If you had a preference for dark hair and many dark haired women were going blonde you might be disappointed in a general decrease in women who met your ideal aesthetic. If you aren’t shallow or are shallow but aren’t a beautiful rich Adonis you probably aren’t turning down any dates based on such criteria but mathematically trends which run contra to preference mean a decrease in average fitness according to your own accounting.
Imagine if a huge portion of men were really into boy bands and mullets. The trend would mean that if you selected men based on other more meaningful criteria like financial stability and emotional maturity that you have an increasing chance of a mullet in your future. As critical mullet mass approaches you may feel disappointed at the popularity of the trend.
That would be true, but for one, the percentage of women with nipple piercings is statistically insignificant. For two, you don’t actually have any measurable way of telling with certainty how popular those piercings are. So it’s not really as comparable to hair color, which you can ascertain at a glance. And even then, I would expect some kind of clarification that this has been obtrusive or obstructive to the speaker. “I’ve been disappointed so many times to find out that my date had their nipples pierced” or something to that effect. Just saying “some women are doing this aesthetic thing to their bodies, and it disappoints me” is not really saying the same thing.
There may be a fundamental disagreement here over whether or not it is valid to feel a sense of ownership over other people’s appearances. “Oh no, that guy would’ve been so cute if he hadn’t grown out a mullet I wish he hadn’t” would be a strange thing to think, let alone verbalize, about a stranger. It implies that by virtue of that man changing some aspect of appearance the speaker has lost something tangible. It might give the speaker pause in that situation to realize that their language kinda makes it seem like they’re entitled to “mullet-less” men. We also have to consider the emphasis that puts on men who do have mullets. The speaker in this case is collectively denigrating all of them for failing to meet their expectation of non-mullet hairstyles, despite those men not knowing the speaker and having nothing to do with them.
The original poster was denigrating all pierced women. The person you replied to merely expressed a preference. Semantically I prefer women who don’t have septum or nipple piercings and I’m disappointed so many women have one or the other is the same statement save that it expresses an emotion that the person feels not one he feels THEY should feel. Also its quite possible that more people in his dating pool have this preference than the entire US population because he is liable to encounter and date people in a comparatively small age and culture range on average. I would assume young urban women are more likely to pierce. I think you are more reacting to the negative nature of the parent post rather than the relatively mild statement made by commenter.
I’m reacting to the comment made by the commenter. Those are not semantically the same statement, though. They literally aren’t. It expresses an expectation for others’ bodies to be a certain way and a dissappointment when they aren’t. The word dissapponted is not interchangeable with preference. “I dislike nipple piercings” is not the same thing as “I am disappointed in women who get them.” You intuitively know this too because someone being angry with you implies a direct response to something you’ve done. Someone being disappointed in you implies they had an expectation for you that you failed to meet. It also takes literally nothing from the speaker to clarify this, which the commenter did not.
I have no feelings whatsoever on the subject of whether the commenter likes nipple piercings or not. I do not have nipple piercings and am entirely uninterested in what the commenter thinks about them. I object to men using language that enforces ownership over women’s bodies. As I said in my prior comment, this is an everyday occurrence for us. This happens to us all the time. My body is not your business, and the bodies of random women are not the business of the commenter.
As I said before, how would he materially know how many women have nipple piercings? It’s possible to have them and them not be visible in public. If his gripe was with how many women he’s hooked up with that have them, he would’ve said that not that he’s disappointed in women who get them.
This entire thing stemmed from a simple call out on something the commenter said. A way that his language implied that women’s bodies should be a certain way. It was never a big deal until several men immediately mischaracterized what I said and tried to imply that I am stupid, that I dont know what I’m talking about, that I’m weird, that I don’t speak English lol. One commenter rambled on about his dick. I would’ve left the comment and moved on, that was always my intent. It was the visceral response at the mere suggestion that something he said may have had a misogynistic implication that prolonged this conversation into what it became.
