seduction as dishonesty

[Guest]

I was thinking about this lately.

Is it dishonest of the part of a beautiful woman to appeal to a guy's lust to win his heart?

Should she let her personality/wit/whatever else do the trick slowly...and not use the low cut blouse ?

Is the appeal of beauty just one more aspect of a relationship?

This could be a story: low cut but with a conscience ...

Maharat

 

[rgraham666]

As soon as some beautiful woman seduces me I'll let you know.

 

[gauchecritic]

I was thinking about this lately.

Is it dishonest of the part of a beautiful woman to appeal to a guy's lust to win his heart?

Should she let her personality/wit/whatever else do the trick slowly...and not use the low cut blouse ?

Is the appeal of beauty just one more aspect of a relationship?

This could be a story: low cut but with a conscience ...

Maharat

It's a good question and I'd have to say that it's all part of the ritual.

In face to face meetings it's natural for both parties to 'point up' their best features. Some people's best feature is a sense of humour or a dazzling wit, you wouldn't accuse them of being dishonest would you?

Very recently I was in conversation with one of my bar staff and his girlfriend. The staffer is not what you would call an intellectual and his girlfriend is looked upon by others as a 'dim' gold digger.

She's very skinny and not my 'type' at all, but in casual conversation I found her to be very attentive and remarkably quick witted. That is to say she actually 'got' my jokes and understood my referents (not a common trait in my local WMC) I must say, I quite like her now.

If a low neckline is all it takes win a guy's heart then the guy probably deserves it.

 

[Liar]

I was thinking about this lately.

Is it dishonest of the part of a beautiful woman to appeal to a guy's lust to win his heart?

Is it dishonest of the part of a witty woman to appeal to a guy's intellect to win his heart?



I'd rather ask this, is it dishonest in general, to try to show ones assets and try to hide one's weaknesses when trying to woo a partner? This could be unbuttoning a button, or surpressing the urge to sneer at the waitress, or giving an extra compliment that you didn't really mean, or hell, just putting on the fancy shoes.

Dishonest, or the way it works?

 

[Guest]

I think too much I guess.

I believe my idea is, the beautiful woman is robbing the man of the intelectual act of choosing.

It is like she is taking the decision for him. Not allowing him to take the plunge.


Maharat

 

[TheEarl]

I think too much I guess.

I believe my idea is, the beautiful woman is robbing the man of the intelectual act of choosing.

It is like she is taking the decision for him. Not allowing him to take the plunge.


Maharat

I think you do men a disservice. Contrary to popular opinion, we are capable of looking past beauty for what we want. Not every man chooses to, of course, but it is a choice. For example, there's someone I know from work who is very well built, but I don't fancy her in the slightest because her personality is not something that attracts me.

The Earl

 

[Boxlicker101]

I was thinking about this lately.

Is it dishonest of the part of a beautiful woman to appeal to a guy's lust to win his heart?

Should she let her personality/wit/whatever else do the trick slowly...and not use the low cut blouse ?

Is the appeal of beauty just one more aspect of a relationship?

This could be a story: low cut but with a conscience ...

Maharat

No, it is not dishonest. With some exceptions, beauty and sex appeal are not enough to entice some guy into marriage or some other long-term arrangement. It takes more than that, althugh that is a good start. At the same time, suppose the guy is charming and attentive. That could be a facade too; he might turn out to be a total cad and bounder and abuser, and everything else that women profess not to want.

If you are just talking about a one-night stand or a weekend shackup, certainly she should use her beauty and he should use his charm. There would be no harm done, and they would both have fun.

 

[Guest]

I think you do men a disservice. Contrary to popular opinion, we are capable of looking past beauty for what we want. Not every man chooses to, of course, but it is a choice. For example, there's someone I know from work who is very well built, but I don't fancy her in the slightest because her personality is not something that attracts me.

The Earl

Oh I did not mean to imply that. I only relate to men I respect and they all are capable of looking past beauty and even wit...I just wanted to get a discussion started in a topic I can't make my mind about.

Maharat

 

[Safe_Bet]

Oh I did not mean to imply that. I only relate to men I respect and they all are capable of looking past beauty and even wit...I just wanted to get a discussion started in a topic I can't make my mind about.

Maharat

I think that if a man or woman focuses in on only one or two aspects of another person they are the ones doing themselves the disservice.

If a chick focuses in on my ass and misses my wit it's her loss not mine.

That said, however, I also have the opportunity to determine that she is only interested in me physically and can decide if or if not I find that acceptable. Bottom line is that BOTH parties have choices.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think too much I guess.

I believe my idea is, the beautiful woman is robbing the man of the intelectual act of choosing.

It is like she is taking the decision for him. Not allowing him to take the plunge.


Maharat

It might seem like that, but it rarely works out that way. There's still the parts about free will, and also-- backpeddling.

No, it is not dishonest. With some exceptions, beauty and sex appeal are not enough to entice some guy into marriage or some other long-term arrangement. It takes more than that, althugh that is a good start. At the same time, suppose the guy is charming and attentive. That could be a facade too; he might turn out to be a total cad and bounder and abuser, and everything else that women profess not to want.

