Light Pollution, the Printed Page v. the Screen & More
Commodification and consumerism: Who stole fun? by Lisa Meekison (EB)
Liberty with a Backbone
Peter Hitchens, 'Cushty, easily done!' A criminal's mocking words that sum up our injustice system
Going Local in an Age of Globalization (with Michael Schuman)
Is it too late for sustainable development?
ALEXANDER COCKBURN, Farewell Gastro-Porn: Is the Foodie Frenzy Finally Fizzling Out?
PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS, World’s Apex Bully Leads World Into Lawlessness
GARETH PORTER, U.S.-Israel Deal to Demand Qom Closure Threatens Nuclear Talks
Cardinal Burke: Employers who Provide Contraceptives Cooperating with Sin
Partisanship and Religious Freedom
The Bishops' Statement on Religious Freedom and Widespread Misunderstanding of the State of Free Exercise
Feminism is failutre
The career neg
Why Rosen's remark was significant
Down with Gender Studies!
I’ve always thought that feminists trying to make a moral issue out of the basic nature of males’ sexual attraction to females particularly on first impression by calling it “objectification” was utter nonsense. Yeah we’re attracted by the visual, in particular young, 0.7 or lower waist to hips ratio, symmetrical and healthy looking beauty. We have individual preferences particularly at the higher levels of beauty but also a whole lot of commonality in what men find most attractive. Trying to shame that by calling it “objectifying” women is just absurd. Men are different from women, and no that’s not mostly a social construct.
Yep. It’s not really “patriarchy” that feminists hate, it’s maleness itself.
Given the role that the male plays in courtship (as the pursuer) it makes sense that he would rely on visual cues to determine first of all whether a woman is healthy and fertile before choosing her as a possible mate?