s butt and found it attractive and went to talk to her in the hope of hooking up, as soon as she turned to face him for the purpose of conversation and he could no longer see her butt, he would forget that he was ever attracted to her unless she had an auxiliary backup butt in front for him to look at?

Long story short, it was the 60’s—who knows what Desmond Morris was smoking when he came up with that one?

Sarah opines “oscarzoalaster, you really come across as a guy a lot of woman aren’t interested in, for whatever reasons, and so you’re playing the “nice guy victim” card.”

  A misimpression in several ways.  I am not playing any ‘card’, I am simply saying what I experience.  If I was willing to approach conversations as if they were card games I would not care what people thought of me and would consequently not have any worries about what reactions a woman might have to an expression of sexual interest.

“there’s a whole lot of straw man arguments in your post, a lot of “men are told this, women are told that” kind of crap that really isn’t true.”

  And those straw man arguments are?  I was writing what I have experienced.  I am fully aware that other people have had different experiences.  I would like to understand those experiences.  My experience of the world has some unpleasant and nonsensical contradictions, but dismissing my experience of those contradictions as unspecified ‘straw men’ is not helpful.

  I am very very certain that treating women respectfully and valuing them for their intelligence, personality, wisdom and other non-sexual contributions to society is a very good thing to do.  I am also very certain that humans are primates who value, and benefit from, being in a long-term sexual relationship that places a very high value on communication, sharing, and mutual respect.  My experience of the world is one that places these two truths in conflict.  I am aware that other people, some of them very ethical people, do not experience this conflict.  I do not think that the conflict between desire and respect that I perceive makes sense – but it is what I genuinely do experience.

And more gently concludes with “trust me, there are plenty of men out there who know how to woo women in a way that is playful, intelligent, sexy, and respectful.  talk to women that are in happy relationships, find out what their husbands did in the courtship and actual relationship that worked.  you might also try soliciting some honest feedback about how you are coming across that is causing you to be so unsuccsessful with the ladies.”

  <sigh>  My lack of success is primarily the result of a lack of effort.  Since I have not figured out how to initiate a sexual relationship without apparently violating the ‘do not indicate sexual interest in a woman if you want her to feel comfortable/like you’ rule my success rate is what you would expect of an intelligent, well-spoken, polite, funny, and handsome man who makes no effort to initiate a relationship.  My doubts have always been about the ethics and acceptability of being sexually persuasive, I have never had doubts about my ability to be charming, playful, or intelligent – provided that being sexy can be respectful.  Unfortunately my experience of the culture around me – including substantial portions of this thread – suggests to me that my expressing a sexual interest in a woman is innately disrespectful.

The Devil’s Advocate, who probably reads Pharyngula, comments “@ Oscarzoalaster: Christ on a cracker, dude; just ask her on a date!”

  If I had someone specific in mind there is still the problem that sexual harassment is defined as ‘any unwanted expression of sexual interest’, a date is intrinsically an expression of sexual interest, and a ‘no’ is a clear indicator that the expression was unwanted.  Some of us males really do take ‘no means no’ seriously.

“Women are human beings, and not some alien species. Do to her as you’d want her to do to you if the situation were reversed. It’s simple. ”

  I do not think that I can “do to her as you’d want her to do to you if the situation were reversed” if the thought is going through my head that I would absolutely love it if the woman I was talking with would put her arms around me, draw me close to her, and kiss me.  I see it happen all the time in movies, but to me most of that looks like assault.  My wanting something does not mean that a woman wants the same thing.  Unfortunately my experience of the culture around me tells me that it would be wrong for me to simply ask.  (I’ve even been told that I shouldn’t ask people questions at all, that it is impolite.  It is unclear to me how communication is supposed to occur.)

“And it’s not like you can *accidentally* slip from polite conversation into a screaming frenzy about what nice tits your date has and how you wish you could SUCK ‘EM DRY – AGAGAGAGAHH…HUBBA HUBBA1!1111111111111111!!!”

  <*sigh*>  If the distinction was as clear as you believe it to be I would experience no problem.  Asking someone for a date is much more pleasant, for many reasons, than the ‘screaming frenzy’ you describe – but both are an expression of sexual interest.  And my experience of discussion threads like this, conversations that I have been in, and a variety of other experiences, strongly suggests to me that if a man wants a woman to like him and not feel threatened, disrespected, or uncomfortable, he will not express any sexual interest in her, nor will he admit to being actually interested in, or discuss, sex.  (The most important part, of course, being to not express a sexual interest in her.)

  It would be nice if the issue was how artfully a man expressed an interest, but my impression is that the issue is that an interest is expressed at all and that this is because women experience male sexual interest as demeaning and dehumanizing.  I have no interest whatsoever in ever demeaning or dehumanizing any woman.  Being a good and respectful person is very important to me and it is something that I will do even when I know that I am miscomprehending parts of human nature and cultural flexibility.  As a human being I want to never demean or dehumanize anyone, even though as a man such behavior is expected of me.

Fair enough, Lauren.

I give the benefit of the doubt to the deliverer, and just plain hope the deliveree takes it as intended.  I know from bitter and extensive personal experience that won’t always be the case, but a “joke” delivered in good faith, to me, is worth a try.  It is a wonderful thing to make people laugh, and it can be argued that a HUGE percentage of “jokes” are at someone’s expense.

I suppose I’m simply old enough to consider “offensive” and “funny” not to be mutually exclusive. 

I just don’t consider most people to be dealing in bad faith.  Some, yes.  Most, no.

Story:  15 years ago or so, I was playing in a Chicago city-league championship game, on an only 1-black guy team, against a truly inner city team of all black bad asses.  They actually had boxes of new Nike’s, a boom box for their warm up, and a huge posse fan base.  We didn’t even have the the same colored t-shirts on.

We’re in the middle of the game, and my team is just beating the living shit out of them, and I’m having a nice game, despite being the most basketball-inexperienced and crappiest player on the team.

At some point after hitting another bomb, someone on the opposing team shouted in sincere disgust to his mates, “Who’s got the old bald guy?”  And not as a joke.

The whole gym stopped to laugh, probably at least 50 fans, and including my teammates.  I mean, the game was stopped for 15 seconds until everyone could get it together.  Including the refs. People were laughing HARD.

It just wasn’t in me to take offense.  I was laughing hard, too.

Ys just gotta be able to laugh.  It’s important for your mental health.

More fun and an elaboration:

Our black teammate was named Mike Hunt.  No kidding.  Great guy, great player.  We had a lot of fun with that.

And I was by a stretch the oldest guy on the team.  But I could (and still can a little) shoot the rock.  LOL.

How could breasts have evolved to remind men of a woman’s ass when, in their natural (i.e. braless) state, they don’t look anything like buttocks?

Also, penises evolved that way because women needed to be reminded about male toes.  Hominid women saw large toes as desirable in a mate, but toes were all the way down there on the ground, so the larger penis evolved as, like, a proxy.

Oscarzoalaster, you seem to be having a hard time separating asking someone out from yelling “nice tits” because both are expressions of sexual interest, and you think that “women experience male sexual interest as demeaning and dehumanizing.” The difference between asking someone on a date and yelling “nice tits” is consent, which is what divides demeaning/dehumanizing sexual interest from legitimate, enjoyable sexual interest. When you ask someone out, or lean in to kiss her, you are giving her an opportunity to provide or withdraw consent. When you say, “Nice tits,” you’re basically saying, “Your consent means nothing to me, only my sexual desire matters.” (Now obviously if you’re in a relationship with someone for a while, the phrase “nice tits” might have an acceptable use, but that’s kind of a different story.)

Women are not generally insulted by sexual attention. They’re insulted by sexual attention that implies they have no say in sex - which would make them objects for someone else’s sexual pleasure. That’s the link between objectification and demeaning behavior. You are perfectly free to flirt with a girl, ask her out, try to kiss her, and initiate further sexual acts, because at any point during that, if she is uncomfortable, she can tell you to stop, and you will.

I suppose I’m simply old enough to consider “offensive” and “funny” not to be mutually exclusive.

And I suppose I’m simply old enough to understand that but also realize that just because something was meant to be funny doesn’t mean it is funny. And old enough not to imply other people are young and naive when I have no idea how old they are.

John O, your conversational points and anecdotes seem to be getting further and further off-topic. I don’t know if you’re intentionally trying to make the thread all about you, but that’s definitely what you’re making it seem like. Somehow the excoriation of the objectification of women has become you telling stories about basketball games you’ve played in.

Just for the record, I’ve never shouted “nice tits” at any woman, nor anything remotely resembling the sentiment.

But it can still be funny.  I attended Mardi Gras once. 

No one took it in bad faith.  Great time.

“Oh, and if big chests provided such a great evolutionary advantage, then just about all women would have big chests. “
iirc, they do, at least relative to other primates.

You know, this thread almost makes me reconsider believing that “sight of boobs makes men automatically act like dipshits.”

But I think we’re really just seeing “threat of not-being-all-about-menz makes some men panic and storm into thread to act like dipshits, while many others show that men can be non-dipshitty even in the presence of breasts and topics not centered on their cocks.”

Well, Lauren, when you get attacked in a personal way by strangers who think they understand the depths of your soul on the basis of some comments on a blog, at least if you’re me, you try to fill in some of the blanks.

I wholeheartedly agree that something that was intended to be funny is not necessarily funny.  I guess I just think the effort is more worthy than you do.  I like Chris Rock, Richard Pryor, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and dozens of others funny, despite being sure others don’t.

Unless someone addresses me directly again, the thread is all yours. 

I’m just trying to be not a dick.  I’m sorry that I failed in your eyes.

If I had someone specific in mind there is still the problem that sexual harassment is defined as ‘any unwanted expression of sexual interest’, a date is intrinsically an expression of sexual interest, and a ‘no’ is a clear indicator that the expression was unwanted.  Some of us males really do take ‘no means no’ seriously.

Dude, nobody is going to sue you for sexual harassment if you just ask her out for a damn drink.  Seriously.  You’re so caught up in self-pity that you’re not listening to anything anybody tells you, I know, but…seriously.  Most people don’t assume “drink” means “sex”, at least not the way you’re (way, way over)thinking. 

Seriously, dude, just step off the cross, take off your halo, knock over your pedestals, do whatever you gotta do.

In the interest of being on topic, and because it is only seconds after my last post, Selma Hayak has great tits that I think would be fun to see, not to mention play with.

That being said, it is at least a little likely I would think she was a moron for whatever reason, couldn’t pretend I was interested for more than a week or two despite her terrific rack, while that same opinion is very unlikely to be held by me where it comes to Amanda.

If only Selma had a blog…

Thank you all for being engaged.  Sincerely and truly.

That’s the link between objectification and demeaning behavior. You are perfectly free to flirt with a girl, ask her out, try to kiss her, and initiate further sexual acts

In that order.  And there is an order to these things.  A woman who doesn’t want to go out with you (or dance with you, if you’re at a club…I suppose) probably doesn’t want you to try to kiss her.  A woman who doesn’t want you to kiss her probably doesn’t want you to try to grope her.  And so on and so on.

The problem with saying “Nice tits” to a woman you don’t know really well (or grabbing a strange woman’s ass, another favourite of mine) is it skips all the water-testing, all the preliminary stages, and assumes a level of intimacy that goes way beyond acquaintanceship and which you have no reason to think she wants with you. 