If you are just talking about a one-night stand or a weekend shackup, certainly she should use her beauty and he should use his charm. There would be no harm done, and they would both have fun.

Box, sometimes you hit the nail right on the head.

 

[Tricialen]

First of all, there is free will. A man can admire and even lust after a beautiful woman who wears suggestive clothes or not. He chooses to act on it or not. To blame the woman for being a woman is ludicrous.

It is just a woman's nature to want to be admired and wanted by the opposite sex, it is in our genes and we seek out the one whom we feel can best take care of us. That is how we have evolved. Thousands of years ago, women looked to the strongest men to father their children and probably did what they could to make themselves appealing.

I don't think it is dishonest at all.

 

[DeeZire]

Picture twins, one gal wearing the low cut blouse, the other wearing a sweatshirt. The man in question is going to choose based on what's most important to him at the moment. It might be the intellect of sweat-shirt girl, it might be the tits of cleavage-girl.

You could say that using cleavage to attract men is unfair, but I think cleavage is going to attract a certain kind of man, so in that sense, the cleavage-bearer is going to get exactly what she deserves.

 

[Safe_Bet]

First of all, there is free will. A man can admire and even lust after a beautiful woman who wears suggestive clothes or not. He chooses to act on it or not. To blame the woman for being a woman is ludicrous.

It is just a woman's nature to want to be admired and wanted by the opposite sex, it is in our genes and we seek out the one whom we feel can best take care of us. That is how we have evolved. Thousands of years ago, women looked to the strongest men to father their children and probably did what they could to make themselves appealing.

I don't think it is dishonest at all.

Uhhh, not EVERY woman.

 

[Stella_Omega]

First of all, there is free will. A man can admire and even lust after a beautiful woman who wears suggestive clothes or not. He chooses to act on it or not. To blame the woman for being a woman is ludicrous.

It is just a woman's nature to want to be admired and wanted by the opposite sex, it is in our genes and we seek out the one whom we feel can best take care of us. That is how we have evolved. Thousands of years ago, women looked to the strongest men to father their children and probably did what they could to make themselves appealing.

I don't think it is dishonest at all.

That theory has been pretty well shown to be early anthropologist's unsupported fantasy, my love. It's probably no coincidence that these anthropologists were all men, and that the suffragette movement was reaching its peak at the same time...

A lot has happened in the field since the Victorians came up with the caveman with the club image.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Well put, Stella. While I admit to being as attracted to cleavage as the next straight male (or lesbian) getting me into bed or down the aisle is going to take a lot more effort than just undoing a button. Sure, I'll look, even stare. But if there isn't wit or playfulness along with it, she could be a painting on the wall, for all it attracts me.

 

[Tricialen]

That theory has been pretty well shown to be early anthropologist's unsupported fantasy, my love. It's probably no coincidence that these anthropologists were all men, and that the suffragette movement was reaching its peak at the same time...

A lot has happened in the field since the Victorians came up with the caveman with the club image.

Just because it's not politically correct does not make it wrong. I don't think that attracting the opposite sex or even the same sex is totally learned. It's inheriant to want to be wanted. In that wanting we, male or female, want to be seen in our best light.

This is my opinion, I'm not basing it on some study done one hundred years ago. If it's looks like duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. It just makes sense, without covering it up with polical correctness.

Please don't be a blatherskite, it's the same for men and women all over the world, all countries, all cultures. And it's been going on since before Adam gave in to his baser desires and took a bite of Eve.

 

[gauchecritic]

Thousands of years ago, women looked to the strongest men to father their children and probably did what they could to make themselves appealing.

I think this is what Stella was referring to. It caught at my eye too when I read it.

It's the phrases "strongest men" and "make themselves appealing" that stuck in my craw.

If you're going back as far as you seem to be suggesting then there isn't any way a woman can make her hips wider nor breasts fuller. And I doubt very much weather women actually looked, they only had to make themselves available to fulfil their genetic role.

All the men would have to do is fight off (or around) the other men.

 

[cloudy]

I just love it when other women try to stick me into some decades-old gender role simply because that's all they feel comfortable with.

 

[wafflemtl]

If a chick focuses in on my ass and misses my wit it's her loss not mine.

Now that I know your wit (and love it), can I see your ass ... please.

(sorry sorry couldn't resist *** run and hide *** )

 

[Tricialen]

I think this is what Stella was referring to. It caught at my eye too when I read it.

It's the phrases "strongest men" and "make themselves appealing" that stuck in my craw.

If you're going back as far as you seem to be suggesting then there isn't any way a woman can make her hips wider nor breasts fuller. And I doubt very much weather women actually looked, they only had to make themselves available to fulfil their genetic role.

All the men would have to do is fight off (or around) the other men.

I do understand how "strongest men and making themselves appealing" would bother a great many people. Never the less, it seems to be true. Look at advertising. There hundreds of magazines for women and men, giving advice on how to make themselves more appealing.

