Jadak said:
Lightknight said:
Do you think linguistic drift thanks to common use is beginning to transform the term misogyny to include areas of bigotry and stereotyping towards women? It seems to be so commonly misappropriated for that use as to almost now include the meaning as happens with various other terms.
Yes, but things only drift if you let them. I'm not letting go of it just yet.
Not true at all, if we couldn't stop literally from becoming a synonym of figuratively by way of emphasis then we sure as hell have no control over anything else. It's linguistic drift because it's adrift on an ocean of the masses and no individuals have any kind of real control except in extreme situations.
renegade7 said:
Lightknight said:
I don't know if it's social norms so much as biological norms where the demand for female performers is higher than the demand for male performers. Remember that males are predisposed to higher rates of arousal due to their ability to reproduce multiple times a day whereas females have a lower predisposition which is hypothesized to their ability to reproduce once per year. These biological differences are not likely just social normatives. We see these across multiple species and while humans may like to believe that we are evolved beyond animal instinct that simply isn't even close to being true.
That may be true, but people don't go to strip clubs to have babies, so I don't know how good of an explanation that is.
That's not really relevant. We evolved to have a heightened sense of sexual arousal. That has an added benefit of leading to procreation on its own where survivability is concerned.
It's the same with food. We have evolved to want to eat an excess of food to survive and so we love food. But that doesn't mean we're always eating to survive. Not by a long shot. Many times we're just eating because it's time to eat or simply for the pleasure of doing so.
