Anti aging and pedophilic patriarchy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

This. Plus at 48 no matter what I do, I will never ever look even 30 much less like a child.

So dumb. I really hate when other women create these dumb posts to tell us what we should be doing with our bodies. Go gray, never shave, be flabby. WHO CARES. I'll do whatever I damn well please with my body. I dont have to justify it to anyone.

How can a 50 year old look 25? What does that entail?

Did I say I was trying to look 25? Why would I know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

This. Plus at 48 no matter what I do, I will never ever look even 30 much less like a child.

So dumb. I really hate when other women create these dumb posts to tell us what we should be doing with our bodies. Go gray, never shave, be flabby. WHO CARES. I'll do whatever I damn well please with my body. I dont have to justify it to anyone.

How can a 50 year old look 25? What does that entail?

I think there's been a cultural shift away from trying to look younger in favor of trying to look good for your age. There are so many women in their forties (Giselle, Jessica Alba) and fifties (Halle Barry, Heidi Klum, Nicole Kidman) who still look gorgeous. It's not about looking 25; it's about looking and feeling your best for as long as you can.

Hollywood women have to look youthful. Their livelihoods are based on looks, not necessarily on talent. Why is that? Because most of Hollywood is controlled by men.

Some women are trying to change that - like Jessica Alba owns Honest Company, and Nicole Kidman is an accomplished producer.

Some men in Hollywood are also desperately trying to hold on to their looks, like Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise have had work done.

The desire to look good for as long as possible is not solely grounded in patriarchy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bikini wax is 100% related to this.

No, I do this because I don't want hairs picking out of my swimsuit. I like being clean and fresh. But you do you.

DP. This is actually interesting to me because I feel pretty sure that if a woman wore a bathing suit with visible pubic hair coming out, it is women who would freak out and shame her first. Some men might think it's gross but some would not care, some would think it's hot even (yes this is a thing). But women would be the ones to speak up, criticize, gossip, and shame her. Fir having naturally occurring body hair and failing to cover it up or remove it.

Women tend to be harder on each other with regards to grooming, specifically. Even here people are saying they wax because it's "cleaner" and "fresher" implying that women who don't wax are dirty and... stale?

I think this raises questions of where this aesthetic preference comes from and why. Is it that women have so internalized male preferences that they self police (even though being bald down there is not actually a universal male preferences)? Are women competing with each other to be viewed as the cleanest and most hygienic, in some eternal competition for mates and resources? What is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to date a bald man with a paunch so guess there are biases on both sides.

Sure, but having some kind of bush = woman. Being bald down there = prepubescent.

Eh, give it a rest.

"Having some kind of facial hair = man. Being cleanshaven = prepubescent."

This gets boring so fast.

Yes, exactly. Lots of youthful looking men grow facial hair precisely for the reason that - they look prepubescent without facial hair.

But, if the man without the facial hair looks like an adult, it doesn't matter.

Unlike a man's face, you can't really tell the age of a woman by looking at her shaved pubic area. So, if she has no hair there, yes, it can look prepubescent.

Please stop shaving your armpits and legs immediately. You look prepubescent if you shave those. See how dumb you sound. Stop policing what women do with their bodies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

This. Plus at 48 no matter what I do, I will never ever look even 30 much less like a child.

So dumb. I really hate when other women create these dumb posts to tell us what we should be doing with our bodies. Go gray, never shave, be flabby. WHO CARES. I'll do whatever I damn well please with my body. I dont have to justify it to anyone.

How can a 50 year old look 25? What does that entail?

Did I say I was trying to look 25? Why would I know?

PP said they were wanting to look 25, not 17. So how can someone who’s 50, who can pass for half their age, not also pass as a teenager? Its just not common at all for a 50 year old to look 25.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a woman who has always looked young for my age and spent my 20s and early 30s looking like a 13 yr old girl (almost no curves, very thin, very young looking face), I already knew this.

In my 20s, I very rapidly learned that my appearance had a tendency to attract men who had straight up pedophilia leanings. I got hit on and asked out by older men a lot, and quickly started self selecting only towards men my own age or even a couple years younger as a safety precaution. Many men were extremely open about what they found appealing about me and my body, including just telling me that my size and appearance made them feel "powerful" or "like a protector". I was sexually assaulted when I was 26 which made me incredibly wary of men in general but especially any man who was physically much bigger than I was or seemed sexually aggressive in any way.

I'm much older now (mid-40s) and no longer have this look. I've had kids and look more womanly and my face has aged. I have never had any desire to try and preserve my youthful appearance and actually love that I look mature and adult now. I have a lot of emotional scars from my experiences, not just with sexual assault but with a whole variety of of manipulative and exploitative relationships (especially in work settings) that in retrospect I think had a lot to do with how young and innocent I looked, which I think drew in people who have these impulses to dominate and overpower other people (men AND women, btw, anyone who thinks there are no women with these impulses is wrong).