And really I find it hard to believe men don’t get this.  Fantasies aside, if an unattractive woman (for the sake of clarity, let’s make it an unattractive woman, however you define that) actually grabbed your crotch as you passed her on the street or tried to put her finger up your ass, would you be happy about that?  Come on.

If only Selma had a blog…

If only you could spell Salma’s name right…

In the interest of being on topic, and because it is only seconds after my last post, Selma Hayak has great tits that I think would be fun to see, not to mention play with.

That being said, it is at least a little likely I would think she was a moron for whatever reason, couldn’t pretend I was interested for more than a week or two despite her terrific rack, while that same opinion is very unlikely to be held by me where it comes to Amanda.

So much fail in two tiny paragraphs!  The major oversharing!  The sexist stereotyping!  The weird sexual harassment vibe!  The breathtaking point-missing!  I’m calling troll.

“And really I find it hard to believe men don’t get this.  “

I get the vibe from Oscar that part of his problem may be total inability to read signals of a woman’s disinterest to flirting apart from the woman walking up to him and saying “I do not want to date you and your attentions have become creepy. Leave me alone.”

I’ve had experience with guys like that over the years, personal and watching them harrass friends. Some dudes won’t even take no for an answer if someone else intervenes. “She didn’t come to lunch today because she finds you creepy and she’s been avoiding you. It’s really starting to interfere with things. Please leave her alone.”

“Why won’t she tell me that herself?”

Because you’ve been creeping her out with your constant harassment, inattention to her non-verbal signals, and inattention to the appropriate boundaries of behavior in a professional context, dipshit. Creepy enough that you come across as stalkerish and potentially violent.

What a spectacularly strange thread.  I’m holding responsible Ezra and that guy who used to write about how much he liked Oasis.

LOL!  My apologies, though I DO think it evidence how little I care about Salma.

killjoy, good handle.  Oversharing?  In blog world?  I know more about the proprietors of this blog than most people I’ve worked with for 10 years or more.

Sexist stereotyping?  How so? 

“Sexual harassment vibe?”  WTF?  Nice!  Why don’t you file a lawsuit, and we’ll see how it goes!  “Vibe?”  Genius.

Call whatever you want.  I believe most of you people are nice, well-intentioned, decent, and kind. 

“Troll.”  The pinnacle of blogospheric insults.  No room for dissent, which I don’t even think I’m indulging in, here in Purityville.

killjoy, good handle.

Oh, how you have burned me, little inappropriate troll man. 

Sexist stereotyping?  How so?

“Pretty women are dumb!”

“Sexual harassment vibe?” WTF?  Nice!  Why don’t you file a lawsuit, and we’ll see how it goes!  “Vibe?” Genius.

Yes, your repeatedly informing the world at large that you want to fuck Amanda, having received exactly no encouragement from Amanda, is creeping me out.  And nobody said anything about suing you.

John O, you cannot say that what you posted was not rude, assumes the worst of Hayek by emphasizing how you think her two breasts weigh more literally and figuratively than her brain. And that she is something to use and discard.

That is mean spirited and you add nothing to the conversation at hand. Which makes you far less palatable as a potential romantic interest for anyone at all. You have an ugly personality.

“Pretty women are dumb!”

That is just plain stupid, in any read of what I’ve said.  “Smart” is one of the most beautiful, sexy things a woman can be.

I’d like to fuck Susan Sarandon and Emma Thompson, and Barbara Boxer.  Is that in any way related to an average woman’s desire to fuck (insert hot, by any woman’s definition’s, guy here) in any way?

I feel the need to tell you, despite being a little embarrassed for you, that I don’t think any of the above will happen. 

Amanda wouldn’t fuck me with a gun to her head.  I get it.  LOL.

Who I want to fuck is none of your business and not likely to be of any interest to you, which might be why I haven’t brought it up.

Amanda wouldn’t fuck me with a gun to her head.  I get it.  LOL.

Then why do you feel the need to keep bringing it up when all it does is make people uncomfortable?

You do have an ugly personality, troll man.

Totally agreeing with killjoy. Lay off, John O.

Norvegica,

Are you kidding?

Let me be clear:  I don’t know Salma Hayek.  She could be the smartest, most terrific woman in the world, and I could fall in love with her if she tripped my emotional, spiritual, intellectual, and physical triggers.  (I’ll concede she has the physical one in hand.)

Another effing mind reader.  “Ugly personality.”  Thanks again.

I would NEVER say that about anyone I didn’t know reasonably well.  So you can define “ugly personality” as you will, but I think an ugly personality is one who pretends to know someone they have no clue about, particularly when the conclusion about said personality is negative.

You can’t hurt me this way.  I have a huge family, a huge body of old friends, and since I’ve worked at the same place for near 25 years, a whole body of colleagues who would tell you that it wasn’t so. 

Can someone point me to the personality-reading genius store?

And my experience of discussion threads like this, conversations that I have been in, and a variety of other experiences, strongly suggests to me that if a man wants a woman to like him and not feel threatened, disrespected, or uncomfortable, he will not express any sexual interest in her, nor will he admit to being actually interested in, or discuss, sex.

Man, you really need to get over yourself.  This is really fucking pathetic.  Maybe that’s why chicks won’t have sex with you, even when you’re nice to them.  We have a really good nose for desperate creep.  Please get counseling.  But I’ll leave you with a thought:  how the hell do you think the human race has endured for thousands of years if the only way people get laid is to act like they don’t want to have sex?

Wear me out, everyone.  I can take it.

OK, let’s take it back a step or two here.  Maybe we should define “who I want to fuck.”

There are all sorts of women I would like to fuck in the circumstances of both parties understanding each others motives and probable outcomes.

Like most people of either gender, I have no expectations of fucking any of them, or at least very, very few, none of whom are famous, including Amanda.

Like most of you, despite your sexists posts to the contrary, I’m guessing I’m not alone in my dream-world of fucking.  Like most of you, I imagine this dream world has nothing to with expectations, or realistic “hope.”  Reality, if I may.

I would like to fuck Salma Hayek.  This is NOT to say that I would want to marry her, or commit my soul to her in any way, or most of all, lie to her.  This is also not to say it wouldn’t be great if she surprised me with her personality.

Ain’t.  Gonna.  Happen.

Like most public personalities, Amanda has become a symbol.  I like her symbol.  Repeating now:  I think she’s fabulous, and it has only a little to do with her being pretty.

I think my chances of having sex with Amanda are 0, much like the non-existent fantasies of whomever lurks around in your pure skulls when it comes to the people you’d like to fuck.

Why is this so complicated?

Why are you so vicious, personally?  Why do you assume you know how you’d feel about me if you knew me?  Why do you think Bill Donohue had a right to judge Amanda on the same grounds?

John O: I will loudly list off who I want to fuck. Often. In excruciating detail.

I will boast of my network of friends and family who love me so much. As if we the rest of the readers, care about your self protestations beyond the fact that you are making noise. 

I will continue to post about how special I am and how my opinion on fuckability is so damn important on this blog.

You will all pay attention to me, to the detriment of this thread.

I don’t care that I’m creeping people out. So there!

Oh and also, I’m tough! Really really tough!

Yeah, I’d say what you choose to consciously and repeatedly type in front of a bunch of e-strangers for the purpose of annoying us makes it all the clearer that you are an ugly personality.

John O.

Your fantasy life is not appropriate comment thread material. There’s nothing wrong with thinking naughty things about ladies. There is something VERY wrong with telling strangers about it.

Something that really disturbs me is when male coworkers tell me their thoughts on female coworkers. I really, really don’t want to know.

All right, you win, and I sincerely apologize about trying to personalize my opinion about Amanda’s original post, which basically made fun of people who considered Salma a sex object.

I guess it’s the only way I can try to explain the meta in the context of the subject at hand.  My bad.

I’ve never once pretended or claimed I was “important,” nor that my thoughts were.  Again, ad homs are other people’s business.

I’m NOT trying to annoy anyone.  All I was trying to say was that the worship of Ms. Hayek’s breasts was not, in essence, worth a shit.  It has no social significance, just like Brad Pitt’s handsomeness.

And yeah, what a weird fantasy life I have.  Nothing in common with anyone.  And thanks for addressing the Donohue thing.  I get it:  It’s different.

And thank FSM that nobody expresses themselves personally on-line.  The world would be crappier for it.

See, there. There you just missed the whole damn point of the post!

It doesn’t have to be Hayek at ALL! It could be any celebrity mother with large breasts who are breastfeeding!

It is rude and creepy and deeply dehumanizing that any mother to know that her choice to do breastfeeding for her own damn offspring becomes commentary about her breasts!

The whole series of your posts shows that no, a woman can’t just breastfeed and have it done without some man voicing some stupid opinion about the way she looks and how they want to fuck her!

She’s already been fucked, thank you very much, and the result is there and she is feeding it! You (the general public you) can just stop with the creepy sex talk, okay? It’s rude!

Is that so difficult to comprehend?

The fact that people feel such uncomprehending liberty to voice their puerile opinions about her breasts, shows a cultural, ingrained rudeness and disrespect for women who are just being mothers! Minding their own damn business feeding their kids!

She’s not being sexy for you! She’s feeding baby!

It’s not about you!

Talk about her in her movies! Talk about her at events! Talk about how she looks in her dresses or whatever, but leave her breasts and their use or nonuse for men out of it! It’s for the baby! End of discussion!

Amanda, I love you, I really do.  I think you are brilliant, pretty, articulate, strong and self-confident.  A perfect mix, in many ways. I apologize for finding you sexually attractive.

This is you being creepy by bringing up your fantasies about our friend, apropos of nothing. It has nothing to do with the subject at hand. I understand you were trying to make a joke, but it’s not really a joke, is it. You used “it’s a joke” as a dodge to allow you to publicly state your infatuation.

I know that because in ever subsequent post, you keep mentioning how you want to have sex with her. STOP TALKING ABOUT IT.

When people do their mind-reading impressions of me, I dig it.

Idiot. We are reacting to the ridiculous bullshit you keep saying. Your ego is preventing you from seeing what a jerk you are being right now. It’s not that we don’t understand. It’s that you are being a jerk, and making wildly inappropriate sexual comments about someone that we care about. You are acting like a stalker. Stop now.

Also, do men—even cavemen—really have such short attention spans that if a guy saw a woman’s butt and found it attractive and went to talk to her in the hope of hooking up,

We’re talking creatures that were pretty much closer to chimpanzees than cavemen.  The theory posits tits developing about the same time hominids decided walking on two legs was a permanent part of life.

I haven’t claimed any of you had “ugly personalities.” 

Because that would be fucking insane.

I haven’t pretended that any of you didn’t have fantasies.  I haven’t pretended that I know any of you worth a crap.

I haven’t pretended that any personal anecdotes would not help me understand you better.  I haven’t pretended that I understand the infinite natural and nurtural components that make up your selves.

I haven’t pretended that any of you are in any way ugly.

I haven’t pretended that I had all the answers.  I haven’t pretended that I was superior to you, though many of you (interestingly) assumed I have.

I think this is one of the most amazing websites in the world.  I think purity is for losers, and I think slamming people you don’t know from you ass is small, and beneath the people here.

I think you all should handle differing opinions or means of expressing same with a little more class.

Oh, that’s rich. The guy who wouldn’t shut up about his preferences on fucking women over and over in his posts speaks of class.

We only know you because of what you typed. Which is creepy and rude. Therefore, we interpret these multiple posts of creepy and rude. The conclusion is that you have an ugly personality. Or more succinctly, a jerk. An attention whore. A pontificating ponce.

