So, would it be considered okay to do it?
| First Trap, I don't think you understand my point, I'm talking about attractiveness and how the whole "You must not look at a girls boobs" is bullshit. Morally, it's wrong (actually, no, it's the whole "respect" thing, which is even worse), but logically no. I know perfectly fine of the tribes that see "neck rings" as "beautiful" (not necessarily attractive), so I've countered you with the whole idea of "fertility" and "attractiveness". A girl with big breasts and a nice pair of buttocks was deemed as a lot more fertile than a girl without such traits (also, a lot more healthier, especially at the boobs part). Attractiveness is biological, we look at breasts because we are attracted towards them, it is only wrong morally, which I do not care about as I just said I changed the subject (this thread would have no discussion whatsoever then, this can be deemed as spam). Whining and finding out fallacies are two different things. I suppose you do not know what an argument is. Tavor said: Immahnoob said: Which cannot be proven, like that awesome case with the lawyer that accuses her girlfriend (or whatever it was) of trying to suffocate him with her breasts. Like, what? Saying she was jealous. Still, as most would say, morally, no I wouldn't stare. As for saying "they are there for staring and it's biological" well in regard to "We still have instincts" then by that logic, rape must be okay if the man has the urge to engage in sex since it is at our biological interest to reproduce and therefore be okay? I know might be putting words in your mouth immahnoob or changing the context, but I'm interested in the responses. It is in our biological interest to reproduce, but also to survive as a species. It's not like raped women only started having problems when "rights" and "villages" first came on Earth, no. Rape harms psychologically, a raped woman becomes depressive, blames herself, thinks she lost her "innocence" and puts an impact on her every day life. A psychologically broken individual is an useless individual. Also, what we deem as "good" and "bad" also comes from feelings and instincts (thus, good and bad are not part of objective reality), but we as a majority think rape is bad exactly for these reasons. Even if we humans had no idea about the human body or mind, obvious results like the fear of the woman that got raped, the way she acted (maybe even violently), the struggle (what is aggressive we deem as "bad") etc. Even if rape can be seen as "reproduction" it is a bad way of doing it, for what it takes it gives really bad results, thus, there's no reason to act in such a way then. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| I feel flattered when men stare at them ,and I will sure not care if I go blind. |
 «War is a hostile takeover of nations, coated in sugary religiosity and fiery terms of "right" and "wrong" from people who use faith as a mean of coercion and a tool of capitulation.» - Sacrophagus |
Immahnoob said: I know perfectly fine of the tribes that see "neck rings" as "beautiful" (not necessarily attractive), so I've countered you with the whole idea of "fertility" and "attractiveness". A girl with big breasts and a nice pair of buttocks was deemed as a lot more fertile than a girl without such traits (also, a lot more healthier, especially at the boobs part). Attractiveness is biological, we look at breasts because we are attracted towards them I didn't bother bringing it up because it's absolutely ridiculous. There is no correlation between breast size and fertility; "considered" is barely something to base a point off of when you're talking about biology. Something either is, or it isn't. I feel that this is such common sense for anyone above the age of 14, that I don't even see why I would need to post sources, but hey ask if you wish. "We are attracted to them because we just are" Argumentative skills 101: Learning with Immahnoob. I don't know why I need to keep repeating myself, but again. If attraction to large breasts was an evolutionary trait, biological, then it would be something you see across various cultures. Instead, it's something which you see mostly in western countries, and in some cases, completely ignored in others. |
TrapaliciousDec 26, 2012 11:58 AM
| I thought that "fertility" and "reproduction" was an obvious reason for why we are attracted towards them. It's called instinct of reproduction, son, and we develop that when we become teenagers. I'm talking about the FERTILITY STATUES, can you READ? Tribes from South Africa deemed those TRAITS as FERTILE (size especially, why? Because they can contain more MILK). But I suppose I have to smash it into your face every time even after I repeated it for about two hundred times and you still did not find a valid point until now. So until now: 1) Looking or staring at breasts is not illegal. 2)a) Looking or staring at breasts is morally wrong, but who cares again (as I changed the subject) ? (look 2)b)). 2)b) It's a sign of attraction towards the female that we are looking at, it is biological as it is one of the traits of fertility which is not "bad" in any way. |
