View Single Post
Old 04-20-2010, 10:37 AM   #18
dsvick
Wizard
dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dsvick ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
dsvick's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,737
Karma: 635747
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio, USA
Device: PRS-900
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlorenceArt View Post
Ah yes, but everyone seems to overlook that, even though the immodest women are responsible for the whole thing, the theory actually reposes on the men's response to them. So, can we assume that U.S. males are somehow immune to the boob factor? Or, even more intriguing, that they are more sensitive to it in California than, say, Florida?
Florence, I think you're on to something here...

Given that it is men's thoughts and reactions to the immodestly dressed women.
Given that telling women to wear more clothes would be repressive
Given that telling men not to look at or react to immodestly dressed women would not be fair or practical, or even possible in some cases.
Given that continued exposure to a stimulus will gradually reduce the reaction to that stimulus.
The only reasonable conclusion, for the safety of the human race, is for women to be as immodest as possible in their clothing choices!
dsvick is offline   Reply With Quote