Who willfully misses the point.

The whole series of your posts shows that no, a woman can’t just breastfeed and have it done without some man voicing some stupid opinion about the way she looks and how they want to fuck her!

Maybe you just missed it.  10:05.  A long time ago:

“As for her breast feeding, count me in as one who can only muster a huge *YAWN*.  That’s her business, not ours, period, end of story.”

See, I don’t think you’re subhuman if you did.

Jeez, I know how this is all going to offend you, but I attended many a public movie with a woman sitting right next to me who was *gasp* breast feeding her daughter!

Like, several times!  And this is a post-graduate teacher of poor children who does professional opera on the side!

This is what I mean by mind-reading.  And why the best I can do is try to relate some personal experience to help.  As futile as that obviously is.

And, it’s boring me to check, whomever, my apology to Amanda was meant to be sincere, ironic, and relevant to her criticism of the HuffPo posters.  In the broader picture, all kinds of people find all kinds of other people attractive, even sexually (The Horror!) for all kinds of reasons.

Nobody bats 1.000.

OK, Noriega (on purpose), explain to me “the point” and I’ll give it one more shot.

I admit I though Amanda’s original point, in a galaxy far, far away, was that the commenters on HuffPo were being sexist assholes and treating Salma like a sex object.

To which I thought, gee, Salma hasn’t done anything to promote herself as a sex object?  Among other things.

One more try.  I’m getting tired.  And thanks again for pretending your desire or not to fuck speaks of your “class.”

So? A woman can’t choose to be sexy and seen as sexy for a job and maybe, just maybe, hold the job down as mother and general human being who is not thinking about or wanting people to think about her as a sex object other times of the day?

That it?

She got to be on for the audience all the damn time?

It’s like those stupid tabloid spreads where they show celebrities doing stuff like normal people like it’s such a huge surprise: grocery shopping, picking noses, filling up the tanks in their cars, wearing house slippers. Can’t have any privacy.

When it is time to go on stage, that’s the time to be snapping pictures and judging or whatever. When it is time for them to live their own lives, that’s it. Leave them to themselves.

And wow, man, that’s real clever, messing with my handle. Convinces me you have something to say and are not baiting people on here with your jerkiness, oh yes.

No, I was asking what the “point” was.

If the “point” was celebrity privacy, I’m totally on your side.

Somehow, I don’t think that was it.  And since your last comment is so close, I’ll get your name right, Norvegica.

Think what you will.  It isn’t like I can do anything about that.

No, you wouldn’t because pontificating on women with celebrity you’d like to fuck to e-strangers would be rather hampered if celebrities actually were accorded any privacy, wouldn’t it?

Who willfully misses the point.

Norvegica, 4:12.

And the “point” is?  That’s all I want a shot at.  Quick, though, I’m really tired.

I have never invaded a celebrity’s privacy in my life, and have had occasion to do so, living in a relatively target-rich environment.

One time I told one, “I really enjoy your work,” and walked away immediately.  And that’s the sum total of my celebrity interaction. 

If you’re blaming me for the invasion of celebrity privacy, you’re even more confused than I originally thought. 

The “point,” please?  Post-haste?

I’ve never once pretended or claimed I was “important,” nor that my thoughts were.

No, you’ve just inundated people here with irrelevant personal details after you were specifically and repeatedly told that you were being creepy and annoying.  You evidently decided that your desire to tell everybody whom you want to fuck and why was more important than other people’s desire not to read about it. 

Also, “Salma Hayek’s breastfeeding is no one’s business but hers, but I love her boobies and I want to fuck her, I want to fuck her, maybe she has a shitty personality but I want to fuck her, maybe she’s actually good enough to meet my exacting standards in women and I wouldn’t actually want to toss her aside after a few weeks but anyway I want to fuck her, also I want to fuck Amanda, also did I mention I want to fuck Amanda, also nice tits nice tits nice tits you’re being mean to me” is not convincing.

You don’t seem to understand the difference between having a fantasy and sharing it with the world at large.  Do you masturbate in public too?

Oh, look, I can quote myself:

The fact that people feel such uncomprehending liberty to voice their puerile opinions about her breasts, shows a cultural, ingrained rudeness and disrespect for women who are just being mothers! Minding their own damn business feeding their kids!

And then you go: But she’s built a reputation as an sex object!

And then I go: She isn’t one all the time, asshole!

And then you go:This isn’t about celebrity privacy!

And then I go:True, this is about womens’ privacy.

And then you go:I don’t understaaaaaaaand!

And then I think: Jerk.

On second thought, I shouldn’t have asked troll man if he masturbates in public; his next post is likely to go something like this.

“How dare you!  I have never once masturbated in public.  Once I got an erection on the subway, but being the gentleman I am, I paid it no mind.  I have many friends who will attest to my non-masturbating-in-public ways and they all think I am a prince among men.  I have never offended anyone in my life.  If you think I have, you are just as stupid as I thought you were.  Were I to get the opportunity to play with your tits, I would enjoy you for a matter of mere weeks before casting you aside for your stupidity.  I am a man with depth of character.  And many friends.  And fantasies which you need to know about, for I am Important.”

LOL.

It sure is hard to join certain clubs, no matter how much you like them.  I suppose that’s why I’ve never joined one.

killjoy (LOVE the handle!), you’re right, Amanda’s post had nothing to do with Salma’s sex-objectivity.  Therefore the subject of “fuckability” was moot.  Q.E.D.

Manual, yes, I am tired and prickly (have fun with that one, Einsteins!) I said I agreed with you completely about a woman’s privacy, celebrity or not.  Look it up, genius.

And here, a gesture of peace:  Sexuality is entirely rational, fair, objective, and private.  In the culture at large.

*yawn*  Looks like it’s just the three of us.  Now down to two.  I’m beat.

I still don’t think you’re the assholes you think I am, but you’re doing your best.  Kudos.

killjoy (LOVE the handle!), you’re right, Amanda’s post had nothing to do with Salma’s sex-objectivity.  Therefore the subject of “fuckability” was moot.  Q.E.D.

You brought it up, genius, not me.  G.F.Y.

Sexy goiters, the codex: my social circle must be a profoundly strange one, wildly different from the ones the rest of you travel in.  I say this because at least 1/3 of the young women I know (or am related to, neighbor to or a fringe acquaintance of) have had breast augmentation.  The preponderance of them who have taken this step have decided to exercise the “maximum option” in this procedure.

I will willingly concede that I am ignorant with regard to the reasoning behind this.  Back in the day (my age is showing here) people were fairly discreet about cosmetic surgery, trying to conceal the fact of it as much as possible. Now, everyone is very aware of work done and if they’ve somehow missed the event, they are treated to extensive displays and descriptions.  “Look at my new boob job” has become the new equivalent to “Come out and look at my new car”, a celebration of a valuable acquisition.  Each passing year seems to find past limits of increase to be surpassed, even to somewhat absurd new heights.

I’m archaic enough to find it appalling.  What drives a 36” busted girl-woman to have a surgical procedure to become a 45”?  What drives her mother to approve and pay for the procedure?  My own niece can barely make her rent, yet she felt compelled to go deeply in debt because “my boyfriend really wants me to be bigger”.  I’ve had the odd experience of having my heart stop under general anesthesia, so I attempted to educate her on the potential dangers, to no avail.  “It’s no big deal!  All of my friends have had boob jobs and none of them are dead!”.  The oppressive nature of her relationship, needless to say, was manifestly pointless to broach.

The results were strange, unnatural, clearly disproportionate to the rest of her figure.  It is difficult for me not to regard her surgeon as unethical, save for the fact that cosmetic surgeons now have become more like order fillers rather than aesthetic advisors.  American culture has long fostered a desire for bigger, better products and like SUV’s, the American boob job has become the mega-boob job.  Clearly, it is impolitic to ask what is behind the motivation here.  In a 200 plus comment response to a post about large breasts invoking the milk-sucking fantasies of group of male responders, I’m unaware of any besides mine that even brings up breast augmentation or the society that cultivates it.  Additionally, I’ve been chastised repeatedly for having an opinion on mega-breast culture (non-appreciation of the full range of female physicality, “shaming” women with large breasts, my health concerns about anorexia are really about a woman’s “fuckability”, and assorted misnomers) that could easily have been avoided had I adopted the sobriquet of “Jane” rather than John Doe.

I have to confess, to my probable damnation, that I am unrepentant. I find the entire phenomenon as bewildering and defeating as if young males were encouraged by the society around them to go under the knife to acquire a hyper-extended nose (my apologies to all out there with a hyper-extended nose).  My sincere concerns for the psychological and physical well being of (probably delusional) young women can really only be asshattery and douchebaggery, after all.  I still find the results as sexy as a goiter but to give balance to my “you kids get off of my lawn” attitude, I also find the intentional display of 5 inches of underwear above a young chap’s waistband to be a banner of declared idiocy.

I cede the floor to you, fellow denizens of Pandagon.

John, that’s all interesting, but it’s not what you said to start out with. 

Remember?

I’m in the minority of males who just don’t find large breasts attractive (what’s next, sexy goiters?)

You didn’t compare augmented breasts to goiters; you compared big breasts to goiters.  And you felt the need to bring up what you personally found attractive, which, if you’re interested in women’s health and well-being, isn’t really the issue.  If women were having dangerous, expensive surgery that actually did make them more attractive by your lights (and don’t cop out and say “having had surgery is unattractive”, because you can’t always tell when someone’s had plastic surgery), would that be okay with you?

John Doe - Not all women with big tits have had breast enhancement surgery. 

If you really care about your niece, and all those other poor, delusional women who do get plastic surgery, maybe you should try treating them with a little respect and stop complaining about their bodies on the internet. 

Oh, and fuck off.

Christ.  Can we please flush the Johns now?

Is this breast obsession confined to Americans?  Europeans and South Americans seem to be more comfortable in their own skins, while we’re still hung up on Puritanical nonsense.  Would the divine Ms Hayek have caused the same stir in the land of her birth?

Plus, did the infamous “WOOT” post on this thread?  I confess I did not read the whole thing.

The last of the thread seems to have degenerated into troll-smacking, but I have Something To Say, as usual:

Does anyone else remember the exact moment when they realized that the front of their upper torso belonged to Dudes and Babies and not to them?

I was in seventh-grade Spanish class, itching and sweating in a too-tight bra under a giant men’s shirt (because people had started looking at me and it skeeved me out) and there was this guy who was lazily scratching his chest while he waited for the teacher to hand out worksheets. I remember staring at him in sickening jealousy, because I knew that no matter how much the damned underwire of my 30B Playtex My First Bra or whatever was digging into my breast, I could not ram my hand down there and scratch without being indecent or at least ducking into a restroom, because now my chest was a Sex Part that I wasn’t allowed to touch in public. Some dude somewhere wanted to touch my chest, so now I couldn’t, and that struck me as really freaking unfair.

I do want to note that I have lived for six months in a culture which, while not particularly equitable gender-wise, does accept that women are going to whip out a mammary gland and breast feed in church, at the market, on the bus, etc with no attempt at covering. The present generation of young women tends to wear tank tops and just yoink them down. And men there, no matter how street-harrassy they get (which is very) do not stare at your chest. At all. I didn’t realize how much of a difference there was until I was around some (tipsy) Canadian engineers three or four months in, and noticed that their eye level didn’t seem to rise above my collarbone for our whole conversation.