ImmahnoobDec 26, 2012 12:00 PM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: I thought that "fertility" and "reproduction" was an obvious reason for why we are attracted towards them. It's called instinct of reproduction, son, and we develop that when we become teenagers. I'm talking about the FERTILITY STATUES, can you READ? Tribes from South Africa deemed those TRAITS as FERTILE (size especially, why? Because they can contain more MILK). But I suppose I have to smash it into your face every time even after I repeated it for about two hundred times and you still did not find a valid point until now.  |
| Staring at breasts for the entire elevator ride?? What the hell? |
 Steam: Zeemanhuismerk |
Chair-san said: I asked my friends this, by the way. They went into "but she'll notice! Blind people have heightened senses, you know." I lol'd I was right then Tavor said: She'll read you like braille and slap you. |
 Just this once, I'll fulfill whatever your wish is. |
mdude009 said: Suddenly FJ's been doing a lot of katawa shoujo posts which made me wonder. Now say you were in an elevator, and suddenly it stops and a girl with the white cane and milky eyes (or dark glasses) walks in, she also happens to have amazing tits. Would it be fine to stare at them (and I don't mean the quick half a second glance you do with other chicks, I mean a full hard stare for the duration of the entire elevator ride, getting time in to admire ever little detail your eyes can get) or would that be considered a big social "no-no." Discuss my minions! I wouldn't just stare, I would fap to that. |
NicoleB said: InfiniteRyvius said: NicoleB said: Monad said: Or maybe it was too wise for your over-feminist mind Nicole B. Or maybe you're just a misogynist asshole, hence why you can't understand why it's not okay? Who knows. I hope think he was joking. No, this is Monad, every single thread which could possible be interpreted as having anything to do with feminism or anything pro-female, has him in it telling how the world is so awful now that women have even basic rights. He definitely has some deep issues with women and me especially since he basically attacks my posts all the time. Lol, what a complete twisted person you are. Just because i disagree with your bullshit suddenly i have problems with women and a personal vendetta. I simply think that your opinions on this matters are full of shit and i call you on them. The first that doesn't shut up and attacks others is you and that's why you have someone like me answering you back. You didn't even bothered answering to his perspective instead your suppose comeback was basically nothing more than "you are a moron because i don't like what you said or don't get it" I have no problem agreeing with you if in another matter i find your perspective more logical. And leave other women out of your personal defense, your views ain't the collective of womanhood, you ain't the voice of female existence and disagreeing with you doesn't make anyone against women or their rights so stop playing the fucking female god. |
| Lol like I was referring to the fat. If the glands are bigger, so are the breasts, thus, more milk. That does not say they're not attracted towards breasts, so wait, if I have a foot fetish, does that mean that I am only attracted towards the woman's feet? That's your logic right there. Presumptions, good job on that. I don't know, but I thought that accepting the fact that you are in my harem also means you finally know me a bit. Since when do I care of anything else other than fun? EDIT: By the way, breasts are also erogenous zones, as they're connected to the "pleasure part of the brain" (with the genitalia). They're deemed as aesthetically pleasing and erotic. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifestyle/scientific-proof-that-men-look-at-womens-breasts-first-and-their-face-is-almost-last/story-e6frf00i-1225770286482 Here's a bit of research on how men actually look at breasts first before the face. Oh, did I ever tell you that there is NO CULTURE that does deem breasts as NOT erotical? No? Okay, I just did. Actually, they do say how some cultures deem old and saggy breasts as better than round and youthful ones, as they indicate experience in life and motherhood. Monad said: NicoleB said: InfiniteRyvius said: NicoleB said: Monad said: Or maybe it was too wise for your over-feminist mind Nicole B. Or maybe you're just a misogynist asshole, hence why you can't understand why it's not okay? Who knows. I hope think he was joking. No, this is Monad, every single thread which could possible be interpreted as having anything to do with feminism or anything pro-female, has him in it telling how