Daily Dose of Stupid

[GenesisNemesis]

We start with a wonderful post by KingTickleDicks on Imgur, where a man is praised for complaining about not being able to see a woman's boobs. Here is the full image:

There's quite a lot that's wrong with this. Firstly, there's the notion that she wanted men to stare at her breasts, when in reality it's far more likely that she was wearing that shirt simply because it's comfortable. Secondly, the man states that he's "biologically programmed" to stare at breasts. This is the appeal to nature fallacy, where it is argued that something is "good" because it is "natural". Moreover, it implies that men have no self control whatsoever, which is fairly demeaning to men, as well.

Finally, my favorite part, the man claims that breasts represent "a time when life was easy", and that he spent "the best 18 months" of his life sucking on breasts. I'm not sure how he can tell that they were the best months of his life, when you can't judge the quality of something you don't remember at all. Then, suddenly, the woman agrees with him, because obviously this argument is completely correct and there are no flaws with it. Anyone who knows anything about logic would be able to pick apart this argument easily. It's fairly pathetic that a man getting so annoyed that he can't look at a woman's boobs is considered praiseworthy, by some.

 

[Shadowy Man]

There's quite a lot that's wrong with this. Firstly, there's the notion that she wanted men to stare at her breasts, when in reality it's far more likely that she was wearing that shirt simply because it's comfortable.

I guess she couldn't find any comfortable shirts without a neckline that plunges six inches into her cleavage.

 

[Atheos]

Dude's a hero. Mmmmmm.... boobies.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

There's quite a lot that's wrong with this. Firstly, there's the notion that she wanted men to stare at her breasts, when in reality it's far more likely that she was wearing that shirt simply because it's comfortable.

I guess she couldn't find any comfortable shirts without a neckline that plunges six inches into her cleavage.

I guess it's not actually so big of a deal that someone should be so annoyed about it.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I guess she couldn't find any comfortable shirts without a neckline that plunges six inches into her cleavage.

I guess it's not actually so big of a deal that someone should be so annoyed about it.

The initial image as presented implies that she felt that a look at her chest is the same thing as ogling. Most men will look at the bodies and secondary sexual characteristics of women but not all looking should be considered 'ogling'. I do believe that men should be discrete and polite and not define the women they meet by their sexual characteristics alone.

My mother used to say that women would ask her if she was worried that her husband would look at other women. She would tell them that she would be worried if he stopped looking at other women.

 

[abaddon]

I’m going to coin the new “appeal to feeling offended” as a new fallacy. People seem to think that if something offends them then it can’t be right.

And I’m going to analyze this at a little length…

1) Women walk a tightrope throughout their lives between sexuality and reputation. They want to be looked at and appreciated by at least some males and they are raised with pressure to please males generally, and they respond to it. But due to prudish morals in our allegedly “libertine” society, they’re also compelled to mask the wish to be seen as sexy at least to some extent, and sometimes (and maybe very often) the “I wear this scant clothing to be comfortable” stuff is exactly just that: subterfuge.

The arguments over that usually assume consciousness on anyone’s part. People can’t help but talk about their “choice” to do what they do… it’s part of their script.

But should women cover their tits to avoid men looking at them? No. Isn’t the real shame that people, both male and female, are bothered with all these “oughts” and “shoulds”? There are too many rules pushed on everyone! Yet people seem to keep looking for more rules. Why? Control, manipulation, “do what I want and not what you want”.

2) I wonder… is the appeal to nature always wrong? I think it’s important to not just slap a label on someone’s argument but actually analyze why the presumed fallacy necessarily devastates the argument in its particular context.

And anyway, did the man argue it’s “good” to follow his nature and glance at her tits? Or did he just say it’s a hard-to-control impulse?

Is suggesting men lack control sometimes really demeaning? If so, then so what? Maybe it’s just descriptive. And should everyone always be in control? Is that a realistic expectation, or just an unfeasible moralistic one?

And, again, what offends anybody doesn’t matter a fuck when it comes to what’s true and what isn’t.

3) “The best 18 months of my life”. He seems to be suggesting things were comfortable and easy before he had to work at everything. Is it really necessary to remember it to conclude those were good times if being untroubled, maybe even with the burden of memory, is what is valued?

4) “It's fairly pathetic that a man getting so annoyed…”. Was he so annoyed or was he hitting on her? Or at least dialoguing with her?

And if he was annoyed, then so what? Is he supposed to give a female special deference, as if he must necessarily take a docile position irt "women's concerns"?

5) One last thing. I think the sketch is something of a sardonic look at men and women, with an intent to entertain and amuse, yes? We’re treating it very seriously and that’s ok, but I’m wondering if the not-so-serious intent of the sketch’s author is recognized?

Closing remarks: If the guy’s hitting on her, he’s doing it skillfully, with a nice mix of humor and maybe somewhat sketchy logic … but the main thing is it’s two humans dialoguing with each rather than the woman successfully shaming the man. What would be pathetic is if he merely cowed to her sense of offense and sheepishly apologized and slunk away in shame. How about this instead: Fuck shame, and fuck all the goddam moralistic crap people manipulatively lay on other people.

 

[TSwizzle]

He's wearing a bandanna, prick.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I’m going to coin the new “appeal to feeling offended” as a new fallacy. People seem to think that if something offends them then it can’t be right.