A Guide To Keeping Your Johns Straight

I don’t have enough to worry about with cops and STDs, now I have to remember the bastards’ names?

And junk science for the win.

Wow, this thread has come a long way from the post I wanted to respond to . . . but anyhow . . .

A total little tyrant who wanted it then and there.
Kinda turned me off of having children altogether.

If my two-year-old ran up to me in public and tried to rip open my shirt to get to nee-nees, we’d be having a talk and not nursing. That’s because yes—that’s being a total little tyrant, and those actions aren’t within the nursing manners we’ve worked out. He’s perfectly welcome to come over to me and ASK for “nees-nees, please”, though and I’m willing to nurse in public. I would be embarrassed by him being a total little tyrant, just for him being a total little tyrant.

I’m unaware of any besides mine that even brings up breast augmentation or the society that cultivates it.

Maybe because it’s off-topic and you’re derailing the thread with it?

The results were strange, unnatural, clearly disproportionate to the rest of her figure.

Boob jobs are problematic for many reasons. The fact that you (or other men) might find the results unattractive is not one of them.

Musing on the demise of this thread, as a person who usually lurks, I have to say that this is one instance where the trolls / Johns would have been better off being ignored, especially once they revealed their tendency to stomp their little feet and demand that we make this thread all!  about!  them!

Michael McSkeevy, or whoever the troll is on the Mormon/Prop 8 threads, is a useful troll.  He makes the arguments for the other side, and you all have fun tearing them apart, and you hone your debating skills while educating the lurkers.

The Johns, on the other hand, aren’t interested in having a debate on an issue.  I actually have no idea why they’re here, when they obviously hadn’t read the post, have no idea what was being talked about, and thus have no sense of irony about how their behavior illustrates the main point of the post (i.e., how women’s breasts are treated as public property).  This specimen of troll, though tempting bait, is perhaps better left ignored, and his posts turned to bunny videos.

/done meta-commenting.

But I do not think that I should arrogate to myself to decide which woman is ‘normal’ (and therefore potentially ‘safe’ to ask for a date) and which are ‘not normal’ (i.e. potentially likely to think I’m an asshole for asking her out).  I think it is better in the long run to simply try to do everything I can to avoid giving any woman a reason to be annoyed with me.

Well, avoiding disappointment at all costs is one way to live, but it’s not the way I’d pick.

Can someone point me to the personality-reading genius store?

Man, you’ve revealed things to us about yourself that your therapist would shudder at. Excuse us for picking up things about you that would be obvious to an Amish newborn. Believe me, I would prefer not to know you so well.

I think there has been some misinterpretation… Most of the guys here who said “Holy gazangas batman” arn’t talking about breastfeeding. You follow the link, and it’s 4 pretty sexy pictures of Salma Hayek none of which involve breastfeeding.  Us guys are reacting to those pictures. While there has been some unfortunate (ahem) elaboration beyond this point, that’s what the comments are based on - not on the sexual aspects of breastfeeding.

*catches up on thread* Wow…. Just wow. LOL

Amanda: “You want women to like you?  Be likeable.  Don’t be fucking weird and creepy.”
One Of The Johns: “But that’s sooooo muchhhhh woooooorrrrrrrkkkkkkk.”

I actually have no idea why they’re here,

::coughs::  ::points up to pix of Salma Hayek::

Really, there’s no better ‘fly-paper’ than pix of gorgeous women.  That’s why women in bikinis are used to sell mufflers.  (Which even cracked me up as a kid.)

In the interests of ‘balance’, some story about Gerard Butler, with illustrations, needs to be posted soon.

Yelling, “Nice tits!” at a woman so you can enjoy watching her squirm with discomfort is.
Hmm, back in my yelling days, that was never MY motive.

Putting up pictures of scantily clad women around your office so that your new female coworker (who you disapprove of because you don’t like working with women) knows she’s unwelcome is.

What about the pix that were <u>already</u> there before the new coworker was hired?  The ones put up because, oh, I dunno, guys like to look at scantily clad babes?

Europeans and South Americans seem to be more comfortable in their own skins

Not entirely true—for one, Brazil’s plastic surgery industry rivals that of the US.

What about the pix that were already there before the new coworker was hired?  The ones put up because, oh, I dunno, guys like to look at scantily clad babes?

You’re being funny, right? Obviously not appropriate. How would you feel if, in a mostly female workplace, in addition to some amount of leering, staring, and not-quite-quiet-enough sexual comments about how delicious your cock looks in those trousers, one of your co-workers had pinups from Playgirl in her cubicle. For the purpose of this what if, also imagine that most of your coworkers are extremely, aggressively unattractive to you. How would that make you feel, dude?

Hmm, back in my yelling days, that was never MY motive.

Really? You actually thought they’d like it, or that it would get their attention in a positive way? Because I have a hard time believing anyone could be that stupid.

Sara: Really?  So, would you say it to your mom?  Your mother in law?  Your boss?  A cop?  A judge?  Your doctor, or professor?  Of course not, you know why?  Because it is DISRESPECTFUL.  If you are extremely close with a woman, and you have an agreed upon level of mutual irony that allows you to make comments like that knowing that you’re joking in a playful way, no problem.  Otherwise, you’re being a giant douchebag.

I’ve recently had to analyze the concept of respect because of a relationship of my own that is falling apart and the other person complains of a percieved lack of respect on my part.  What you say here operates under the same misconception I feel he is, which is that respect is universally similar. 

I show respect for my mother and respect for my boss in different ways from one another, both of which are distinct from how I respect my ex-girlfriend and my platonic ladyfriends.  It’s entirely possible for me to call attention to my ex’s rack or comment on how a friend of mine managed to keep her sizeable breasts after undergoing gastric bypass surgery in a respectful way as long as it’s consistent with the established relationship.  If the relationship is of a casual nature, then it’s possible for sexual comments to be within the bounds of what’s considered respectful.

At the moment, this post is the #1 search result for “sexy goiters” on google.  Predictably if a bit disturbingly, it’s not the only one.

Also, the amount of win in this thread arguably outweighs the stunning and often creepy amount of fail.

““and stomp his little goolies too!””

Am I the only one who started imagining a very odd Wizard of Oz remake?

“ But that doesn’t mean that it’s suddenly a compliment to stare at someone’s hair and say, “That would look awesome with my come in it.””

I’m now really hoping that John O doesn’t feel the urge to comment on this.

Jumping in late into this thread. But, FWIW, one more guy’s take on the subject. I don’t understand the need to make objectifying / demeaning comments about women’s bodies on a blog in any context. Hopefully this is not too unrelated, but I have been in several situations (when being out with other guys, particularly colleagues) where there is some amount of peer pressure to at least go with, if not personally resort to, commenting on other women because one of the guys starts off by making a “weird” comment on a woman passing by, or a female waitress/bartender. Of course, the peer pressure varies depending on the type of crowd you are in, so while I haven’t resisted always, I have sometimes made it clear that I would rather not go there. On the internet, generally speaking, it is safe to assume that there is no such peer pressure on anyone, so it is perplexing to me that people would repeatedly make objectifying remarks.

Yelling, “Nice tits!” at a woman so you can enjoy watching her squirm with discomfort is.
Hmm, back in my yelling days, that was never MY motive.

And yet, you don’t seem horrified to discover that this is the (entirely predictable) result.  Why is that?

Amanda Marcotte, (first quoting an earlier comment of mine) points out that “If I had someone specific in mind there is still the problem that sexual harassment is defined as ‘any unwanted expression of sexual interest’,
Well, lucky for you, that’s not the definition of sexual harassment.  Sexual harassment is a form of bullying using sex and gender as ways to put down the victim.  Asking someone out on a date is not sexual harassment.<i>”

Amanda Marcotte concludes with “<i>If you can’t tell the difference between bullying someone and dating someone, you should be rejected by women, because you’re dangerous.”

          I am quite aware of the difference between bullying and dating.  I know from personal experience that being beaten is far less pleasant than spending an evening with even a ridiculously inappropriate blind date.  I’ll pick an awkward date over being beaten every time.

          The experience that I described above made it very clear to me that someone with no bad intentions (as regards violence, dominance, exploitation, etc.) could be guilty of sexual harrassment simply because there was a perception of an unwanted sexual interest, and that the unwanted sexual interest was the issue - not whether that interest came with respect, a loving attitude, or a fascination with equality.

          Everyone should avoid anyone who bullies, but the definition of sexual harrassment that I have experienced has nothing to do with bullying and everything to do with someone being disquieted by a perceived indication of sexual interest.  I found it a horrible experience to be accused of sexually harassing someone, I deeply want to never be in that situation again.

oscar, no one’s going to give you the reassurance you want that no woman will ever be offended by your asking her out, or that asking women out or trying to kiss them will guarantee you a positive response. All you can do is be respectful and considerate and ask for what you want instead of demanding it. Sometimes you’ll get what you want, sometimes you won’t, and sometimes the whole thing will blow up spectacularly in your face. That’s life, and I hope you learn someday to enjoy it instead of being terrified of it.

Mandolin, in an accomplishment of poor reading comprehension, opines
“I get the vibe from Oscar that part of his problem may be total inability to read signals of a woman’s disinterest to flirting apart from the woman walking up to him and saying “I do not want to date you and your attentions have become creepy. Leave me alone.”
I’ve had experience with guys like that over the years, personal and watching them harrass friends. Some dudes won’t even take no for an answer if someone else intervenes. “She didn’t come to lunch today because she finds you creepy and she’s been avoiding you. It’s really starting to interfere with things. Please leave her alone.”
“Why won’t she tell me that herself?”
Because you’ve been creeping her out with your constant harassment, inattention to her non-verbal signals, and inattention to the appropriate boundaries of behavior in a professional context, dipshit. Creepy enough that you come across as stalkerish and potentially violent.”

  This is where I get angry.  What part of my comments prompts you to believe that I am harassing women in any way?  I have stated repeatedly that I make every effort to not in any way give an indication of sexual interest, and that I reflexively assume that no non-verbal action by a woman is an indicator of sexual interest.

  If I make a point of not acting interested, and always assume that she is not interested how in the hell am I going to do anything the least bit harassing?  Is it that you think my very existence is an act of sexual harassment?  How discrete, deferential, and unobtrusive do I have to be in order to be considered ‘safe’?

  I am a good person.  I am polite, friendly, supportive, compassionate, and an excellent listener.  I have some very strong, and somewhat irrational, inhibitions about sexual behavior, inhibitions that draw a lot of their power over me from my innate caring for other people.  There is no way that those inhibitions could result in my harassing someone, but those inhibitions are strongly reinforced when admitting to them in a sincerely meant comment to a post results in being described as someone who harasses coworkers.

  If I was aware of meeting you in real-life Mandolin you can be absolutely sure that I would go out of my way to avoid you.  Your lack of reading comprehension probably extends to verbal conversations.

Oscar, you say you’re unable to read “signals”. Seriously, if a woman’s into you, she will make it abundantly clear. You really don’t have to worry about it. 98% of the women you meet won’t want to have sex with you. Skip them and look for the other 2%. It sounds like you feel resentment about the 98%. Do you think that’s the case?

If I make a point of not acting interested, and always assume that she is not interested how in the hell am I going to do anything the least bit harassing?

Don’t do that. Being afraid of women is a big turnoff. Be friendly, don’t stare, be relaxed. When you consciously avoid someone like that, it’s completely obvious what you’re doing. By acting like that, you’re telegraphing a mixture of attraction, hate and fear.