the world is so awful now that women have even basic rights. He definitely has some deep issues with women and me especially since he basically attacks my posts all the time. Lol, what a complete twisted person you are. Just because i disagree with your bullshit suddenly i have problems with women and a personal vendetta. I simply think that your opinions on this matters are full of shit and i call you on them. The first that doesn't shut up and attacks others is you and that's why you have someone like me answering you back. You didn't even bothered answering to his perspective instead your suppose comeback was basically nothing more than "you are a moron because i don't like what you said or don't get it" I have no problem agreeing with you if in another matter i find your perspective more logical. And leave other women out of your personal defense, your views ain't the collective of womanhood, you ain't the voice of female existence and disagreeing with you doesn't make anyone against women or their rights so stop playing the fucking female god. I have no idea why she lacks logic so much, really... Comes in says "No, you guys are wrong", we counter-argument her, then she won't say anything more. INSTEAD, if people agree with her, she's all over the thread. Even triple replies, to show how awesome her opinion is. |
ImmahnoobDec 26, 2012 1:08 PM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
SetsukoHara said: If you're all alone in an elevator, what's to stop you. Though don't some elevators have cameras.mdude009 said: Suddenly FJ's been doing a lot of katawa shoujo posts which made me wonder. Now say you were in an elevator, and suddenly it stops and a girl with the white cane and milky eyes (or dark glasses) walks in, she also happens to have amazing tits. Would it be fine to stare at them (and I don't mean the quick half a second glance you do with other chicks, I mean a full hard stare for the duration of the entire elevator ride, getting time in to admire ever little detail your eyes can get) or would that be considered a big social "no-no." Discuss my minions! I wouldn't just stare, I would fap to that. |
     Short of the day: Monotonous Purgatory(MAL) ✰Public Domain Club | One Piece Club✰ |
| No, just masturbate as fast and forceful as you can while grunting, the cameras will then explode. She's not deaf yeah, but who cares, she can't slap you if you're as fast as a ninja. Then ejaculate all over her and run as fast as you can, before the police finds you. |
ImmahnoobDec 26, 2012 12:56 PM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| thread title reminded me of lily. and sure go right ahead. no harm done just by looking. |
Immahnoob said: No, just masturbate as fast and forceful as you can while grunting, the cameras will then explode. She's not deaf yeah, but who cares, she can't slap you if you're as fast as a ninja. Then ejaculate all over her and run as fast as you can, before the police finds you. What if they make you bate in a lineup of possible like-sounding suspects? |
| Join the "I like changing names in IRC" club! Especially if you like changing names in IRC! It's really neat! Dare to be someone different, many, many times! Dare to dream! |
Chair-san said: Immahnoob said: No, just masturbate as fast and forceful as you can while grunting, the cameras will then explode. She's not deaf yeah, but who cares, she can't slap you if you're as fast as a ninja. Then ejaculate all over her and run as fast as you can, before the police finds you. What if they make you bate in a lineup of possible like-sounding suspects? I love this animal. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Chair-san said: Immahnoob said: No, just masturbate as fast and forceful as you can while grunting, the cameras will then explode. She's not deaf yeah, but who cares, she can't slap you if you're as fast as a ninja. Then ejaculate all over her and run as fast as you can, before the police finds you. What if they make you bate in a lineup of possible like-sounding suspects? I love this animal. To be honest, that sounds more like something courage wolf would say. |
| Join the "I like changing names in IRC" club! Especially if you like changing names in IRC! It's really neat! Dare to be someone different, many, many times! Dare to dream! |
| I'm Googling them, and I know... |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Of course, if this is not ok, why would she have grown them? No, just kidding, I think it's the same as every other boobed person, but for me, I woudn't stare like an idiot cause respect and stuff. |
Narmy said: What if she was only pretending to be blind, solely to trap perverts who stare at women in elevators. hahaha :D You wish you arent one of those. |
"A half moon, it has a dark half and a bright half, just like me…", Yuno Gasai |
