Originally Posted by danthepoetman
I?m speechless, here. There?s indeed nothing else to add, everything is under your very eyes.
Yet I guess I?ll try to explain a bit more. Ila, you told me first that I was making an ?unscientific generalization?. Well, science (biology) does make such a generalization. Of course people have particular physical differences and characteristics, but there is also obviously general differences between sexes (or else, by the way, why would anyone feel she/he is in the wrong body?) If that was your point (that everyone is different), it has nothing to do with what I was saying and therefore it was indeed irrelevant in the first place. In any case, stating that people are different is so obvious, ila, that in itself, it?s an irrelevant intervention. Isn?t it?
Now, the point about desire and beauty is that we, as animals, have biological tendencies to find beautiful and desirable (?quality?, judgement on quality) what favours reproduction, and therefore we see more enhanced sexual (general) characteristics as something more attractive, something that seems to indicate good genes, good carrier of babies, good provider, etc. etc. Do you understand? As I said, this is academic, this has been well established by biology and evolutive sciences forever, ila.
Besides, if you don?t think yourself that is of a greater "quality" a skin which will biologically tend to be paler, finer (thinner) and more sensible than a skin thicker, redder and less sensible, well, yes, there?s no reason for me to discuss endlessly and ridiculously with you?
I?m sorry if I?m getting mad at you here. But ila please, read all the post quietly and try to understand what I wrote, would you? (By the way (and to end this all), we?re not discussing your point! You intervened on mine! We should therefore be discussing mine in all logic, shouldn?t we? It?s one more reason why I?m asking you to read back the posts!)
|