I’m skeptical about your workplace story. Some girl felt unsafe from having a 5 second conversation with you. Everybody’s got issues. Maybe you were only slightly creepy, but you were the fifth creepy guy that day, maybe she was assaulted the week before, who knows. But it seems that something about your personality is off putting. I suggest working on becoming more awesome, and the relationship thing will take care of itself.

Oscar, what’s the purpose of all your posts, really?

You are paralyzed by fear about the reactions of a monolithic block of women, afraid of expressing any attraction at all, because you will get disapproval and censure. You hate it. You hate it so much, you have to go on the internet and tell people how you hate it. And how you are a really, really, decent person who would never frighten anyone on purpose, why does it have to be so difficult? Won’t somebody please recognize and laud your selfless sense of studious self control?!

Won’t somebody else out there in the internet identify with my struggle and we can commiserate together about those mysterious, inexplicable, overreacting women! Who get angry! I can’t be myself around them! It’s such hard work!

On this thread. On this thread, where the post is about how women do not live in a society that accords them privacy and agency over their own body parts. This is what you post? How difficult it is for you, that you may be potentially accused of sexual harassment and how that is so horrible for you? When there are women being accosted by people far less repressed than you, many times over? You may not be creepy, but you are in no way, sir, a sensitive, caring individual from your posts.

You are a wallowing fountain of self-pity. Who also misses the point. What did you expect to contribute with your navel gazing?

Most mystifying Oscar quote:

I disagree.  Because a date, ideally, eventually culminates in marriage and a long happy relationship – which includes a sexual relationship – asking for a date is an indication of sexual interest.  (I’ve been told twice by women that they did not want to continue to go out with me because I have not tried to kiss them, which even the second time it happened I had no idea how to respond to.) “Nice tits” is far less elegant than “Would you like to go on a date with me”, but both – among other things – indicate a sexual interest.  And over and over and over, when I hear women complaining about men who say “Nice tits” it is expressed as, again, among other things, dismay that men express a sexual interest in women.

Good god, man. Nice tits reduces a woman to her body parts. A date is an invitation to an exclusive social event between two, where the two figure out through conversation and shared activity whether or not they are compatible.

They are not the same at all! What’s the matter with you, that you can’t differentiate between the sheer offensiveness of the former and the polite, socially accepted, nearly ritualistic maneuvering of the latter? Nice tits and other forms of catcalling are sexual interest used as a method to overtly make women uncomfortable. Nobody likes that at all! But there are dating sites on the internet! Can you conceive of this, women signing on to membership of sites where there are people on the hunt for dates!

You just seem really invested in the idea that women just don’t like sex at all. That’s just absurd!

You are a wallowing fountain of self-pity. Who also misses the point. What did you expect to contribute with your navel gazing?

He’s confessed that he has a very difficult time reading people and is that leaves him paralyzed into inaction by fear that he’ll inadvertently cross a line… That’s a sad admission to make, and here you are beating up on him for this? Sorry, but that is nine kinds of fail.

Admittedly his post had wandered some distance from the original topic, but at the same time it followed reasonably from the discussion that had preceded it. Bring things back, sure, but there’s no need to beat up on a guy because he worries about coping responsibly with a social skills deficit.

Oscar, please don’t take this as an insult, because I honestly don’t intend it as such : it’s abnormal for social and non-verbal cues to be as opaque to a person as you describe. While I’m not a doctor , I wonder whether you have something like Asperger’s Syndrome.  Yes, it would suck to go through the hassle of going to doctors to be checked.  The upside for you though is that they might be able to help you out of this hole you seem to be in, one that you don’t seem able to exit by yourself.

Oscar:  Given that you have an excuse for why simply being straightforward, respectful, and willing to take the risk of rejection are things you cannot do, and that you clearly have no sense of how to interact with women, the only conclusion one can come to from your many remarks is just as Amanda noted—you are looking for a group of feminists to give you permission to stop treating women like human beings and start treating them like the subhuman fuckholes you clearly think they are. You want us to tell you Input A and Output B, in which the woman will essentially have no choice to consent to a sexual relationship because you put in the “correct” information and now she is required to reciprocate your attention with the “correct” output (i.e. sex).  See, when you want to date all you can do is put the information out there; a woman is under no obligation to a) reciprocate your attentions, b) feel complimented by your attention or c) otherwise react positively (even if she turns you down).  She is allowed not to be thrilled by your advances because women are not required to be nice, just as men are allowed to reject advances and not be nice about it (there are female assholes just like there are male assholes). 

You’re a Nice Guy™ and you don’t seem to want to become an actual nice guy.

And can we please ban John O.  Who needs to be sexually harassed through blog comments when I can just walk down the street for an hour?

PWI, agreed… Oscar is sounding a lot like some of the Aspie people I know, especially with the apparent fearfulness that even the slightest social conflict represents unbearable hostility.

Is this breast obsession confined to Americans?  Europeans and South Americans seem to be more comfortable in their own skins, while we’re still hung up on Puritanical nonsense.

For what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure the actual Puritans would have nursed in public with no hangups.

To the various boys (Johns and Oscars) - I can’t believe you’re really so blind to context. It’s not ok for men on the street to tell me how awesomely big my breasts are. It is ok for my husband to tell me that my sweater makes my breasts look fabulous. It’s not ok for you to compare the giant breasts whose size I didn’t ask for to goiters. It is ok for you to think, in your head, silently, that they’re not attractive.

Incidentally, very large breasts actually make it more difficult for newborns to learn to latch and nurse. I felt deeply betrayed when my doctor warned me.

He’s confessed that he has a very difficult time reading people and is that leaves him paralyzed into inaction by fear that he’ll inadvertently cross a line… That’s a sad admission to make, and here you are beating up on him for this?

If all he had said was that he’s terrified of women and lacks social skills, no one would be “beating up on him.” He’s instead blaming women for not liking being leered at and threatened by creeps because it makes him hate himself even more, as if women have some sort of responsibility to put up with assholes who harass them because it’ll make him feel better about himself. That’s what’s pissing people off.

Ecks: You might have had a point if Oscar did not keep deliberately shooting down the real, rational advice he was offered.

It’s one thing to admit you cannot read social cues, but when you constantly reject the advice offered, then the problem is likely that you do not wish to actually figure out how to adjust yourself but expect everyone (read: women) to accommodate you.

oscarzoalaster,

you might be interested in http://divalion.livejournal.com/163615.html
(which has been described somewhere rather well as The Perfect Nice Guy (R) 101),  especially the bit about half way in where she talks about her experience with a genuinely nice guy, whom she in fact later got involved in (*WARNING: This is not a guaranteed outcome, nor should you act in the expectation that it might be - indeed, that’s part of the whole point. Nor does being a decent human being, in itself, mean you’re specifically entitled to a relationship.). Actually, let me quote:

“ Let me contrast this with another example from my life. Random, who is a genuinely nice guy, was my best friend and roommate before we ever got involved. He developed romantic feelings for me at a time when I did not return them, and when he expressed them to me we had a long talk about it and about how we could keep living together and being friends without things being all weird. Here’s the key. Random took a chance and confessed his feelings without knowing if I’d feel the same way, but when I didn’t, he BACKED THE HELL OFF. He made it very clear that being friends with me was still important to him and that he wanted us to be comfortable together, that he understood that he had to deal with his feelings and that I wasn’t responsible for them, and that it was very important to him that I know that he wasn’t going to pressure me or keep trying to put the moves on me and make me feel unsafe or cornered. And he stuck to it, to the point where I *was* quickly comfortable with him again, and tried to make an effort in return to respect *his* feelings and (for example) not rub his face in it when I had a date. Eventually, of course, I did fall in love with him and the rest is history, but NONE of that would’ve happened if he’d pushed me to “give him a chance” or treated me badly for not returning his feelings. He respected my decision and proved that he was still going to be a good friend to me, and frankly that might have told me more about the kind of guy he is—the kind of PERSON he is—than I’d have learned from dating him right then. And that became part of why I fell for him.

Now the moral of the story is not “good things come to those who wait”. If you (male or female) have a thing for someone and they tell you they don’t return it, waiting around and playing at being a sympathetic friend in the expectation that you’ll wear them down and get yours one day makes you an asshole, not a friend.”

I’m perhaps one of the last people who should offer advice, given that I have the social skills of mashed rutabaga, but - caveat lector - the lesson you took from that genuinely embarrassing and distressing-sounding event you describe was the wrong one.  Seriously.  On the other hand, you’re entirely correct when you write many comments back that “  I do not think that the conflict between desire and respect that I perceive makes sense - that’s reassuring on one hand, but also a bit worrying, in that you might eventually become embittered enough to fall the rest of the way over into (one definition of?) Classic Nice Guyism, which may be in part taking the (mistaken) perception that desire/relationships/sex and respect are mutually exclusive, and deciding that screw it, you’re gonna jettison the latter in order to get the former.  (See this impressive post on “The History of Nice Guys”:

http://kugelmass.wordpress.com/2007/06/20/absolutely-fun-and-true-fact-4-the-history-of-nice-guys/.

  Another damaging idea is the one potentially encouraged by the (rather bad) advice you cite, that “just treat women like human beings and they will be falling all over you”.  Treating women like human beings (fascinating if generally unintended implication there!) is an end in itself, not a hookup line. (I’d describe this as the Categorical Imperative of Relatinships, but somehow I just can’t . . .)*  (Indeed, that’s the flipside and basis of the previous tendency.

Anyway, I don’t really have any good suggestions - see, mashed rutabaga - , but there are some very helpful-sounding comments here, including ones by junk science, Sarah (2nd paragraph), The Devil’s Advocate, Lauren O, etc.

“t.  And over and over and over, when I hear women complaining about men who say “Nice tits” it is expressed as, again, among other things, dismay that men express a sexual interest in women.”

*  sorry.  and if confused
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_Imperative#The_second_formulation_.28Or_Second_Maxim.29

And PLEASE, can somebody explain to me why I can’t make working links with <a href = “”></a>, and what does work?  I don’t understand it - after all, I’m such a nice guy . . .

You didn’t compare augmented breasts to goiters; you compared big breasts to goiters

Which has it’s source, in my particular experience, in hyper-breast extension examples.  The interesting flaw of forum commenting is that all of our comments arise “mid-narrative” in our lives.  None of us here is devoid of perspective, we arrive here with experience that forms our opinions.  That experience cannot practically proceed our comments, thus they arrive in the midst of our life-stories and thus they are incomplete.  This gives rise to constant misunderstandings and the superimposition of our own life-attitudes over the comments of others. There’s really not much that can be done about that, save for loading comments with unwieldy prefaces and footnotes, proofs and supporting equations, which would damage the spontaneity of comments in a way that would kill the format.

It goes without saying that my large breasts = goiter comment was an incomplete one, arriving as comments do, in the middle of my thoughts.  However, its been interesting to watch a spectrum of negative opinion unfold in reaction to it, wildly off base and revealing perspectives that carry their own distinct patterns.  True enough, it would’ve been vastly more articulate of me to have said “mega-plasic boobies” or “twin SUV’s of a cosmetic origin”, but in my own mind (which I am speaking, after all) “big breasts” have become my personal, inner code words for current breast augmentation examples.

