Quote: (09-02-2016 11:34 AM)Ivanis Wrote:
Good to see some hot anti-feminists fighting the good fight.
http://www.rooshv.com/why-the-female-ant...n-disguise
Quote: (09-02-2016 11:34 AM)Ivanis Wrote:
Good to see some hot anti-feminists fighting the good fight.
Quote: (10-13-2016 11:05 PM)Penta Sahi Wrote:
Bump.
I was catching up on news on my phone last night in bed. Lauren Southern was attacked again by some SJW types. I know, it's her shtick. But anons have been talking about it and they started sharing her pics. This is apparently a younger Lauren Southern before she got the blond hair.
And this was me the rest of the night before I fell asleep.
Quote: (10-14-2016 03:58 PM)Enoch Wrote:
She's a Canadian 8. Made-up pretty heavy most times I see her. You don't really know what a girl looks like until you see her without makeup.
Quote: (10-14-2016 08:47 PM)RBerkley Wrote:
Rob Banks,
In Toronto, where Kathleen Wynne, a leader for the Province of Ontario wants to force 5-year-old kids to know about penis, vagina, vulva and genitals, and about anal sex at age 11, there is way more sexual degeneracy than a hot 21-year-old chick wearing shorts to "blend in" a Slutwalk demonstration.
There are female teachers and summer camp instructors who dress more provocative than Lauren Southern's shorts.
Even in the USA, some states got teacher union who would condone dress codes for students, but for female teachers, they even want to forbid school boards from even banning teachers showing ass cheeks & see through clothing citing "First Amendment", the right to dress even naked inside a classroom of minors they say.
Lauren Southern shorts is considered "modest" compared to what female teachers in Canada wear these days when teaching during the Summer weather. Plus, a horny 13-year-old boy isn't going to complain if he gets to see his teacher's boobies and bare legs while his female classmates are forced to cover up like wearing burkas because "dress code".
Quote: (10-14-2016 09:39 PM)RBerkley Wrote:This is something i've gotten from a lot of people and I don't really understand it. Whenever I make a comment to friends or family about some young girl who is either dressed too skimpy, or has had more than one boyfriend, or whatever, a response I often get is "She's still young. She's only 19. You can't really blame her."
Lauren Southern did dress skimpy, but she's 21 like a college chick.
Quote: (10-14-2016 09:39 PM)RBerkley Wrote:What kind of political statement? I thought she was opposed to the "slut walk."
She most likely wore that shorts to make some political statement
Quote: (10-14-2016 09:39 PM)RBerkley Wrote:That's my point. She doesn't dress like that, and she even pointed out one (while being interviewed by Steven Crowder) time that if she showed any cleavage in her videos "the internet would go crazy."
she doesn't usually dress like this too much on her official YouTube channels.
Quote: (10-14-2016 09:39 PM)RBerkley Wrote:I hope so. I'm not sure Roosh would ever want to go back to Canada, though.
The next thing to develop if for Roosh to get a notch with her.
Quote: (10-21-2016 06:22 PM)Andy_B Wrote:
Quote: (10-21-2016 05:05 PM)redbeard Wrote:
....Did you bang
No. Didn't try. She must have like several hundred thousand right-leaning men to choose from, I can't imagine I'd have much to bring to the table.
Quote: (10-17-2016 08:46 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:
Quote: (10-14-2016 09:39 PM)RBerkley Wrote:This is something i've gotten from a lot of people and I don't really understand it. Whenever I make a comment to friends or family about some young girl who is either dressed too skimpy, or has had more than one boyfriend, or whatever, a response I often get is "She's still young. She's only 19. You can't really blame her."
Lauren Southern did dress skimpy, but she's 21 like a college chick.
My response to that is, "so are you saying if she was 13, it would be even more acceptable to do what she's doing?"
In my opinion, it is actually a lot more off-putting when I see a young teenage (or early 20s) girl dressed skimpily than an older woman in her 30s. The woman in her 30s I assume has been damaged for a long time, but the younger girl I feel bad for.
Quote: (10-24-2016 01:24 PM)Blaster Wrote:
Quote: (10-17-2016 08:46 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:
Quote: (10-14-2016 09:39 PM)RBerkley Wrote:This is something i've gotten from a lot of people and I don't really understand it. Whenever I make a comment to friends or family about some young girl who is either dressed too skimpy, or has had more than one boyfriend, or whatever, a response I often get is "She's still young. She's only 19. You can't really blame her."
Lauren Southern did dress skimpy, but she's 21 like a college chick.
My response to that is, "so are you saying if she was 13, it would be even more acceptable to do what she's doing?"
In my opinion, it is actually a lot more off-putting when I see a young teenage (or early 20s) girl dressed skimpily than an older woman in her 30s. The woman in her 30s I assume has been damaged for a long time, but the younger girl I feel bad for.
