Oh are we comparing teenage girls who read twilight to 30-something males who are too lazy to scrape the spunk off their asuka pillow? ok
The teenage girls with twilight backpacks, the middle-aged women with stacks of romance novels, and the otaku women who have turned man-love comics into an industry.
Yes, I think we are.
Its all about social mores, isn't it?
Once its gone on long enough, and persistently enough, it'll be accepted as normal.
And then we can discuss more important things, like those damn youngsters and their sexbots.
No, man, reclusive perverts are never going to be normal. Girls with backpacks and crushes are already normal.
wait wait wait wait.
we're not comparing twilight fans with pillow-carrying otaku.
we're comparing twilight fans with gamers who think "hey that female character is hot".
we're asking why the twilight fans don't get societal disapproval while the gamers do.
curly haired boy on
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
I wasn't the one who brought up non-video game-related fixation on fictional characters.
True, but what do either of things you brought up have to do with 2d fetishes or japanese cartoons?
They are all a sexual attraction to fictional characters.
To get back to my original point, most games seem to have female fan service characters, as well as male.
I mean, I disliked Wakka. Didn't like his accent, his story, anything about him.
But apparently the constant shirtlessness, broad shoulders, and abs of steel count for something for a female audience. Who knew bronzed muscle men with a pacific islander accent were popular with the ladies?
Sepah on
0
Options
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
I mean, I disliked Wakka. Didn't like his accent, his story, anything about him.
But apparently the constant shirtlessness, broad shoulders, and abs of steel count for something for a female audience. Who knew bronzed muscle men with a pacific islander accent were popular with the ladies?
My dislike of Wakka is, ya know, a mild flicker when put alongside the furnace that is my burning hatred for Tidus, ya know.
Huh. You know, if it comes down to sexual inequality in video games being a significant contributing factor to the social stigma attached to being attracted to a video game character, then TV Tropes makes a good argument by highlighting a lot of the female fan service out there.
No, because the number of men out there with sad vg/japanese cartoon fetishes greatly outnumber the women, though the women with those predilections have it gendered in a way that makes it different. The reason it's sad to me is that these are fetishes held by people who are often physically unattractive or unable to relate to normal people and so sexualize things they wouldn't otherwise sexualize if they could get a normal relationship.
And through a combination of all these things, Japan's fertility rate is actually taking a big hit recently, standing at about 1.27 births per women which is unsustainable
The same could be said for the births per women of most developed countries. Japan's culture certainly isn't helping, but its been Japan's stance on immigration that is causing their decline in population. With as little immigration as they allow, the culture changes slowly if at all. (Edit: And I guess their population has actually increased for the last 2 years, due to Japanese people who moved out of Japan moving back. Weird.)
This much is true, as we've seen in Europe and Russia particularly
But if you're arguing that attraction to fictional characters is viewed with such disdain because it causes declining birth rates, I'd have to disagree. It isn't something that would significantly contribute to that.
This is not what I'm arguing. Although I believe this underground culture is certainly attributing to it to some degree, it was brought up more to show up your citation needed comment than anything else. To say that there are more men than women with fetishes for "vg/japanese cartoon" characters is completely correct.
I remember reading about a phenomenon where men over thurr are getting increasingly intimidated by women; that they can't handle them having careers and being able to divorce and such, contributing to this situation. Creepy.
Reading this, I found the case more convincing than "dorks playing video games too much". The part about distinguishing "child-friendly employers" in particular was eye-opening.
Women are far less likely to see an attractive guy on the street and go "damn that dude's hot, I'd let him do me" while it's much more believable a guy would say the reverse. In my anecdotal experience, women will create a backstory to help augment why that guy attracts them, like guessing at his job (that rugged guy's a fireman, that guy in a suit's a lawyer, or that metrosexual's an actor), evaluating his worth (look he's getting into a BMW or he must be rich to afford those clothes), or evaluating his personality (oh how sweet, he held the door open for that old lady). Finding people attractive that way is looked on as far less shallow by society (even though it really is still pretty shallow) while the males' looks-only evaluation is looked not only as shallow but sometimes as disgusting, especially if the male making the evaluation is looked down upon for other reasons (bad hygiene, living in their parents' house, bad fashion sense, etc).
Women are far less likely to see an attractive guy on the street and go "damn that dude's hot, I'd let him do me" while it's much more believable a guy would say the reverse. In my anecdotal experience, women will create a backstory to help augment why that guy attracts them, like guessing at his job (that rugged guy's a fireman, that guy in a suit's a lawyer, or that metrosexual's an actor), evaluating his worth (look he's getting into a BMW or he must be rich to afford those clothes), or evaluating his personality (oh how sweet, he held the door open for that old lady). Finding people attractive that way is looked on as far less shallow by society (even though it really is still pretty shallow) while the males' looks-only evaluation is looked not only as shallow but sometimes as disgusting, especially if the male making the evaluation is looked down upon for other reasons (bad hygiene, living in their parents' house, bad fashion sense, etc).