And Killjoy, to answer your question with regard to cosmetic surgery whose results I would “find attractive, let me be a little nuanced.  I think any elective surgery needs to be approached with very great care (as I pointed out, my own experience in surgery shows the danger), certainly greater care than the modern boob-job is given.  However, it can have a powerful effect on a person’s life.  I know a woman who had a facial deformity, whose spirit had been beaten down from a childhood of taunts and insults and her surgery to correct that defect had a remarkable result on her personal happiness.  As you can see, this has nothing to do with attractiveness to me, rather, spiritual healing of the person involved.

I would think the differences between this and the motivations behind breast augmentation would be pretty clearly delineated.  Does the result leave the enhanced one happy about her body image and if so, what’s the problem?  Yes, it does seem to (at least temporarily)... but the problem, in my perspective, is “whose dream is she realizing”?  Where did the *need* for this surgery come from?  What societal defect is it attempting to remedy?  Why does the standard for the resulting size continue to increase?  Perhaps I’m treading on the toes of women who’ve already gone this route and perceive my comments as “shaming” them but one wonders about the feminist perspective concerning artificial body image promulgated by a patriarchal society.

On the other hand, as a male asshat douchebag, what right have I to even ask these questions?

I didn’t see Oscar shooting down advice… I just saw him telling the story about women dumping him because he wouldn’t make a move to kiss them, and reading into that an extreme inability to read people crossed with not wanting to be a jerk, and therefore never making a move at all because he could never tell if it would be welcome. I also caught him expressing frustration at this.

FTR, I think a lot of advice he got here was good. Especially the stages thing (“if someone’s willing to date you, then possibly they’re open to kissing…”), and the getting checked for asperbergers thing.

As an example of the importance of context, I have friends who will jokingly direct the most vile racist, sexist, homophobic bullshit at me that they would never utter around strangers, and that I would be shocked to hear from someone I wasn’t good friends with. It’s a conversationally ironic way of saying “We’re such good friends that I can even talk to you like this, because you know I don’t mean it.”

When you have a girlfriend, you like her breasts because they’re hers, not just because they’re breasts. You like sex with her because it’s sex with her, not just because it’s friction against your groin. When you admire a stranger’s breasts, you’re being reminded of the positive associations you have with breasts, which have nothing to do with the woman herself, and in which she is not personally involved. When you yell at her that she has nice tits, you’re calling to her attention that her body has given you pleasure in which she is not involved, and in which you don’t care to involve her beyond calling her attention to it. You’re taunting her that you know you don’t mean shit to her, but she doesn’t mean shit to you either, and it’s not going to stop you from enjoying her body and making sure she knows you’re doing it whether she likes it or not. It’s talking about someone as if they weren’t in the room taken up about twelve notches.

JD: Short answer: Patriarchy is the reason. However, Salma Hayak by all accounts, has not had a boob job. So while it’s a good question to ask, not really relevant here.

It goes without saying that my large breasts = goiter comment was an incomplete one, arriving as comments do, in the middle of my thoughts.

No, it was a stupid thing to say. Feel the burn and move on, dude.

“i like my body when it is with your
body.  It is so quite new a thing.
Muscles better and nerves more.
i like your body.  i like what it does,
i like its hows.  i like to feel the spine
of your body and its bones, and the trembling
-firm-smooth ness and which i will
again and again and again
kiss,  i like kissing this and that of you,
i like, slowly stroking the, shocking fuzz
of your electric fur, and what-is-it comes
over parting flesh . . . .

Here’s what’s interesting: A lot of guys claim they don’t know what appropriate treatment of women is like.  And yet, in the real world, men do in fact grasp there’s a huge difference between trying to be charming and attractive to women and saying, “Nice tits.” You want women to like you?  Be likeable.  Don’t be fucking weird and creepy.  I suspect men know this and are, with questions like this, seeking a way to intimidate women without being held accountable for it.

A lot of socially-awkward guys seem to use the Internet as an anonymous safe space where they can fantasize about the way they’d like women to behave.  It’s so hard to have to treat women in the real world like human beings, and it’s so upsetting to face the threat of rejection.  Wouldn’t it be nice if you could just walk up to a strange woman, describe your sexual fantasies in creepy detail or just blurt out, “Nice tits,” and have her react with delight?

In this particular case, the combination of photos of a sexy woman, coupled with text about how she doesn’t use her body exclusively to entertain random men, has clearly caused numerous guys’ brains to short-circuit.  Some men can’t just enjoy looking at boobs and leave it at that.

On a previous, recent thread (Pam’s “well-oiled Mormon machine” post) I took pablo to task for complaining about trolls destroying threads.

Having read John O’s early posts on this one, and eventually taking to skipping his later ones, I apologize to pablo, and other advocates of the “do not feed the trolls” policy, abjectly.

This despite the fact that John O’s pathology is a dead-on-topic demonstration of the very sort of crap Amanda was talking about.

After a while it just gets to be too damn much.

In re Oscar:

...But it seems that something about your personality is off putting. I suggest working on becoming more awesome, and the relationship thing will take care of itself.
banisteriopsis on 11/16 at 02:40 PM

I agree, and if this seems offensive to you, Oscar, consider that people are taking this moderate and caring tone with you in the face of the John O subthread mess. The difference between you and him is, as I see it, that you seem genuinely confused and sincerely interested in some kind of feedback, whereas he kept demonstrating himself to be above all a self-centered, egotistical ass.

I sympathize with you a lot. But didn’t you say something upthread, at this point the whole thing is too unwieldy on my rickety computer to scroll up and quote exactly, about any expression of sexual interest leading logically to marriage and so on into the distance of imaginary future generations? (Your “logic” implies that your merest sexual feeling or most fleeting impulse is tied up with these visions of your generational role—or so at least you seem to believe you have to tell yourself).

I submit to you this may be some of the “creepiness” the women you approach pick up on—that you seem to feel bound by some moral imperative to project a Mission to get Married with all that implies on every possible relationship. Such an agenda is all too much, and you bet that if you feel and see things this way, the women you approach will sense it too. That would be enough to weird them out, even if they too are trapped as you apparently are by some kind of head trip re sex.

I well understand the compulsion to try to “justify” sexual desire by promising the world, and oneself, that it is all sanctified by some higher and nobler Purpose.

But even if there is actually some truth to that (a debate I don’t want to get into at all)—well, if there isn’t then this is all nonsense, and if there is, clearly God or whatever shaped it all this way is a joker, because IMHO a straightforward negotiation based on the premise that we all have some obligation to find our One True Life Mate and set about our duty to bear the next generation etc just doesn’t work. (Nor, in my experience, which is sadly limited to be sure, can one just say, “hey, I’m horny, you might be horny too, let’s just be the mutual solution to each other’s problem once, more often, or forever, whaddaya say?” Not that I’ve ever dared to try that…)

Nope, there is a Zen to it. I’m told that the thing is, one can’t be desperate, certainly not frantically scrambling around to meet some biological deadline—but one must somehow not need the relationship in order to be an attractive candidate for one.

Which I suppose is what banisteriopsis was saying.

A lot of socially-awkward guys seem to use the Internet as an anonymous safe space where they can fantasize about the way they’d like women to behave.  It’s so hard to have to treat women in the real world like human beings, and it’s so upsetting to face the threat of rejection.  Wouldn’t it be nice if you could just walk up to a strange woman, describe your sexual fantasies in creepy detail or just blurt out, “Nice tits,” and have her react with delight?

Open Source Boob project ring any bells, anyone?

I will confess that I occasionally like playing with Nice Guy trolls, while most other trolls just frighten me. They’re so desperately trying not to hate you for being female, but they’re about half an inch away from it, and it’s fun to try to nudge them over the edge. Plus, most of them are hilariously blind to the giant targets they’re painting on their asses.

(I’ve been told twice by women that they did not want to continue to go out with me because I have not tried to kiss them, which even the second time it happened I had no idea how to respond to.)

Be thankful you dodged those bullets. Seriously – they want something specific from you, but expect you simply to “read” them. That’s a big-ass red flag that signals TROUBLE AHEAD.

“Nice tits” is far less elegant than “Would you like to go on a date with me”, but both – among other things – indicate a sexual interest.

The latter indicates more than a sexual interest, whereas the former indicates solely a sexual interest.

And over and over and over, when I hear women complaining about men who say “Nice tits” it is expressed as, again, among other things, dismay that men express a sexual interest in women.

No. Wrong. Epic fail.

It’s dismay that certain men are expressing only a sexual interest, and in a way that’s creepy and a little sickening.

It is a nice idea.  But I do not think that I should arrogate to myself to decide which woman is ‘normal’ (and therefore potentially ‘safe’ to ask for a date) and which are ‘not normal’ (i.e. potentially likely to think I’m an asshole for asking her out).

Most women wouldn’t be offended by your asking them out, even if they ultimately said no. Different strokes for different folks.

And those women who would be offended – well, be thankful they revealed their true colors so soon. You don’t need that sort of drama in your life. 

If I had someone specific in mind there is still the problem that sexual harassment is defined as ‘any unwanted expression of sexual interest’, a date is intrinsically an expression of sexual interest, and a ‘no’ is a clear indicator that the expression was unwanted.  Some of us males really do take ‘no means no’ seriously.

You might want to update your files, since your definition of sexual harassment is broader than the commonly applied legal definition. Let me help you out, since you seem a bit confused.

It is not sexual harassment for you to ask a woman out during a social gathering. If she says no, just move on.
It’s not sexual harassment to stare at pictures of women, or to fantasize about women, or to masturbate when thinking about women. Your internal life is your own exclusive business.

It may be grossly unprofessional, and even against workplace regulations, for you to politely ask a co-worker out for coffee, but it’s not sexual harassment unless you won’t take no for an answer.

It *is* sexual harassment if you make demeaning comments about a co-worker, or if you touch a co-worker inappropriately, or if you ask a subordinate out (for obvious reasons).

I do not think that I can “do to her as you’d want her to do to you if the situation were reversed” if the thought is going through my head that I would absolutely love it if the woman I was talking with would put her arms around me, draw me close to her, and kiss me.

Oh for fuck’s sake; use a little common sense.

And my experience of discussion threads like this, conversations that I have been in, and a variety of other experiences, strongly suggests to me that if a man wants a woman to like him and not feel threatened, disrespected, or uncomfortable, he will not express any sexual interest in her, nor will he admit to being actually interested in, or discuss, sex.

If you fail that early and that often in basic social situations, the problem is with you. You’re the common denominator.

For all your self-serving blather about treating everyone with respect, you really don’t respect women as equals. You may not be out to hurt them or anything, but you have real difficulty in empathizing with them – that is, with being able to recognize points of commonality between yourself and women, and with being able to extrapolate from your own experience the ways a female human being might react to certain stimuli or the way she’d want to be treated in a certain situation. 

Stop acting like women are all mysterious and scary and shit. Your faux-fear and “gee-golly, but I did no wrong” attitude is appalling.

If you’re really interested in correcting your obvious character flaw, go hang out for a few days with your grandmother or another older female relative – in other words, a woman you would not and could not ever fuck – and observe how they respond to the men around them.

“Open Source Boob project ring any bells, anyone? “

Gargh. Least favorite recent convention moment: one of the guys who runs the convention where OSBP was engineered explaining to me why it was hunky dory.

On a slightly, but not totally, separate note, at some point, people need to take responsibility for the fact that they can’t tell what social signals they’re receiving, especially if their inability to respond appropriately continually skeeves people out to the point where they’re feeling harrassed. I have minimal compassion for this in adults. There are plenty of ways for individuals who find social interactions opaque to work around that, and people need to take responsibility for not hurting others.

