Anon12/03/25, 16:56No.727436335
>Same =/= Same. Now I understand that this is hard to accept for many with your worldview, and you don't have to subscribe to it, but I want you to try and give it a honest go at trying to understand why wokies think that:
>Showing sexualized dudes, is not the same as showing sexualized women. Why? Because we as Men, do not suffer from the consequences of oversexualization in general. We as men, don't get bothered all the time by people just wanted to fuck us. Hell, we get bothered so little, that we think: "Fuck, it would be NICE if some lady catcalled me for once". When an attractive guy gets a promotion nobody whispers: "Bet he was on his knees all night for that promotion". In the last 100 years of TV and movies, how many fat man have you seen, vs how many fat women? Now on top of the fact that men historically do not suffer from male sexualization in media at all, there is also the fact that often these "topless men", are not there to be the same for women, as bikini bimbos are for men. In a majority of cases, the topless men are still there for men. But as an aspirational power fantasy, rather than a sexual one. "He-man" was not for girls, it was for boys, wanting to be like He-man. That's why it is not actually contradictory. Just because you switch the gender of who is half naked, doesn't mean the whole situation is reversed