No, it's wrong because the guy's logic is total bullshit. Also it's much easier to dismiss someone's argument because you think they're offended. I probably can't convince you that I'm not offended, though. The only reason I posted this was to poke holes in the argument that was presented, because I enjoy poking holes in arguments.

and sometimes (and maybe very often) the “I wear this scant clothing to be comfortable” stuff is exactly just that: subterfuge.

A statement like this can't be backed up by anything other than anecdotal evidence, and I doubt there's very much of that.

But should women cover their tits to avoid men looking at them? No.

Wasn't suggesting that. I'm merely saying that the guy has no reason to be so annoyed that he can't look at a girl's boobs, and if a girl doesn't want someone to look at their boobs, then people should respect that based on the simple idea of consent, regardless of what she's wearing.

 

[Bronzeage]

If this have been men, it would have gone something like this:
"I'm sorry, but did you just look at my chest?"

You are forgiven.

"For what?"

You said you were sorry, so you must imagine you offended me is someway, probably for taking a friendly encounter and making it unpleasant by demanding to know if I looked at something in my field of vision. Now, you can stand here and be offended, for which I will not apologise, or you can keep walking and I'll just watch your cute little ass trot off to yoga class. Namaste.

 

[Shadowy Man]

To be fair, he probably would have looked at her chest regardless of what she wore.

 

[bilby]

Presenting a fictional dialogue in an attempt to support a point is underhanded and vile.

I expect that man grew up to be Albert Einstein, too.

When you have control of both sides of the conversation, it's no great surprise that the conclusion matches your preconceptions.

That said, women are beautiful; breasts are beautiful; and only a fool tries to avoid looking at things of beauty that he encounters. If a lady is offended by some guy staring at her, (and many are, so it is a good assumption that she will be, unless she makes it clear that she is not) then it is impolite to stare. If she is offended by a glance, then tough - she will spend a LOT of time being offended. But that doesn't mean an apology is not called for, if you wish to maintain a self image as a good person.

Staring is rude. Glancing is inevitable. Apologising for any offence, intended or not, justified or not, without trying to explain, rationalise, or trivialise the complaint is what polite grownups do in casual social interactions. She is asking you not to stare at her cleavage, not demanding that you teach creationism to five year olds. Even if you think she is wrong to be offended, it doesn't hurt to apologise and to cease the behaviour she finds offensive.

Being a dick is childish.

Presenting a fake dialogue in which being a dick is laudable is even more childish.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There's quite a lot that's wrong with this. Firstly, there's the notion that she wanted men to stare at her breasts, when in reality it's far more likely that she was wearing that shirt simply because it's comfortable. Secondly, the man states that he's "biologically programmed" to stare at breasts. This is the appeal to nature fallacy, where it is argued that something is "good" because it is "natural". Moreover, it implies that men have no self control whatsoever, which is fairly demeaning to men, as well.

Finally, my favorite part, the man claims that breasts represent "a time when life was easy", and that he spent "the best 18 months" of his life sucking on breasts. I'm not sure how he can tell that they were the best months of his life, when you can't judge the quality of something you don't remember at all. Then, suddenly, the woman agrees with him, because obviously this argument is completely correct and there are no flaws with it. Anyone who knows anything about logic would be able to pick apart this argument easily. It's fairly pathetic that a man getting so annoyed that he can't look at a woman's boobs is considered praiseworthy, by some.

Sorry, but sports bras flatten her tits, not enhance her cleavage like that. The rest of her objections are on target. The rest of it is stupid as described.

 

[ideologyhunter]

The moral compass has been enlarged to include all of the Talkfreethought community who stared at the boobage while absent-mindedly readaing the text. Oh, the horror.

 

[Playball40]

There's quite a lot that's wrong with this. Firstly, there's the notion that she wanted men to stare at her breasts, when in reality it's far more likely that she was wearing that shirt simply because it's comfortable. Secondly, the man states that he's "biologically programmed" to stare at breasts. This is the appeal to nature fallacy, where it is argued that something is "good" because it is "natural". Moreover, it implies that men have no self control whatsoever, which is fairly demeaning to men, as well.

Finally, my favorite part, the man claims that breasts represent "a time when life was easy", and that he spent "the best 18 months" of his life sucking on breasts. I'm not sure how he can tell that they were the best months of his life, when you can't judge the quality of something you don't remember at all. Then, suddenly, the woman agrees with him, because obviously this argument is completely correct and there are no flaws with it. Anyone who knows anything about logic would be able to pick apart this argument easily. It's fairly pathetic that a man getting so annoyed that he can't look at a woman's boobs is considered praiseworthy, by some.

Sorry, but sports bras flatten her tits, not enhance her cleavage like that. The rest of her objections are on target. The rest of it is stupid as described.

My sports bras enhance cleavage. I think it depends on the cup size, really.

 

[Keith&Co.]

My sports bras enhance cleavage. I think it depends on the cup size, really.

Obviously, we need some pictures to fully evaluate the claim...

 

[repoman]

So, even Yoga Jesus likes to look at boobies...

 

[braces_for_impact]

My sports bras enhance cleavage. I think it depends on the cup size, really.

Obviously, we need some pictures to fully evaluate the claim...

But, we promise we won't look at them.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Obviously, we need some pictures to fully evaluate the claim...

But, we promise we won't look at them.

No. We have to look. But dispassionately. No ogling.

 

[Elixir]

Well, here's what I think - in the first picture, there is...
Waitaminit... what was I going to say?

 

[dendrast]

Just be cool.