They’re so desperately trying not to hate you for being female,

“junk science” is not exactly an obvious name there.

I have to admit I’m getting tired of pushing people’s buttons online.  At the same time that people annoy me, I’m also feeling empathy for them, and it isn’t as much fun anymore.  Even wingnuts.  I can’t seem to sustain a decent hate anymore.

And in my real life, I have way too many people seeking advice or help, due to playing a role in the local union.  One of the reasons I had to step back from that was because I found myself manipulating them for their own good, and that’s pretty sucky.

“junk science” is not exactly an obvious name there.

True. They might just hate me for being an asshole. But I was speaking more generally.

Shorter Pho: No one reacts to my asshattery anymore.

Shorter Pho: No one reacts to my asshattery anymore.

I can’t begin to describe to people how unknowingly funny this comment is coming from Sharon - it’s like Godel’s incompleteness theorem as applied to bitter wingnuttiness…

“(I’ve been told twice by women that they did not want to continue to go out with me because I have not tried to kiss them, which even the second time it happened I had no idea how to respond to.)”

If you’re going out with someone - I mean, you understand that it’s really probably ok if you try to kiss someone you’ve started going out with (using common sense - in appropriate situations, and with some sense of their reactions, etc.), right?.  Is it that you were unsure whether you were in fact going out? 

——

Besides possible ideological/social issues, you actually might want to consider talking to someone in RL, whether on a professional basis or even just a trusted and level-headed friend/family member.  (But let me really really stress that I’m certainly not a doctor, etc.) (And just it case you’re getting all insulted, suck it up - I have to gobble down ADD and antianxiety meds every day just to more or less function halfway decently, so whatever.*

* In a somewhat ironic twist, I’m generally too worried about possible side effects from the anti-anxiety medication to actually take it, with fairly predictable results.  It’s like rain on your wedding day - wet, sidewalk and road-slicking rain of a kind that could make one’s elderly fragile loved ones slip, not to mention all those with tired guests who maybe had a little more to drink than they should’ve before starting out for home . . .

And in my real life, I have way too many people seeking advice or help, due to playing a role in the local union.

It seems to be a common thing with assholes here how they feel compelled to keep mentioning how many male and female friends they have, people asking them for help, awesomely gorgeous female women they know, wives/girlfriends who love them, etc. etc.

“Seriously, does it even occur to Nice Guys® wallowing in self-pity that other men don’t seem to find women so mysterious, fickle, and arbitrary?  The secret is to assume that women are human beings.  I mean, there’s differences that men should be willing to respect if they don’t want to come across as creeps, the major one being that women experience the world as a much more dangerous place than men do, especially when it comes to sex.  A wise man knows this and adjusts his behavior accordingly, realizing that women aren’t being mean when we’re cautious, we’re being safe.  If you can’t respect someone’s basic right to self-preservation, then said people are going to pick up on how little respect you have for someone.”

Amanda, I’m putting this on a fucking plaque.

other men don’t seem to find women so mysterious, fickle, and arbitrary

It is possible that we do, but just accept it as a part of het life’s rich pattern and don’t whine endlessly about it.

This is a golden comment thread.  And don’t forget, if she doesn’t talk to you, maybe she just thinks you’re ugly?  Exercise, plastic surgery, professional style advice, etc… might help you out if you’re a really Super Nice Guy but those damned ladies won’t submit as you wish they would.

Wow Wow Wow! I am always amazed at the amount of cluelessness that men can have. But I think Amanda’s comment about how women experience the world as a more dangerous place than men do hits right at some of the cluelessness, here.

Some men lack any sort of understanding or empathy about this. For all of you who say to these men, “How would you like it if some strange woman came up to you and grabbed your ass or said, “Nice Cock!” and expect that to work, for them to gain empathy from that, it doesn’t work. Because they are either thinking “That would be great!” which is why we have to tack on the obligatory “Oh, and did I mention you find her terribly unattractive?” Because even if she is unattractive to them, they see it as a compliment. Because they have the privilege of always knowing they are in control. They have a choice as to whether to reciprocate that. So even if they aren’t particularly thrilled with the idea that an unattractive woman crossed the boundary, even if it made them feel uncomfortable—it likely never made them feel like they were potentially in danger.

I can’t believe how many men don’t understand this. If a stranger on the street yells, “Nice Tits!” and you respond with anger, shame, or even if you don’t respond at all, it doesn’t matter, you have that slight little fear that your response might set him off and he’ll come grab you and escalate the situation. (It isn’t really your response that matters of course, just that it could be used as an excuse for further assault.) You grab your keys a little tighter, you look around and scope out where the nearest public place is, who else is around, etc. And this kind of stuff happens so often that it becomes a conditioned response. Because generally men have and use physical power over women, and often try to disguise it as starting off as consent, women see this kind of stuff as offensive and creepy. Maybe YOU would never physically assault a woman, but it happens just enough that women have learned to be suspicious of all men until they have behaved in a way to earn trust.

If you don’t want to be thought of as creepy, don’t act in a way that is creepy. To women, creepy = potential danger. And danger = something to get the hell away from. It is that simple. Be trustworthy and respectful. How the fuck hard is that to do, anyway?

I mistyped. I meant to say “Generally men have physical strength over women, and some men use that power…

I did not mean to say that generally men have and use physical power over women. I do think most don’t. But enough do to make it a dangerous world out there.

Because even if she is unattractive to them, they see it as a compliment.

Just ask them how they’d feel if a man did it. You’ll probably have to cover your ears immediately after.

Exactly, JS. Because beyond the homophobic shit…men are more physically evenly matched. It could be that they didn’t control the situation and it would be a real threat.

It seems to be a common thing with assholes here how they feel compelled to keep mentioning how many male and female friends they have, people asking them for help, awesomely gorgeous female women they know, wives/girlfriends who love them, etc. etc.

Uh-huh. Feel free to point out the “keep mentioning” bit.  You may be confusing your assholes here.

Some men lack any sort of understanding or empathy about this. For all of you who say to these men, “How would you like it if some strange woman came up to you and grabbed your ass or said, “Nice Cock!” and expect that to work, for them to gain empathy from that, it doesn’t work. Because they are either thinking “That would be great!” which is why we have to tack on the obligatory “Oh, and did I mention you find her terribly unattractive?” Because even if she is unattractive to them, they see it as a compliment. Because they have the privilege of always knowing they are in control.

Interestingly, I’ve had men get the deer-in-the-headlights look and avoid me for months after I expressed interest in them, and not in vulgar terms either.  I’m about 100 pounds soaking wet, so it’s not a question of being physically overpowered.  I “jumped” a guy once—he reciprocated and we ended up dating for several months, but I could tell he wasn’t happy about it; it was as if I’d emasculated him or something.

All this leads me to think that men, as a group, do know what it’s like to be nonplussed or put out by a woman’s interest in them, even if it doesn’t make them feel physically unsafe.

“Nice tits” is far less elegant than “Would you like to go on a date with me”, but both – among other things – indicate a sexual interest.

“Nice tits” is not an inelegant way of expressing sexual interest.  It’s not an expression of interest at all.  It’s an expression of bravado and a means of putting women in their place.  Guys who say “nice tits” to women they aren’t intimate with are not trying to get a date.

PTOR, your personal narrative appears to be that you’re a kind of ghetto savant. This time you mentioned how people are asking for your help because of the union thing. Previously you said basically the same thing regarding having many youngish female acquaintances that you dole out your pearly wisdom to, and knowing/advising various hookers in your neighborhood. You seem to say these things either without prompting, or in response to someone pointing out what a pontificating dick you’re being.

Hey Admins, it’d be really nice to have a way to search the site for all of a particular commenter’s posts, or to have the search at the top of the page include commenter’s nicks.

Wow, 312 comments and climbing.  Thanks, Salma!

For the purpose of this what if, also imagine that most of your coworkers are extremely, aggressively unattractive to you. How would that make you feel, dude?

I’d learn to DEAL, dudette.

“dole out your pearly wisdom”

(Snorts coffee through nose.)

PTOR, your personal narrative appears to be that you’re a kind of ghetto savant.

That *would* be fun, wouldn’t it?  Alas, no - the older I get the more aware of my inadequacies I become.  It makes me cranky.

This time you mentioned how people are asking for your help because of the union thing. Previously you said basically the same thing regarding having many youngish female acquaintances that you dole out your pearly wisdom to, and knowing/advising various hookers in your neighborhood.

Hmm.  I think I’ve mentioned *one* person who was going a cheap variety of hell, and how I was *trying* to help and deeply worried about her.  Fortunately, that situation managed to resolve itself.

Hookers?  Don’t know *any*, personally. I know one person, male, who was one briefly many years back. You’re definitely confusing your assholes.

At 300+ comments I’m sure we can’t possibly be on the original subject of the post, but I just have to chime in and say a couple things.

What strikes me the most about this story isn’t so much about feminism, misogyny, or even the politics of breastfeeding, but more about the culture of celebrity.  OK, seriously, when we’re at the point where we not only know that Salma Hayek happens to currently be in the habit of breastfeeding her child, but know that the child is exactly one month beyond the WHO/Unicef breastfeeding guidelines, and we feel as ordinary laypeople (many of whom, in reading the first 50 or so comments, don’t necessarily seem to have ever had a child or breastfed before) that we are qualified to pass judgement on this fact, I think that’s a sign of the level of sickness we’re reaching here.  Honestly, I really don’t care very much about Salma Hayek and what she does with either her breasts or her offspring.  I mean, I wish them all well, but beyond that, who the fuck cares?  Not only that, but who am I to weigh in on exactly why Hayek is still breastfeeding?  For all I know she’s in the process of weaning the kid right now.  Maybe her pediatrician said she should keep going for another few months because the kiddo is a mite bit small for her age.  Maybe it’s family tradition.  Maybe she has some Mommy Guru who says an extra couple months of breastfeeding make all the difference.  We are talking about the breastfeeding of a kid who is A MATTER OF WEEKS past her first birthday.  If she was 5, well, OK, I’ll admit I’d think it a bit odd.  But seriously, what is it to me?

Oh, and the other thing I wanted to say - I’m a queer woman.  Women turn me on.  Breasts turn me on.  And while I will admit to noticing the photo before the text, and even of thinking, “Hm.  Salma Hayek’s breasts are looking even larger and more prominent than usual these days,” I still managed to pull it the fuck together and read the post and generally think non-adolescent thoughts.  Why is it, then, that the first 50-odd comments are full of men writing stupid shit and then justifying it with “oh, sorry, my caveman impulses got the best of me… honestly I didn’t even notice there was writing surrounding that photo…”?  Guys, your privilege is showing.  Which is about the least insulting thing I have to say about this phenomenon.

I have to say that John Doe’s latest meditation on why we women just keep misunderstanding him!!! :(  is pretty amazing.  John Doe, I will spell this out for you in the simplest terms possible.

I naturally had “big breasts.”  I was a C-cup in 8th grade, DD by 10th. At 5’1” and 115 lbs. I was, as you objected to upthread, “disproportional.”  I endured so much harassment that I had a breast reduction (major, incredibly painful surgery that may have left me unable to breastfeed any eventual children I may have) at 18.

