Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: gazit@cs.duke.EDU (Hillel Gazit)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Female human aesthetics
Message-ID: <658245246@lear.cs.duke.edu>
Date: 10 Nov 90 20:17:27 GMT
References: <9011012313.AA11775@rpp386.Cactus.ORG> <8654@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Organization: Nefolet shel nemushot (Fallout of Wimps)
Lines: 31
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu

In article <8654@darkstar.ucsc.edu> (fOoDFoOdfOoDiTYfooD!) writes:

>I disagree completely.  Women are expected to be beautiful so that
>they can win the attention of men.

But they can win the attention of men without being very beautiful.

E.g. some of the net.goddesses are not beautiful (by the usual standards).
Even some of those who mentioned that on the net still have a full
mail-box on regular basis...

>We are taught that being as
>beautiful as possible is the only chance we have to get a boyfriend/
>husband.

You have to be beautiful to get a *successful* husband.

If you are not "looking for the gold" (e.g. earn enough)
then you have a good chance to get a boyfriend/husband even if
you are not beautiful.

>your average fashion spread.  There are *constant* references to
>how attractive you'll be *to men* if you wear this dress or that brand
>of lipstick.

The fact is that even in a female-only env. (army, jail) most
women still try to look as beautiful as possible...

Hillel                                                gazit@cs.duke.edu

"The men of the net *are* that gullible."  --  Miriam Nadel