I’d be interested if there was any evidence that this had any predictive power, but at the moment there doesn’t seem to be.
I don’t expect much evidence to emerge either, because any effect of mood/emotions would likely be overwhelmed by variance in bodyweight/muscle mass. Lighter/stronger people have better posture than others.
That being said, changes in posture in an individual without corresponding changes in health may well be indicative of their mood.
Meta: You don’t suck at writing. It’s very clear what you’re saying. Your problem is sentences like this:
Rather I think non-depressed women often tend to sway the hips. It is an unconscious enjoyment of their own femininity and sexiness, not a show put on for the sake of men.
Which, to say the least, seems to be wild speculation.
Which, to say the least, seems to be wild speculation.
Let’s say that if err I must, I try to err on the side of the less… socially problematic… assumption. But it does seem to make sense for me. I don’t think people live for giving constant shows to other people, it would not make a lot of sense.
I think the problem with “unconscious enjoyment of their own femininity and sexiness” is that it isn’t clear what it means.
Why don’t men swing their hips as an unconscious enjoyment of their own masculinity and sexiness but women do?
How would you test whether or not that’s true?
I try to err on the side of the less… socially problematic… assumption
I think the error here isn’t that you picked the wrong motivation, but that you assumed that there is any motivation at all.
A woman’s center of gravity is in the hips, walking is a pendulum-like motion which requires some amount of side-to-side motion as center of balance shifts. The more purposeful and energetic the gait, the more side-to-side motion is required to maintain speed/balance. For men, with a higher center of gravity, the side-to-side is in the shoulders. But a non-depressed man isn’t shimmying their shoulders because they unconsciously enjoy their own virility and sexiness.
It think you’re attributing emotional motivations to a mechanical necessity of how people walk. Now granted, hip swinging CAN be exaggerated for effect, but if you’re using it as an assay for depression, you’ll generally be looking at typical energetic hip swinging rather than atypical seductive hip swinging.
I’m not saying its distasteful to find that gait attractive, it is a secondary sexual characteristic after all and thus indicates fertility/post-puberty. But yeah, the assumption of motivation/intention is a point of frustration when I run into it because I literally have no way to ambulate without men thinking there is some conscious or unconscious sexuality-based subtext. And it’s not by any means an uncommon assumption, maybe 75% of men over 25 make this assumption.
I have a pear shaped body, so my center of gravity is low even for a woman. As a matter of fat vs. muscle distribution, it is most like saying I grew breasts because I unconsciously feel feminine and sexual. Feelings just don’t have anything to do with fat distribution.
Yeah, OP needs to get out more. That was kind of painful to read.
What about older women? What about women from cultures with strong modesty norms? What about tomboys? What about women who hang their hat on something other than their bodies? What about women from matriarchal cultures? etc.
Men are half the world, too, yet you don’t list all the types of men, demanding that diversity of personality types in men be acknowledged and treated. You’re actually coming across worse than him—he’s merely (and painfully) ignorant, whereas you should know better.
(a) I am replying to a subthread that started discussing women specifically. There is no “equal airtime” rule for gender for every thread in which gender comes up. Discussing a specific gender issue does not imply willingness to throw the other gender under the bus, or dismissing the issue as not existing for the other gender. As I am sure you know, because you follow the principle of charity—right? This is LW, not tumblr.
(b) OP’s take on women is “worse” than OP’s take on men, to me. Men are described in terms of physics—“spring in the step.” Women are described in terms of sex appeal. Both descriptions have problems because they are not engaging with the complexities of human brains and human self-esteem. But the simplifications in play are different in character, too.
There is no “equal airtime” rule for gender for every thread in which gender comes up.
Except your demands in this thread are specifically for equal attention and care to be paid to women. You’re right, there’s no “equal airtime” rule for gender, at least where you are concerned—there’s just an “equal airtime” rule for one gender.
As I am sure you know, because you follow the principle of charity—right?
No. I follow a reciprocal principle. Do you think you have been charitable? I don’t.
OP’s take on women is “worse” than OP’s take on men, to me.
Men are described in terms of physics—“spring in the step.” Women are described in terms of sex appeal.
Which is a perfectly valid criticism to make, and entirely different from the criticisms you actually made, which is why I responded to you in the first place.
The problem is with the women half of the world, it is with the not-broadly western (say, matriarchical or modest) half, I think I covered the western half pretty well, by dividing women into femmes and tomboyish careerists, one or the other tends to fit reasonably well, given the that first is the traditional role and the second is the role created by feminism, so both typical western cases covered. But yeah, I haven no idea how this would work in a modest culture. Never seen one, aside from the Muslim girls in the West who look a lot like they don’t want to be modest, it is their parents who want them to be modest. Is that a problem?
Well, if you don’t want to explain yourself then there was no point in starting this subdiscussion, it is not like anyone learns something from it. But OK, let’s stop.
Okay, phrasing? Terrible. You just implied that women fit only one of two personalities.
(Yes, you generalize men as all belonging to -one- personality group. However, you never explicitly -said- men all fit into one personality, whereas you more or less did with women.)