And what you did in your initial comment was to call my body disgusting and repulsive, as if that was some kind of feminist statement.  You reinforced the notion that I was a freak, and that people have the right to consider it legitimate to remark on it in a way they never would about other people’s bodies.  And by the way, when you said in my own mind (which I am speaking, after all) “big breasts” have become my personal, inner code words for current breast augmentation examples. ,  you acted as if that was understandable, natural, and inoffensive.  Well guess what. It’s not.  There are millions of women in this country with naturally large breasts, and to conflate them, even in your own mind, with women who have had breast enlargments that you consider tacky and gross and shallow (another discussion altogether) is both stupid and offensive.  I reaped the results of that kind of thinking in high school, when it was assumed by many people that because I had big breasts, I must be “easy” or a “slut” or a “bimbo.” 

I doubt you will take responsibility for the offensive statement you made.  But I don’t think I could spell it out any more clearly why so many of us reacted with hurt and anger. It wasn’t because we didn’t understand.  It’s because you don’t.  As the women who lived with these bodies, we understand one hell of a lot better than you.

but know that the child is exactly one month beyond the WHO/Unicef breastfeeding guidelines

Actually, Oppo, the child is 11 months short of the WHO guidelines, which are that you should breastfeed until two or beyond.

Oh.  Hm.  Heh. 

For some reason I’d always mixed it up in my mind and thought that the WHO recommended that children be breastfed for at least the first 12 months.  (And had no illusions that they thought all children should be weaned at 12 months, btw).

I think it’s the American Academy of Pediatrics that recommends all children be breastfeed for the first year of life, and as long thereafter as mutually desired. WHO recommends first two years, and as long thereafter as mutually desired.

We’re not that complicated.  If we like big tits, we like big tits, the psychology literally stops right there for us.

As for the remark about women not making nut jokes about famous men: I take it the fact that women don’t tend to find nutsacks attractive (and even if so, men can’t walk around with part of their nuts showing in public anyway) isn’t seen as a factor.

Um, bullshit, whateverman, and don’t speak for me.

whatever man said:  We’re not that complicated.  If we like big tits, we like big tits, the psychology literally stops right there for us.

Oh really?  Then what about you just liking big tits compels so many of you to post your private attraction on a public blog, without any reference to what the blog post is?  Or, if you’re talking about the idiotic comments made on HoffPo, why do so many of you think that expressing your opinion of a complete stranger’s breasts is a perfectly reasonable response to an article on breastfeeding?

Frankly, why do you think that publicly commenting on a stranger’s breasts is appropriate, full stop?

the fact that women don’t tend to find nutsacks attractive

this is a FACT to you?

Is conceiving of a woman as a pleasing aesthetic shape, a spatial structure, the same as objectification? Is it still so if this is not the only conception one has of the woman?

I’m not sure if making sexual assessments of strangers is immoral or not from a constructed moral viewpoint. At least one of the bible’s authors seems to think so:
Matthew 5:27-28
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
NIV, Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

Interesting that it says “woman”. Presumably it’s OK for women to look at men lustfully then? Or perhaps to be expected of what was seen then as a lesser being?

I am sure, however, that reinforcing your tribal identities by declaring your sexual preferences, or at least what you feel they should be, does not indicate self-confidence.

Further, one cannot be sure that a woman has a sexual interest in the first instance. Once that’s established, an expression of aesthetic delight might be in order, but before that is nothing but a brutish imposition, akin to grabbing a random stranger by the hair, attaching a nose clip and forcing them to drink a beer.

“has a sexual interest”
Has a sexual interest in the specific person approaching her, of course. This is entirely independent of whether the person approached has sexual interests in general.

There is the matter of context, too. What would the etiquette be at a swingers’ bar, for instance? I honestly have no idea, but I strongly suspect it would differ due to other expectations.

Wow, way late to this thread. I think that if ms. Hayak wants to breastfeed her mkids until THEY decide they’re ready to move on. More power to her. Whatever is my opinion.

She is a talented actess and a beautiful woman, though, and if she was Jane Doe breastfeeding “too long”, we’d never hear about it.

Late to the comment party because after fifty or sixty I couldn’t stomach the “I LOVE/LOATHE big titties and here’s why!!eleventy!1!” and had to go read Twisty’s blog to cleanse my obstreperal palate.

But. Fuck.

Dear Male Tit Lovers/Loathers Who Insist On Oversharing,

The flipped script is NOT “what if a lady commented on yer jock/objectified you/hooted at you/grabbed your ass”.

It’s imagine a physically larger, more aggressive man who could easily rape, beat, kidnap or murder you talking about your body in an offhand way as though he owns it. As though he just might, given the im/proper response, hurt you, rape you or kill you.

Whether or not you find him attractive is immaterial. Whether or not you appreciate, fear, hate or despise the attention is immaterial. You are immaterial. Just a thing. Like all the other things walking around asking to be judged, fucked, beaten, raped or killed.

Here’s an idea! Go fuck yourselves.

Sincerely,
mir

Here’s an idea! Go fuck yourselves.

What do you think I’ve been doing for the past 30 years?

@ Oscarzoalaster: Christ on a cracker, dude; just ask her on a date!”

If I had someone specific in mind there is still the problem that sexual harassment is defined as ‘any unwanted expression of sexual interest’, a date is intrinsically an expression of sexual interest, and a ‘no’ is a clear indicator that the expression was unwanted.  Some of us males really do take ‘no means no’ seriously.

Yes, sadly, you cannot COMPEL someone to go on a date with you. And yeah, if she says no and you HARASS HER about it, that is HARASSMENT.

That you are entirely too bewildered (read: cowardly) to even broach the subject with someone is entirely not the fault of feminism. If there were no feminism, you would simply have another elaborately-constructed martyrdom to explain your utter terror of ever hearing someone say “no thank you.”

Very belatedly, on the possible evolutionary reasons for women to carry more fat than our primate precursors did;

fat to get you through the famines is an advantage, but creating and storing and carrying around fat has costs. So our fat is not a yes/no tickbox in the evolutionary game; we must have fat strategies, both personally and across populations. High on the body, low? Always store some fat, even if it postpones other growth? Only lay it down if you’ve been well-fed for months? It depends!

Probably it’s most secure for a population to have a range of fat-carrying strategies, so that some women will survive even the most peculiar conditions.

For some reason I’d always mixed it up in my mind and thought that the WHO recommended that children be breastfed for at least the first 12 months.  (And had no illusions that they thought all children should be weaned at 12 months, btw).

Nope.  Breast milk alone for six months, breast milk as a supplement to other food for two years or more.

*peeking in from behind the curtain*

Well, thanks for stopping ripping me, anyway.

Shorter me:  Who cares about Salma, her tits, or her breast feeding preferences.

Both men and women have physical sexual turn-ons, both men and women have non-physical sexual turn-ons.

Identity politics can be found anywhere if one looks hard enough.  I call women out on their general baldophobia, as a bald guy.  I think I can stay away from the horror of the other night if no one pretends it isn’t a general fact.  So there.

I really DO love this place, and its proprietors.  Also, that doesn’t make me a stalker.  It makes me a purveyor of intelligent thought, wonderfully written, that I may or may not agree with at its baseline, as I understand the words on the page, which I make NO declarations are perfect or complete representations of the writers’ intent.  Usually, I’m one of the former, someone who says about the posts here, “Right on!.”  Also.  (God, Sarah has provided a whole new level of the funny.) 

*running for the hills!*

Shit.  I went back and read a little closer.

First of all, I’m sorry to creep you out, Amanda.  Sometimes you creep me out, too.  But I still respect you as a voice that is necessary to move the proverbial ball down the field.

Second, I have never in my life told a woman, “Nice tits,” or anything even resembling that.  So, c’mon, get a grip, and stop assigning your wishes or dogma on strangers.

Third, I have no interest, nor have I ever, in being with a woman in any way who didn’t want to be with me, too.  Y’all may not believe it, but it happens from time to time, and my guess most of you would think those rare and fabulous women were, indeed, pretty fabulous.  Strength and self-confidence are essential for me to be seriously attracted to, which I stated earlier.

Fourth, I really feel bad.  I just don’t think most of you would think I was such a wank if you really knew who I was, where I came from, and what I think.  If you spent some real time with me, men or women.  And, sorry, this judgmental aspect of your personal attacks is simply a personality characteristic I do not share.  I think most people are good and kind and decent.  Even if I happen to disagree with them on a particular subject.

I’m not the greatest writer in the world, and certainly not even in the same universe as Jesse or Amanda or Pam.

Finally, what a standardly typical fascinating thread.  I’m sorry I detracted from it, sincerely.  It makes me wish I could express myself better, most of all.

As usual, you’ve all made me think a bit.  That’s a great thing, and I’m grateful for this place because of it.

creep out =/= have a difference of opinion with

Sorry, Lexie, not good enough, nor coherent enough, for me to bite on.

I am creeped out by people who have substantive differences with me from time to time.  But those are on much larger issues than jokes about Salma’s rack.

And I STILL don’t claim to know them well enough to truly understand them.

this thread just keeps on giving.

“And, sorry, this judgmental aspect of your personal attacks is simply a personality characteristic I do not share. “

HI-larious. “I don’t judge people, unlike some people!” hahahahahaha

LOL, indeed.  Can you find me a comment I made impugning the integrity or global moral fiber of anyone who was ripping me?

This is where it gets weird.  I’m confident that people who knew me, personally and well, would say I was highly non-judgmental, relative to most.  But you’ll just laugh.

I’m not sure what I can do.

So, I stand by what I said, and even your characterization of it:  I don’t judge people to the extent the middle of the judgment bell curve does.

And it seems you would be surprised by this if you knew me and reacted like most who do.  There isn’t much I can do about that. 

Seriously, I don’t know what I can say.  It’s frustrating, believe me.

I just read Amanda’s post on Ayers, from Salon.

It’s easy to make cartoons out of real people here in infotainment-land.  But most all people are not, in the end, cartoon configurations.

It is a little more complicated than that.  And yeah, another brilliant post by Amanda.  I agree Ayers was wrong and ultimately destructive to the cause he supported.  But I don’t think he’s the spawn of Satan, either.

He was young, horribly angry, and misguided.  A lethal combination, one that most adults can relate to if just on a much, much smaller scale.

Ayers is simply not the two-dimensional human being the McCain campaign tried to make him out to be.

I just don’t understand how a regular human being could fail to consider this. 

But I’m essentially atheist-lite, and I support the Invisible Sky Wizard of your choice, no matter how weird I think your choice might be.

It doesn’t make you a misogynist, sexist, retard if you profess to be Catholic.  As just one example.  And that’s mostly because I know Catholics who are none of those things, though I do get a great kick out of questioning their beliefs in the context of the Pope’s infallibility. 

John O : can’t you read?  Amanda asked you to leave.  Why the fuck are you still posting here?

srsly, john, get your sensible ass (*rawr*) out of here.

Toughest crowd on the intertoobs?  Close, at least, in my experience.

Bye.  Thanks for all your generosity of spirit, kind words, and (*rawr*) sensibilities.

Just one more, I hope. 

Comments on all kinds of things, mostly your famously, historically brilliant ad hominem attacks.

Thankfully, I’m sure no one is here anymore.

I guess I have to say I like the posters here more than the commenters these days.  But it isn’t personal, honest.  We’re all (except me) a little more complicated than one should ascribe overall humanity to anyone based on some comments about boobie jokes on a particular topic on a particular blog.  Just MHO.

Yeah, you have to be able to put up with some grief in blogostansylvania.  From every direction.  And, I know you’ll be proud, the personal attacks got under my skin.

It’s part of the fun.  And in my case, it isn’t easy.

Congratulations.