You're absolutely wrong, but carry on with your patriarchal views on how women have to justify their attraction whereas men can just be attracted.
Well seeing as it's what my wife told me when we were discussing this calendar at the store yesterday and that I explicitly mentioned it was anecdotal (maybe I should have put "extemely anecdotal" and italicized it) I don't think I'm "abolutely wrong."
So you're angry that I didn't caveat everything as much as possible to indicate that it doesn't apply to everyone ever? I had hoped my specifically added in non-concrete phrases ("less likely," "more believable") and my explicit mention of my example being anecdotal would be enough to handle that but I can see I was wrong.
What I stated is basically what society believes, even if it's not true for all women everywhere all the time. The topic came up over conversation of that calendar because my wife pointed out how they were pandering to the idea that women want more from their hot men than just a nice body. Since she recognized that pandering, it made the men completely unattractive and fake to her. The question of why it seems okay for women to swoon over a romance novel character when men get chastized for drooling over a video game chick because "she kicks high" had come up here and I presented my opinion of why.
Women are far less likely to see an attractive guy on the street and go "damn that dude's hot, I'd let him do me" while it's much more believable a guy would say the reverse. In my anecdotal experience, women will create a backstory to help augment why that guy attracts them, like guessing at his job (that rugged guy's a fireman, that guy in a suit's a lawyer, or that metrosexual's an actor), evaluating his worth (look he's getting into a BMW or he must be rich to afford those clothes), or evaluating his personality (oh how sweet, he held the door open for that old lady). Finding people attractive that way is looked on as far less shallow by society (even though it really is still pretty shallow) while the males' looks-only evaluation is looked not only as shallow but sometimes as disgusting, especially if the male making the evaluation is looked down upon for other reasons (bad hygiene, living in their parents' house, bad fashion sense, etc).
You're absolutely wrong, but carry on with your patriarchal views on how women have to justify their attraction whereas men can just be attracted.
What exactly is he absolutely wrong about? Given his statement is a stereotype, I assume were working off that idea rather than "factual" individualism that applies to everyone.
I don't agree 100% with the way it was phrased, but I will say that all-in-all most women tend to seek a strong supporter for their potential family, and there is nothing wrong with this. They want someone with a good job, strong for defense, etc. Whatever that woman deems as the highest priority for a partner is quite often tied to a sexual desire as well. It's common really, especially considering that woman are engineered to be mothers and well protective of said family they mother over.
Whereas guys... weeellll.... quite often most men are whores. It has become acceptable of course because men tend to "lead the pack" so to speak, and only in the last few years has it become taboo for a guy to be that way, which forces him to keep his shenanigans limited to the locker room.
All that gibberish aside..... I would totally do Lara Croft.
What exactly is he absolutely wrong about? Given his statement is a stereotype, I assume were working off that idea rather than "factual" individualism that applies to everyone.
I don't agree 100% with the way it was phrased, but I will say that all-in-all most women tend to seek a strong supporter for their potential family, and there is nothing wrong with this. They want someone with a good job, strong for defense, etc. Whatever that woman deems as the highest priority for a partner is quite often tied to a sexual desire as well. It's common really, especially considering that woman are engineered to be mothers and well protective of said family they mother over.
Whereas guys... weeellll.... quite often most men are whores. It has become acceptable of course because men tend to "lead the pack" so to speak, and only in the last few years has it become taboo for a guy to be that way, which forces him to keep his shenanigans limited to the locker room.
Yeah.
You know go back a couple hundred years and claim that men couldn't keep it in their pants, whilst women could. Do you think they'd agree with you?
Also evo-psych evo-psych lol. Get a real science.
Leitner on
0
Options
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
Women are far less likely to see an attractive guy on the street and go "damn that dude's hot, I'd let him do me"
Personally, this is the most interesting thing I've seen on this page. I'm just curious here, I'm not picking you apart or anything, but I am curious why you chose to use the word 'let'.
What exactly is he absolutely wrong about? Given his statement is a stereotype, I assume were working off that idea rather than "factual" individualism that applies to everyone.
I don't agree 100% with the way it was phrased, but I will say that all-in-all most women tend to seek a strong supporter for their potential family, and there is nothing wrong with this. They want someone with a good job, strong for defense, etc. Whatever that woman deems as the highest priority for a partner is quite often tied to a sexual desire as well. It's common really, especially considering that woman are engineered to be mothers and well protective of said family they mother over.
Whereas guys... weeellll.... quite often most men are whores. It has become acceptable of course because men tend to "lead the pack" so to speak, and only in the last few years has it become taboo for a guy to be that way, which forces him to keep his shenanigans limited to the locker room.
Yeah.