I’d be interested if there was any evidence that this had any predictive power, but at the moment there doesn’t seem to be. I don’t expect much evidence to emerge either, because any effect of mood/emotions would likely be overwhelmed by variance in bodyweight/muscle mass. Lighter/stronger people have better posture than others. That being said, changes in posture in an individual without corresponding changes in health may well be indicative of their mood.
Meta: You don’t suck at writing. It’s very clear what you’re saying. Your problem is sentences like this:
Which, to say the least, seems to be wild speculation.
Let’s say that if err I must, I try to err on the side of the less… socially problematic… assumption. But it does seem to make sense for me. I don’t think people live for giving constant shows to other people, it would not make a lot of sense.
I think the problem with “unconscious enjoyment of their own femininity and sexiness” is that it isn’t clear what it means. Why don’t men swing their hips as an unconscious enjoyment of their own masculinity and sexiness but women do?
How would you test whether or not that’s true?
You don’t have make any assumptions.
I think the error here isn’t that you picked the wrong motivation, but that you assumed that there is any motivation at all.
A woman’s center of gravity is in the hips, walking is a pendulum-like motion which requires some amount of side-to-side motion as center of balance shifts. The more purposeful and energetic the gait, the more side-to-side motion is required to maintain speed/balance. For men, with a higher center of gravity, the side-to-side is in the shoulders. But a non-depressed man isn’t shimmying their shoulders because they unconsciously enjoy their own virility and sexiness.
It think you’re attributing emotional motivations to a mechanical necessity of how people walk. Now granted, hip swinging CAN be exaggerated for effect, but if you’re using it as an assay for depression, you’ll generally be looking at typical energetic hip swinging rather than atypical seductive hip swinging.
I’m not saying its distasteful to find that gait attractive, it is a secondary sexual characteristic after all and thus indicates fertility/post-puberty. But yeah, the assumption of motivation/intention is a point of frustration when I run into it because I literally have no way to ambulate without men thinking there is some conscious or unconscious sexuality-based subtext. And it’s not by any means an uncommon assumption, maybe 75% of men over 25 make this assumption.
I have a pear shaped body, so my center of gravity is low even for a woman. As a matter of fat vs. muscle distribution, it is most like saying I grew breasts because I unconsciously feel feminine and sexual. Feelings just don’t have anything to do with fat distribution.
I was actually referring to
The two possibilities you give aren’t the only ones there are.
Yeah, OP needs to get out more. That was kind of painful to read.
What about older women? What about women from cultures with strong modesty norms? What about tomboys? What about women who hang their hat on something other than their bodies? What about women from matriarchal cultures? etc.
Use the first method rather obviously, or was that unclear?
No idea, but I cannot really make such a quick heuristic so universal, I think that would be difficult.
Women are half of the world, dude. You are just not coming across very well.
Men are half the world, too, yet you don’t list all the types of men, demanding that diversity of personality types in men be acknowledged and treated. You’re actually coming across worse than him—he’s merely (and painfully) ignorant, whereas you should know better.
Yes, OP’s treatment of men is little better. But:
(a) I am replying to a subthread that started discussing women specifically. There is no “equal airtime” rule for gender for every thread in which gender comes up. Discussing a specific gender issue does not imply willingness to throw the other gender under the bus, or dismissing the issue as not existing for the other gender. As I am sure you know, because you follow the principle of charity—right? This is LW, not tumblr.
(b) OP’s take on women is “worse” than OP’s take on men, to me. Men are described in terms of physics—“spring in the step.” Women are described in terms of sex appeal. Both descriptions have problems because they are not engaging with the complexities of human brains and human self-esteem. But the simplifications in play are different in character, too.
Except your demands in this thread are specifically for equal attention and care to be paid to women. You’re right, there’s no “equal airtime” rule for gender, at least where you are concerned—there’s just an “equal airtime” rule for one gender.
No. I follow a reciprocal principle. Do you think you have been charitable? I don’t.
Are you sure your perceptions are unbiased? https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/handle/10012/6958/Yeung_Amy.pdf
Which is a perfectly valid criticism to make, and entirely different from the criticisms you actually made, which is why I responded to you in the first place.
Can’t argue with telepathy.
The problem is with the women half of the world, it is with the not-broadly western (say, matriarchical or modest) half, I think I covered the western half pretty well, by dividing women into femmes and tomboyish careerists, one or the other tends to fit reasonably well, given the that first is the traditional role and the second is the role created by feminism, so both typical western cases covered. But yeah, I haven no idea how this would work in a modest culture. Never seen one, aside from the Muslim girls in the West who look a lot like they don’t want to be modest, it is their parents who want them to be modest. Is that a problem?
Oh my god, just stop.
Well, if you don’t want to explain yourself then there was no point in starting this subdiscussion, it is not like anyone learns something from it. But OK, let’s stop.
Okay, phrasing? Terrible. You just implied that women fit only one of two personalities.
(Yes, you generalize men as all belonging to -one- personality group. However, you never explicitly -said- men all fit into one personality, whereas you more or less did with women.)