This is just the reality of female group psychology. All women, but especially young women, care about their appearance in two primary contexts: social acceptability (etiquette) and signaling to potential mates. There's also status signaling but that's not very relevant here. Lauren is not a religious fundamentalist nor does she appear seeking a fundamentalist husband so it doesn't make sense to apply extreme conservative standards to her behavior.
Social acceptability is exclusively about "not giving offense." If you spend much time around women, you'll hear them frequently talking about what some women "can get away with" or not get away with, and it almost always has to do with their physical appearance. A fit woman with excellent skin "can" go out running in a major coastal city wearing nothing but a sports bra and will only offend a tiny category of marginalized conservatives. However, a woman with a flabby stomach will face greater pressure to cover up, since her fleshy cellulite will offend onlookers. This is just one example. it's unlikely that any man has the time or patience to fully understand all the various rules that women enforce on each other with regards to their appearance and what is appropriate when and where, especially since it changes every few months. I really don't recommend trying to applying too much logic or reason to it. They're women, they're emotional. Ultimately they'll do with whatever feels right to them and they'll use language to reinforce and validate those feelings.
The last important thing to realize about "social acceptability" is that what you're doing, where you're going matters, as does your relationship status. The standards for a young professional working an office job is different from the standard expected for a college girl going to class. Single women are expected to be trying harder to attract men than married women. This another place where the "it's young so it's OK" comes from. Younger women tend to be more likely to be engaged in activities with a lower standard of dress than older women.
The other fundamental category that all women care about is mate signaling. While social acceptance is about not giving offense, mate signaling is about balancing sexual attraction with long-term mate worth. A girl wants to be as sexy as possible to attract as many high-quality men as possible. But she also wants signal good moral character so that those high-quality men will see her as a potential long-term mate, not a mere slut.
The main way women signal good character with their clothing is by conforming to the socially acceptable standards I mentioned above, not the traditional notion of conservative attire. When Lauren Southern is talking about being a good conservative girl, she's still talking within the general overton window of acceptable fashion defined by the women in her circle. She is not talking about your particular notion of conservative dress.
Now remember that the acceptable standards change with the winds of fashion. Women engage in a perpetual arms race with other women with regards to the sexiness of current fashion. Young and sexy women will push for tighter and more revealing clothing while the plainer will tend to pull for more modesty or eccentricity. Sometimes, they they all agree on something that becomes a standard (see: Yoga Pants). Currently, the young&sexy faction has successfully established shorts that reveal the curve of ass cheeks to be inside the far left wing of socially acceptable attire.
So Lauren's jean shorts, which may seem overly revealing to you, are nevertheless rather moderate by the standards of her social sphere. She's also young, single, and undoubtedly trying to attract high-value men. She wants to be as revealing as possible without going too far. If she was trying to attract a Christian fundamentalist husband, she might be dressed more modestly, but that seems unlikely. Most likely she wants the most successful and masculine man she can find to commit to her, preferably someone within her social class or higher.
Quote: (10-24-2016 01:36 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:
Legs not tits is the general accepted modesty code around the world. In Asia for example, booty shorts and skirts that show everything are fully acceptable while just a hint of cleavage is considered very slutty. Eastern Euro countries also have short skirts and short shorts but not much cleavage. Likewise Brazilians will not think twice about a mini-thong but will frown at topless bathing.
Quote: (10-24-2016 02:13 PM)Rob Banks Wrote:
Quote: (10-24-2016 01:36 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:
Legs not tits is the general accepted modesty code around the world. In Asia for example, booty shorts and skirts that show everything are fully acceptable while just a hint of cleavage is considered very slutty. Eastern Euro countries also have short skirts and short shorts but not much cleavage. Likewise Brazilians will not think twice about a mini-thong but will frown at topless bathing.
I just noticed, if you watch the last few seconds of the video, when Lauren turns around, she is showing cleavage too!
Quote:Quote:
If it were my girl in those shorts, I would think to myself "why do I have to be okay with other men staring at my girl's ass when most civilized men throughout history did not have to deal with that. Am I just supposed to accept it because 'times have changed'?"
Quote: (10-24-2016 02:19 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:
Quote: (10-24-2016 02:13 PM)Rob Banks Wrote:
Quote: (10-24-2016 01:36 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:
Legs not tits is the general accepted modesty code around the world. In Asia for example, booty shorts and skirts that show everything are fully acceptable while just a hint of cleavage is considered very slutty. Eastern Euro countries also have short skirts and short shorts but not much cleavage. Likewise Brazilians will not think twice about a mini-thong but will frown at topless bathing.
I just noticed, if you watch the last few seconds of the video, when Lauren turns around, she is showing cleavage too!
Get a grip Rob.