Look back in time. From the very earliest, humankind has used cosmetics and perfume to make themselves more appealing. It is inherent in humans to seek a way to draw another human to them, because humans need to be touched and in even some small way, a part of a group. That is not a "Victorian" adage: it is simply the truth. No man is an island, nor do they want be one. At least not many want to be one.

The question was using one's sex appeal to attract a man. That has nothing to with making hips bigger or breasts fuller. It's using their personality, their clothes, their intellect to attract the one they are interested in. Whether or not that is dishonest. I don't think it is. Because I think it goes back to the very earliest humans. And it has evolved over time. But that's just my opinion.

 

[emap]

Thousands of years ago it was the men who were trying to be attractive and gorgeous for the women. Makeup was originally worn by men, codpieces anyone?

The only thing that is the same then as now, women were to be wooed, given things, shown they were appreciated, and fought over in various ways. The difference between now and then, men were the ones who dolled up. Heck take a look sometime at the fashions of Rennasaince age, or earlier. Women wore big dresses with multiple layers, men wore pants and shirts. Depending on where you look, they wore codpieces and extravagant hats and stockings. They were not trying to be anything but attractive to a woman, codpieces being a big old case in point. It served no purpose, it just made it look like he had a big old wang.

Now we see the same thing with us women, we wear pushup bra's, form fitting clothes, mini skirts, so on so forth. All in an attempt to look better than the gal next to us, next door down the street whatever.

It isn't dishonest, not exactly honest either. Padded bra's being a good example of not exactly honest, yes there are breasts there, not as big as you think though. However flirting is not dishonest, it is simply a part of the dance of courtship, or trying to not pay that much for the new transmission.

I'm still kinda flabbergasted by the advice you get about the whole courtship thing. Be mysterious, don't tell him everything, show interest in everything he does even if you hate it. That is dishonest and I don't get why it is even said so often. I mean seriously, if your dating a guy who goes to monster truck rally's every weekend twice and wants to take you with him, and you really hate monster truck rally's, let him know. Faking it doesn't do anything for you besides make you hate it even more, generally him along with.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Thousands of years ago? How about right now? Think about every young boy who wants to be a guitar hero, for instance. It's all about the pose and the clothes.
Here's a link to a beautiful man who wants to be even more beautiful
and here are more images of the same tribe
You can tell who's female because they don't wear makeup)

Just because it's not politically correct does not make it wrong. I don't think that attracting the opposite sex or even the same sex is totally learned. It's inheriant to want to be wanted. In that wanting we, male or female, want to be seen in our best light.

This is my opinion, I'm not basing it on some study done one hundred years ago. If it's looks like duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. It just makes sense, without covering it up with polical correctness.

Please don't be a blatherskite, it's the same for men and women all over the world, all countries, all cultures. And it's been going on since before Adam gave in to his baser desires and took a bite of Eve.

Well, you are the one who brought up the caveman routine-- which you feel is common knowlege, and i would like to point out that it's a common misconception. the "He-Man gene" is a myth invented by nervous men who saw women getting away from their control. We do not select for violence via male mates we select for careing via long-term parenting abilities. That's what's kept the human race alive all these milennia. Human children who are abandoned don't survive real good. In a society where he-men ruled supreme, we would get the tom cat syndrome, where every man kills random women's children in order to make sure his kids are the generation's winners.

As for "it seems to be true" that's exactly right; it seems to be. Media is controlled by... men. Advertising is mostly decided m=by... men. I work in media off and on, and I can tell you this for sure; the decisions about what women want to see? They are mostly made by men. That's why I write erotica... as an antidote.

I think this is what Stella was referring to. It caught at my eye too when I read it.

It's the phrases "strongest men" and "make themselves appealing" that stuck in my craw....

Thank you, Gauche, and yes, that was exactly what I was referrring to. Tricia, I apologise for not making myself clearer.

Women and men have been making themselves attractive, as you say, since waaaay the hell back there.

But-- you might notice that I say women AND men; Here's Louis XIV at fifteen years old and at 63;

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f8/BalletDeLaNuit-LouisXIV-RisingSun.jpg/389px-BalletDeLaNuit-LouisXIV-RisingSun.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Louis_XIV_of_France.jpg/422px-Louis_XIV_of_France.jpg
(he was per

 

[cloudy]

Tricialen is also making the assumption that every culture is exactly alike, when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[wafflemtl]

Tricialen is also making the assumption that every culture is exactly alike, when nothing could be further from the truth.

You mean there are culture were people don't make an effort to be attractive or make themself appealing ? (body, spirit or actions)

 

[cloudy]

You mean there are culture were people don't make an effort to be attractive or make themself appealing ? (body, spirit or actions)

There are cultures where women don't look for men to "take care of them" - the one I come from is a prime example.

We were matriarchal, and women controlled most of everything that was needed. Women were "lifegivers" and men were "lifetakers."

There were exceptions, of course. Some women chose to be warriors, and could be just as fierce, and just as feared, as any man.

Just an example, and a cautionary tale to those that would lump everyone together.