You know go back a couple hundred years and claim that men couldn't keep it in their pants, whilst women could. Do you think they'd agree with you?
Also evo-psych evo-psych lol. Get a real science.
I'm not sure what sexual promiscuity has to do with variances in what people find attractive. The numbers of people "keeping it in the pants" or not, for either gender, says nothing about what people find attractive at all; just that they do, and then do it.
Women are far less likely to see an attractive guy on the street and go "damn that dude's hot, I'd let him do me"
Personally, this is the most interesting thing I've seen on this page. I'm just curious here, I'm not picking you apart or anything, but I am curious why you chose to use the word 'let'.
edit: or the page before, whatever.
Because even women think of themselves as objects.
I'm not defending his argument. I'm merely pointing out that we're moving off topic. That people find each other attractive is a given. The question at hand is specifically what people find attractive, and the social acceptance/stigmas attached.
Posts
we're not comparing twilight fans with pillow-carrying otaku.
we're comparing twilight fans with gamers who think "hey that female character is hot".
we're asking why the twilight fans don't get societal disapproval while the gamers do.
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
They are all a sexual attraction to fictional characters.
To get back to my original point, most games seem to have female fan service characters, as well as male.
I mean, I disliked Wakka. Didn't like his accent, his story, anything about him.
But apparently the constant shirtlessness, broad shoulders, and abs of steel count for something for a female audience. Who knew bronzed muscle men with a pacific islander accent were popular with the ladies?
I agree
Her heroism is magnified by how dead she is ahahaha
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
I remember reading about a phenomenon where men over thurr are getting increasingly intimidated by women; that they can't handle them having careers and being able to divorce and such, contributing to this situation. Creepy.
Because, you know, I could...
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
Here's a scholarly paper on Japan's falling birth rate:
https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/3757/1/POPwp118.pdf
And as a bonus, no sequels.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
I'm sure she could have conceived another abortion from this plot line.
I think Twilight would have been better if it had vampires in it.
Then they made the dolled up trollop of a farseer in their farce of a sequel. I guess sex just sells!
Hey, we already had a sexy mummy
Robot fucking.
I think Twilight would have been better if it didn't involve a creepy stalker, and his victim flattering him.
Reading this, I found the case more convincing than "dorks playing video games too much". The part about distinguishing "child-friendly employers" in particular was eye-opening.
Taldeer had characterization?
Seemed pretty generic Eldar fresh out of the mold.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
http://www.hulu.com/embed/e53SoT_vS91KAk-38DgVgg
You're absolutely wrong, but carry on with your patriarchal views on how women have to justify their attraction whereas men can just be attracted.
What I stated is basically what society believes, even if it's not true for all women everywhere all the time. The topic came up over conversation of that calendar because my wife pointed out how they were pandering to the idea that women want more from their hot men than just a nice body. Since she recognized that pandering, it made the men completely unattractive and fake to her. The question of why it seems okay for women to swoon over a romance novel character when men get chastized for drooling over a video game chick because "she kicks high" had come up here and I presented my opinion of why.
What exactly is he absolutely wrong about? Given his statement is a stereotype, I assume were working off that idea rather than "factual" individualism that applies to everyone.
I don't agree 100% with the way it was phrased, but I will say that all-in-all most women tend to seek a strong supporter for their potential family, and there is nothing wrong with this. They want someone with a good job, strong for defense, etc. Whatever that woman deems as the highest priority for a partner is quite often tied to a sexual desire as well. It's common really, especially considering that woman are engineered to be mothers and well protective of said family they mother over.
Whereas guys... weeellll.... quite often most men are whores. It has become acceptable of course because men tend to "lead the pack" so to speak, and only in the last few years has it become taboo for a guy to be that way, which forces him to keep his shenanigans limited to the locker room.
All that gibberish aside..... I would totally do Lara Croft.
Yeah.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Don't feel obligated to share it or anything.
(Not sarcasm--I think we've already reached a critical mass of accusations in this thread.)
CLEARLY.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
We sent you one. Did it get lost in the mail?
It was no match for his "old faithful"--it's a pile of ashes in the bottom of his garbage bin.
You know go back a couple hundred years and claim that men couldn't keep it in their pants, whilst women could. Do you think they'd agree with you?
Also evo-psych evo-psych lol. Get a real science.
Personally, this is the most interesting thing I've seen on this page. I'm just curious here, I'm not picking you apart or anything, but I am curious why you chose to use the word 'let'.
edit: or the page before, whatever.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
I'm not sure what sexual promiscuity has to do with variances in what people find attractive. The numbers of people "keeping it in the pants" or not, for either gender, says nothing about what people find attractive at all; just that they do, and then do it.
I'm not defending his argument. I'm merely pointing out that we're moving off topic. That people find each other attractive is a given. The question at hand is specifically what people find attractive, and the social acceptance/stigmas attached.