Chair-san said: I asked my friends this, by the way. They went into "but she'll notice! Blind people have heightened senses, you know." I lol'd Don't make a sound, slow and calm your breathing, don't even move your head. And good god don't make a smell, with luck she won't even know you're there at all. -Atomsk- said: thread title reminded me of lily. and sure go right ahead. no harm done just by looking. Funny considering that was basically what inspired this whole question. |
 |
| Is she wearing a dress? "Oh god, I dropped my pen!" etc. Okay, maybe it was a bit crude for a thread like this. |
| Wear shades and you'll be fine. I've seen some people on public transport wearing them in the morning when the sun isn't even out yet. That or they're hiding their stonered eyes. |
Uncrowned said: Wear shades and you'll be fine. Somewhat shocked no one has mentioned this yet, and it took 9 pages. |
Just this once, I'll fulfill whatever your wish is. |
| I'd cop a good look if they were appealing although I do think a man who says he wouldn't is definitely lying to himself. Sure it's a sly and a shamed upon thing to do but no harm is being done, the only harm that would be caused would be getting a semi and changing the air pressure in the lift. It's not really considered bad for a woman to stare at a guys ass or drool over a mans six pack right? |
----------------------------- |
InfiniteRyvius said: Most people would agree the essence of a human being lies either in the soul, or the brain as a center of perception; the latter quite haphazardly explained away by the non-religious, but on closer examination doesn't change the fact that physical entities are in fact all objects by definition. And even if you prescribe to some sort of Cartesian duality (or most forms of duality that prioritizes the spirit over the body), you'd still have to admit that the body is only a tool -- a machine.It's because you are viewing her not as a person but as an object of sex. It's not that hard. In light of that, breasts, or anything else are objects. And whether they are objects of sex or anything else is subject to the interpretation of the beholder. Unless you think breasts constitute the essence of a human being as a whole, then there really is no confusion between the person and the object of sex. There can be both: People possess objects of sex. InfiniteRyvius said: That right is not violated by the thoughts of others. For example, if someone calls you a donkey, that doesn't actually prevent you from exercising your rights not to be a donkey; neither does someone staring at your breasts prevent you from being a person.All people have the same rights, one of them being is that they are people. InfiniteRyvius said: Staring at anything is impolite, and in that respect it is "wrong" -- but no more than that. There is nothing inherently different in coveting breasts than coveting a Ferrari or someone's school grades or curly hair. Each one of these motivations are different but they are all rather earthly pursuits.I assumed you meant stare rather than look though, that changes things slightly. Most will be drawn to them, but I'd hope people would have to the restraint to stop themselves staring at them. Also, it may be biologically normal, but that doesn't mean something is unnecessarily right. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
Immahnoob said: I'm exactly the opposite. If people agree with me, I don't say any more...I have no idea why she lacks logic so much, really... Comes in says "No, you guys are wrong", we counter-argument her, then she won't say anything more. INSTEAD, if people agree with her, she's all over the thread. Even triple replies, to show how awesome her opinion is.  |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Sure. It's a victimless crime. |
katsucats said: Immahnoob said: I'm exactly the opposite. If people agree with me, I don't say any more...I have no idea why she lacks logic so much, really... Comes in says "No, you guys are wrong", we counter-argument her, then she won't say anything more. INSTEAD, if people agree with her, she's all over the thread. Even triple replies, to show how awesome her opinion is. You don't curse at them while laughing hysterically? |
| "Every man shall reap what he has sown, from the highest lord to the lowest gutter rat. And some will lose more than the tips off their fingers, I promise you. They have made my kingdom bleed, and I do not forget that" |
| What's next? Is it okay to talk about a deaf guy's dick? |
| As a child, I was told that society is a melting pot of talents; knowledge and experience combined to form important alloys that will contribute to mankind. When I got to highschool, however, I thought that it's more like a river in which the water represents our peers while we ourselves are the stones in the river. Constant erosion by mindless majority sheeping has made us lose our unique edge. After I hit the age of 18, I realized that I've been wrong all along. Society is no melting pot. Society is no river. Society is a person, a very skilled rapist, and he has fucked us all. |