The entire Epstein case has been both upsetting for me, dragging up old trauma, but it also feels like a relief in many ways. Listening to people talk about how they had no idea so many people were so interested in young women, or felt comfortable with the exploitation of young women whether they participated or not, feels deeply validating.

People like to "other" sexual predators, but I view it as all part of a big continuum that many people you know and encounter every day are on. A lot of people just want to be able to force other people to do what they want, and a lot of people settle on young women (either actual girls or just young adult women who they feel they can physically and emotionally control) as a target for those desires.

The answer is empowerment of women and of children. The answer is a culture of consent. This means a lot of people, including people who think they are feminist or would never endorse exploitation but who regularly uphold systems that disempower women, children, immigrants, and others, need to rethink what they think they know about the world. I hope the Epstein files are a step in that direction.

I think they are a step in the right direction. Some men may be consumers of exploitive relationships, but they certainly don't want it for their daughters. Men who care and are involved parents want their daughters to be strong, empowered, and make their own money. They want them to eventually partner up with someone their own age, from a good family, who will treat them with respect and be a good father to their grandchildren. I think that once men have daughters, they are less likely to objectify and exploit young women. I hope that is true. Unfortunately, it's less likely our daugthers who are exploited. It is poor and often immigrant girls who don't have people like us to protect them.

Hmm many of the men in the Epstein files have daughters though.

I know, very disturbing. Women need to do more to protect girls from exploitation. That's the bottom line.

How can they when women are often intentionally turning a blind eye to it, participating in the exploitation, gaslighting survivors who come forward, etc.? Women who are in positions of power are part of the problem. Epstein did what he did with the willing participation and assistance of multiple women.

I don't think people understand the depth of this problem. We are all part of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

This. Plus at 48 no matter what I do, I will never ever look even 30 much less like a child.

So dumb. I really hate when other women create these dumb posts to tell us what we should be doing with our bodies. Go gray, never shave, be flabby. WHO CARES. I'll do whatever I damn well please with my body. I dont have to justify it to anyone.

How can a 50 year old look 25? What does that entail?

Did I say I was trying to look 25? Why would I know?

PP said they were wanting to look 25, not 17. So how can someone who’s 50, who can pass for half their age, not also pass as a teenager? Its just not common at all for a 50 year old to look 25.

For all you know that PP is 30 in which case she can indeed look 25 with some work. Either way, you're missing the point entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to date a bald man with a paunch so guess there are biases on both sides.

Sure, but having some kind of bush = woman. Being bald down there = prepubescent.

Eh, give it a rest.

"Having some kind of facial hair = man. Being cleanshaven = prepubescent."

This gets boring so fast.

Yes, exactly. Lots of youthful looking men grow facial hair precisely for the reason that - they look prepubescent without facial hair.

But, if the man without the facial hair looks like an adult, it doesn't matter.

Unlike a man's face, you can't really tell the age of a woman by looking at her shaved pubic area. So, if she has no hair there, yes, it can look prepubescent.

Please stop shaving your armpits and legs immediately. You look prepubescent if you shave those. See how dumb you sound. Stop policing what women do with their bodies.

But if a woman didn't shave or wax her armpits or legs, she would be policed for it instantly. She would be called gross and unhygienic.

The policing is happening already, all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

This. Plus at 48 no matter what I do, I will never ever look even 30 much less like a child.

So dumb. I really hate when other women create these dumb posts to tell us what we should be doing with our bodies. Go gray, never shave, be flabby. WHO CARES. I'll do whatever I damn well please with my body. I dont have to justify it to anyone.

How can a 50 year old look 25? What does that entail?

Did I say I was trying to look 25? Why would I know?

PP said they were wanting to look 25, not 17. So how can someone who’s 50, who can pass for half their age, not also pass as a teenager? Its just not common at all for a 50 year old to look 25.

For all you know that PP is 30 in which case she can indeed look 25 with some work. Either way, you're missing the point entirely.

Shes 48.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to date a bald man with a paunch so guess there are biases on both sides.

Sure, but having some kind of bush = woman. Being bald down there = prepubescent.

Eh, give it a rest.

"Having some kind of facial hair = man. Being cleanshaven = prepubescent."

This gets boring so fast.

Yes, exactly. Lots of youthful looking men grow facial hair precisely for the reason that - they look prepubescent without facial hair.

But, if the man without the facial hair looks like an adult, it doesn't matter.

Unlike a man's face, you can't really tell the age of a woman by looking at her shaved pubic area. So, if she has no hair there, yes, it can look prepubescent.

Please stop shaving your armpits and legs immediately. You look prepubescent if you shave those. See how dumb you sound. Stop policing what women do with their bodies.

But if a woman didn't shave or wax her armpits or legs, she would be policed for it instantly. She would be called gross and unhygienic.