If you had a preference for dark hair and many dark haired women were going blonde you might be disappointed in a general decrease in women who met your ideal aesthetic. If you aren’t shallow or are shallow but aren’t a beautiful rich Adonis you probably aren’t turning down any dates based on such criteria but mathematically trends which run contra to preference mean a decrease in average fitness according to your own accounting.
Imagine if a huge portion of men were really into boy bands and mullets. The trend would mean that if you selected men based on other more meaningful criteria like financial stability and emotional maturity that you have an increasing chance of a mullet in your future. As critical mullet mass approaches you may feel disappointed at the popularity of the trend.
That would be true, but for one, the percentage of women with nipple piercings is statistically insignificant. For two, you don’t actually have any measurable way of telling with certainty how popular those piercings are. So it’s not really as comparable to hair color, which you can ascertain at a glance. And even then, I would expect some kind of clarification that this has been obtrusive or obstructive to the speaker. “I’ve been disappointed so many times to find out that my date had their nipples pierced” or something to that effect. Just saying “some women are doing this aesthetic thing to their bodies, and it disappoints me” is not really saying the same thing.
There may be a fundamental disagreement here over whether or not it is valid to feel a sense of ownership over other people’s appearances. “Oh no, that guy would’ve been so cute if he hadn’t grown out a mullet I wish he hadn’t” would be a strange thing to think, let alone verbalize, about a stranger. It implies that by virtue of that man changing some aspect of appearance the speaker has lost something tangible. It might give the speaker pause in that situation to realize that their language kinda makes it seem like they’re entitled to “mullet-less” men. We also have to consider the emphasis that puts on men who do have mullets. The speaker in this case is collectively denigrating all of them for failing to meet their expectation of non-mullet hairstyles, despite those men not knowing the speaker and having nothing to do with them.
The original poster was denigrating all pierced women. The person you replied to merely expressed a preference. Semantically I prefer women who don’t have septum or nipple piercings and I’m disappointed so many women have one or the other is the same statement save that it expresses an emotion that the person feels not one he feels THEY should feel. Also its quite possible that more people in his dating pool have this preference than the entire US population because he is liable to encounter and date people in a comparatively small age and culture range on average. I would assume young urban women are more likely to pierce. I think you are more reacting to the negative nature of the parent post rather than the relatively mild statement made by commenter.
I’m reacting to the comment made by the commenter. Those are not semantically the same statement, though. They literally aren’t. It expresses an expectation for others’ bodies to be a certain way and a dissappointment when they aren’t. The word dissapponted is not interchangeable with preference. “I dislike nipple piercings” is not the same thing as “I am disappointed in women who get them.” You intuitively know this too because someone being angry with you implies a direct response to something you’ve done. Someone being disappointed in you implies they had an expectation for you that you failed to meet. It also takes literally nothing from the speaker to clarify this, which the commenter did not.
I have no feelings whatsoever on the subject of whether the commenter likes nipple piercings or not. I do not have nipple piercings and am entirely uninterested in what the commenter thinks about them. I object to men using language that enforces ownership over women’s bodies. As I said in my prior comment, this is an everyday occurrence for us. This happens to us all the time. My body is not your business, and the bodies of random women are not the business of the commenter.
As I said before, how would he materially know how many women have nipple piercings? It’s possible to have them and them not be visible in public. If his gripe was with how many women he’s hooked up with that have them, he would’ve said that not that he’s disappointed in women who get them.
This entire thing stemmed from a simple call out on something the commenter said. A way that his language implied that women’s bodies should be a certain way. It was never a big deal until several men immediately mischaracterized what I said and tried to imply that I am stupid, that I dont know what I’m talking about, that I’m weird, that I don’t speak English lol. One commenter rambled on about his dick. I would’ve left the comment and moved on, that was always my intent. It was the visceral response at the mere suggestion that something he said may have had a misogynistic implication that prolonged this conversation into what it became.