| You've never heard of "attraction" before? Do you really not know attraction is instinctual? How do you even pick the girls in the bar or at a party, by the way? You talk to each one or you actually look for the "good-looking" ones THEN start talking? These "good-looking" women are picked by you only because your "instinct" tells you they're the best for the mother job. We are attracted towards healthy and fertile women by instinct. We still have "animal instincts", it does not matter if we also have "rationality", "rationality" only added the "secondary" part in finding a woman/man, the character. The size of the breasts come from the amount of fat and the size of the glands, bigger glands, more milk. Certain body types and sizes are better than the others, they had (had because now it does not matter anymore) higher chances of survival. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Immahnoob, please take a class in biology. |
| Nice argument Trap, oh wait. Nope. Playing LoL, let's see what you got. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| http://www.breastfeedingbasics.com/articles/nursing-tips-for-the-large-breasted-woman http://www.babycenter.com/404_is-it-true-that-small-breasted-moms-produce-less-milk_10310185.bc http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/35320/35321/378037.html?d=dmtHMSContent I know it's hard for you to admit you're wrong. But trust me, anyone who isn't a complete idiot in terms of knowledge of the human body, is going to be laughing at your posts. I can't really be bothered replying to you anymore, but I figured since you didn't get it last time, there was maybe a chance you would now. |
| And what did I say? I'm sorry, but the amount of milk you can keep there depends on how big your mammary glands are too. It's how it works. Or maybe you meant something else? I do not see where I made a mistake. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: And what did I say? I'm sorry, but the amount of milk you can keep there depends on how big your mammary glands are too. If they are small, they expand. I'll do better quoting than Trap on this: http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/83/5/1810.full.pdf TEXT said: PLAINTEXT: There is no correlation between breast size and important stuff(arguably) for babies in milk. Hence, fat tissues in breasts do not produce important stuff for babies, in milk. (See reference 11 - Leptin is present in human milk and is related to maternal plasma leptin concentration and adiposity which is under a Paywall, so good luck if you don't have university access) Explanation: Correlation is not causation, but absence of correlation is a bigger observation: it prevents causation or any form of meaningful relation. This also outright states that fats(which give size) have no effect on milk production. On breast sizes/volumes: http://ep.physoc.org/content/84/2/435.full.pdf The final line reads: TEXT said: This research is based of a small sample, as well as statistical correlation - I would argue this to be an observational study rather than a study of causes. In any case, 'storage capacity' seems to be variable - it's not fixed on initial breast volume, and it's not stated(correct me, I don't read the whole thing carefully) anywhere that says larger initial breast size means more milk storage capacity. Immahnoob said: I'd like to see your sources on your claims. I hope they be NEJM or Nature, the latter which I definitely can refer to. You can also use other equivalents like Science Mag. etc.It's how it works. Or maybe you meant something else? I do not see where I made a mistake. |
 「みんながいるからだ。」 － 棗鈴 |
| They also have a limit, that's what I meant, it's obvious I never said that little breasts do not produce as much milk as bigger breasts, I only said that the storage capacity is higher, the idea is to show why we are attracted towards bigger lower part of the body/breasts. And I never said that the fat produces milk either. Nursing often also makes them produce milk continuously, otherwise they stop producing (duuh). Women with little breasts can feed more often so they can produce more, but bigger breasts also means less work (don't take it literally). When the baby feeds on the breast it sends signals to the brain (the stimulation I mean), so it produces more oxytocin. http://www.llli.org/nb/nbmarapr05p44.html No, this isn't wrote by scientists. I'll try and find some others too, I'm rather slow with these type of research as I am pretty poor in "searching engine skills". Check "Physiology and Milk Supply". "Women with larger breasts and greater storage capacity may be able to go longer between feedings without affecting their supply." But your article says nothing about that, it's rather vague about the storage. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
