This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Sciros's Profile

Sciros's Avatar Joined almost 6 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by Sciros

More Discussions by Sciros

Latest Comments by Sciros

Go to: Where Are All The Atheist Women? Right Here

Sciros's Avatar Jump to comment 424 by Sciros

Sciros what has sexual selection got to do with this?

With women wanting to "look good" and men being attracted to women who "look good"? You're not going to make me draw actual dots, label them, and then connect them with an actual line, are ya? :-/ Sexual selection is at the root of the whole issue of finding a sexual component in physical appearance. I was using it to illustrate that the notion of "perpetuating" physical attractiveness loses sight of the fact that physical attractiveness is effectively demanded by the opposite sex and this in turn breeds the desire to be physically attractive because without that desire one is at a selective disadvantage (and by virtue of that we have people who care about physical appearance far outnumbering those who do not, just like there are more male peacocks with the kinds of tail feathers that females find attractive than there are male peacocks with tail feathers that they find unattractive, people plucking out feathers for the personal accessories notwithstanding).

A bit impersonal but it is what it is.

Mon, 08 Nov 2010 22:41:10 UTC | #544356

Go to: Where Are All The Atheist Women? Right Here

Sciros's Avatar Jump to comment 412 by Sciros

I'm afraid you simply cannot get around the reality that this societal fixation on women's appearances is perpetuated most of all by women themselves.

Uhhh really? Sexual selection is a two-way street. Gender A wants gender B to look a certain way, gender B wants gender A to like how gender B looks. But it's in accommodating gender A's preferences that gender B has to adapt its behavior. It's kind of like how male fish of whatever species have to be brightly colored to attract females (but if they're too brightly colored they can get eaten by predators because they're easier to see), but in this case it's a bit sexier because there are titties involved.

Women "perpetuate" this but do they really have a choice? If they don't come to terms with the pressures of sexual selection, they're out-competed by the women who do. So... yeah.

Anyway as a dude I'm cool with that. I want to be attractive to women myself, for obvious reasons, so it's only fair.

Something more interesting to talk about in terms of being "perpetuated by women" is the attraction to a person based on how awesome of a car they drive. Deny it all you want, but there are totally women who date dudes (for at least a little while) because they have really awesome cars. Dudes on the other hand, as far as I know, don't do this. Is it because women don't drive awesome cars and so it's just a non-issue because of that? I don't know. But I'm curious. I wouldn't date a girl just because she drives an awesome car (she also has to be hot). Maybe it's a status thing. Society tends to "raise" a guy's status based on the car he drives, a woman's status based on the guy she dates, but it's not so much the other way around is it? Except maybe in extreme circumstances. Eh I don't know. All I know is there are lots of cars that are considered "chick magnets" but not a lot that are considered "dick magnets" (in the sexual way at least)... actually that's a pretty funny term. Maybe the Ford SVT Raptor is a dick magnet.

Mon, 08 Nov 2010 22:17:54 UTC | #544339

Go to: Where Are All The Atheist Women? Right Here

Sciros's Avatar Jump to comment 399 by Sciros

make her person even more exclusively about her possession of lady bits.

:rolleyes: The proper scientific term is "love taco." Do try to be less vulgar.

Mon, 08 Nov 2010 21:41:50 UTC | #544321

Go to: Where Are All The Atheist Women? Right Here

Sciros's Avatar Jump to comment 394 by Sciros

nairb (brian?)

Are you crazy? So if your wife wears a sexy dress, you are ok for her boss to give significant attention to it in a discussion about her work performance?
Well that's something of a non sequitur isn't it. If someone dresses to be visually appealing, some will acknowledge this in one way or another. Some ways of acknowledging it are more acceptable and professional than others. You're leaping to some conclusions prematurely here, I'd say, if you are attacking the idea that BB is OK with the unprofessional ones.

BTW idiots are idiots, religious or not. I find myself in agreement with a lot of people on a lot of things, their religiosity or lack thereof notwithstanding. Same goes for disagreement. So that's another non-sequitur you've thrown in here.

Mon, 08 Nov 2010 21:22:33 UTC | #544313

Go to: The origin of religion and it justifying morality

Sciros's Avatar Jump to comment 41 by Sciros

Religion may not be the basis of morality, but can you have morality without a supreme being? Where is your reference point, or is anything acceptable?

Practically speaking, the reference point is the moral system that the society you grow in has developed, augmented a bit by personal values and circumstances. This is true for everyone, whether or not they think they know what the "supreme being" they believe in thinks is "good" or "bad." If you really gave half a shit about what a "supreme being" thought, you might realize that you're ignoring a lot of stuff he tells you to do in your holy book, precisely because it is in stark contrast to the morality developed by the society you've grown up in and the personal values you hold. And luckily for you this is as close to universally true in your society as it is, because when it's not you end up with sectarian violence where one religious sect says "we know what the supreme being wants and you don't" and another sect says "no, we know it and you don't" and they end up cutting each other's throats. Fun times.

This is also why I cannot truly trust people who claim to base such important things as their moral convictions on something they don't understand in the slightest.

Mon, 08 Nov 2010 20:49:06 UTC | #544304

More Comments by Sciros