The policing is happening already, all the time.

All the more reason for other women to stop saying dumb shit about women who choose to wax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

This. Plus at 48 no matter what I do, I will never ever look even 30 much less like a child.

So dumb. I really hate when other women create these dumb posts to tell us what we should be doing with our bodies. Go gray, never shave, be flabby. WHO CARES. I'll do whatever I damn well please with my body. I dont have to justify it to anyone.

How can a 50 year old look 25? What does that entail?

Did I say I was trying to look 25? Why would I know?

PP said they were wanting to look 25, not 17. So how can someone who’s 50, who can pass for half their age, not also pass as a teenager? Its just not common at all for a 50 year old to look 25.

For all you know that PP is 30 in which case she can indeed look 25 with some work. Either way, you're missing the point entirely.

Shes 48.

No, dear. I'm 48 and responded to a poster whose age we do not know. Learn how to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anti aging is about looking 25, not 17.

So… as young as medically possible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to date a bald man with a paunch so guess there are biases on both sides.

Sure, but having some kind of bush = woman. Being bald down there = prepubescent.

Eh, give it a rest.

"Having some kind of facial hair = man. Being cleanshaven = prepubescent."

This gets boring so fast.

Yes, exactly. Lots of youthful looking men grow facial hair precisely for the reason that - they look prepubescent without facial hair.

But, if the man without the facial hair looks like an adult, it doesn't matter.

Unlike a man's face, you can't really tell the age of a woman by looking at her shaved pubic area. So, if she has no hair there, yes, it can look prepubescent.

Please stop shaving your armpits and legs immediately. You look prepubescent if you shave those. See how dumb you sound. Stop policing what women do with their bodies.

But if a woman didn't shave or wax her armpits or legs, she would be policed for it instantly. She would be called gross and unhygienic.

The policing is happening already, all the time.

All the more reason for other women to stop saying dumb shit about women who choose to wax.

Well said. Low IQ "feminist" sez "you were so brainwashed by the patriarchy that you can't think; therefore you wax". As if I'm that dumb. Fck off with your condescension. A beefy, hairy lesbian does not have more feminist credibility than I do just by virtue of her grooming and sex partner decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to date a bald man with a paunch so guess there are biases on both sides.

Sure, but having some kind of bush = woman. Being bald down there = prepubescent.

Eh, give it a rest.

"Having some kind of facial hair = man. Being cleanshaven = prepubescent."

This gets boring so fast.

Yes, exactly. Lots of youthful looking men grow facial hair precisely for the reason that - they look prepubescent without facial hair.

But, if the man without the facial hair looks like an adult, it doesn't matter.

Unlike a man's face, you can't really tell the age of a woman by looking at her shaved pubic area. So, if she has no hair there, yes, it can look prepubescent.

Please stop shaving your armpits and legs immediately. You look prepubescent if you shave those. See how dumb you sound. Stop policing what women do with their bodies.

But if a woman didn't shave or wax her armpits or legs, she would be policed for it instantly. She would be called gross and unhygienic.

The policing is happening already, all the time.

All the more reason for other women to stop saying dumb shit about women who choose to wax.

I get what you're saying, and I'm not the person who was criticizing waxing, but I actually agree with them that we should ask ourselves what the norms are and why. I don't judge a woman who waxes, but I do question a man who prefers it. And I do wonder about the way we talk about hair on women (other than their heads) as unclean or unhygienic. It's worth discussing.

Certainly it is women who don't conform to a hairless standard who get criticism cause zed more than the other way around, yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to date a bald man with a paunch so guess there are biases on both sides.

Sure, but having some kind of bush = woman. Being bald down there = prepubescent.

Eh, give it a rest.

"Having some kind of facial hair = man. Being cleanshaven = prepubescent."

This gets boring so fast.

Yes, exactly. Lots of youthful looking men grow facial hair precisely for the reason that - they look prepubescent without facial hair.

But, if the man without the facial hair looks like an adult, it doesn't matter.

Unlike a man's face, you can't really tell the age of a woman by looking at her shaved pubic area. So, if she has no hair there, yes, it can look prepubescent.

Please stop shaving your armpits and legs immediately. You look prepubescent if you shave those. See how dumb you sound. Stop policing what women do with their bodies.

But if a woman didn't shave or wax her armpits or legs, she would be policed for it instantly. She would be called gross and unhygienic.

The policing is happening already, all the time.

All the more reason for other women to stop saying dumb shit about women who choose to wax.

Well said. Low IQ "feminist" sez "you were so brainwashed by the patriarchy that you can't think; therefore you wax". As if I'm that dumb. Fck off with your condescension. A beefy, hairy lesbian does not have more feminist credibility than I do just by virtue of her grooming and sex partner decisions.

Why do you associate hair on women with being "beefy" or a lesbian? Also why do you use terms like beefy, hairy, and lesbian as insults?