mitch3315 said: I would continue staring at the wallpaper of mai waifu on my phone, paying no attention to the stupid 3D women. Kami-sama ;_; |
 |
| I believe the latter of the articles said more nursing = more milk (infant demand) So greater milk storage = more sexy breasts? That's like saying a 1L bottle > 500mL bottle, because it's larger. This is a stretch of a logic to me. It'd be better if there was an observational study when a random(impossible to get) of men are shown breasts and had their sexual stimulation measured. This would give some observations. The mechanisms would involve nervous systems, perhaps even culture/upbringing, and/or biological means. Knowing the mechanisms would be great, I believe none of us here has quoted an exact and amazing article with an opinion on this. |
「みんながいるからだ。」 － 棗鈴 |
| No, if you re-read my comments you'll understand that I'm talking about fertility and attraction. We are attracted towards what can be a "perfect mother". Somebody that can survive the pregnancy and that can feed the child properly after pregnancy. We attract each other because of the need to reproduce, this instinct never left us. I wasn't solely talking about breasts there, though. I'm also trying to show why looking at breasts is not sexually objectifying anybody (actually, this is a moralist fallacy, so I shouldn't care), to show that there is "attraction" to the "perfect female body" thus "perfect mother" (I'm repeating myself here, sorry) and several people said themselves that looking at breasts is not illegal, even staring. My argument still orbits around the OP's question, but I'm making it a general case. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| So larger breasts -> greater milk storage -> easier motherhood -> sexual attraction It sounds vague. In fact, it is vague. It's also at least a 3-step logic process to which proof is not provided, hence there's a lot of room for doubt. Breasts aren't my cup of tea for discussion, so I'll end my discussion with you until some other picks it up. (in short, I don't really feel like researching the dubiousness of your claims.) |
「みんながいるからだ。」 － 棗鈴 |
| Actually, sexual instincts can be controlled by the human being because of the existence of rationality (I denied this prematurely), of course, you cannot control to whom you are attracted to, I am saying that you can control the urge to interact sexually with the one you are attracted towards. But if you want, I can get even deeper (INCEPTION), humans are part of the hominids (with chimpanzees and other animals), we are the only hominids that have the breasts swollen all the time (chimpanzees have flat chests unless lactating). Hominids like chimpanzees are attracted to the buttocks more than to the chest because the chest is not "visible", while we are attracted to both because of the swollen nature of the breast. (we are also the only ones that can walk upright) Big breasts and their cleavage do look a lot like a pair of buttocks too, we've evolved out of the "buttocks" stage because of the swollen breasts. Not only that, but big breasts get even more swollen during pregnancy, thus, giving the idea of "fertility" which is not entirely false as I have already mentioned, non-swollen breasts during pregnancy means they're not preparing themselves to produce milk. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| don lie. at least half the people in this thread would feel too awkward upon seeing a female to look in her general vicinity for more than 5 seconds, before staring at the elevator number changes and rushing out the door. |
 |
Neane1993 said: I don't like boobs, arms on the other (Huge Arm Fetish)... I've heard of many fetish: Foot, ears, small tits, tomboys, pegging, hermaphrodites/trannies, bestiality, massive dildo's, fleshlights used as dildo's, tentacle, loli, necrophilia, scat, waterworks, pimple popping, toddler-con, vomit... (7 hours later) ... amputees, scars, sounding (putting something into the urethra), and of course lactation. But admittedly this is the first time I've heard about arm fetishes. |
|
| I'd vocalize my actions. |
| Is it okay to look at the opposite sex? |
 |
mdude009 said: But admittedly this is the first time I've heard about arm fetishes. There's an armpit fetish, as much as I know. |
| LUL |
More topics from this board
» Does knowing how MAL user looks like change how you see/treat them?barababas - 27 minutes ago |
2 |
by LoveYourEyes
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» Is English your native language? ( 1 2 )DesuMaiden - Apr 16 |
80 |
by LoveYourEyes
»»
12 minutes ago |
|
» (Nearly) Dying in your dreamsTheAngryNerd - Oct 18, 2022 |
27 |
by Soverign
»»
38 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Do you care about your native culture? ( 1 2 )Kamikaze_404 - Apr 9 |
51 |
by MalchikRepaid
»»
1 hour ago |
|
» Hottest non Hollywood actor on YouTube?scarydragon - 1 hour ago |
0 |
by scarydragon
»»
1 hour ago |