Comment

Comment on I hope i don't get downvoted for this

You’re moving the goalposts so fast they should put you in the Olympics.

My “opening point” was that feet and breasts aren’t inherently arousing from a third-person perspective, you know, the thing you still haven’t directly addressed. You’ve been flailing around, trying to inflate “humans are sexy” into some grand counterpoint, but that’s just vague noise.

“The sensation of another human body is consistently and universally sexually arousing to any predisposed toward arousal”

Cool. So now we’re back to sensation, not observation. You just quietly conceded my original distinction: that first-person experience (touch, proximity, intimacy) can trigger arousal because of biology, but that doesn’t mean the sight of a foot or breast is inherently sexy in the third-person sense. That’s context-dependent. Congratulations, you’ve arrived at my argument, just a few posts late.

“rarely come into dispute”

is not the flex you think it is. Flat Earth nonsense also rarely comes into dispute in certain circles. The fact that pop culture defaults to “sexy = naked human” doesn’t prove it’s some universal truth, it just proves how shallow and repetitive most sexual representation is.

source

Sort:hotnew top

UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

My “opening point” was that feet and breasts aren’t inherently arousing from a third-person perspective

Which is why strip clubs, presumably, never do any business?

So now we’re back to sensation, not observation.

How do your eyes work?

Flat Earth nonsense also rarely comes into dispute in certain circles.

Why are you being a Titty Flat-Earther?

source
- Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  
  Which is why strip clubs, presumably, never do any business? Strip clubs prove people pay to perform arousal cues. not that tits are magic arousal buttons. Context sells, not anatomy.
  
  How do your eyes work? By processing signals, not generating meaning. You don’t get horny from photons; you get horny from associations.
  
  Why are you being a Titty Flat-Earther? Because I’m not dumb enough to confuse popularity with proof.
  
  source
  - UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    Strip clubs prove people pay to perform arousal cues.
    
    But this won’t work, because there’s nothing inherently sexy about arousal cues. Therefore, nobody goes to them and the businesses all fail immediately.
    
    Context sells, not anatomy.
    
    Omit the anatomy and see how much context you sell.
    
    You don’t get horny from photons
    
    You quite literally do. If your eyes are closed, the visual medium has no effect.
    
    I’m not dumb enough to confuse popularity with proof
    
    You’re arguing against how eyeballs work, at this point
    
    source
    Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    “There’s nothing inherently sexy about arousal cues. Therefore, nobody goes to them…”
    
    You’re trying to sarcasm your way around a syllogism that doesn’t follow. Arousal cues work because of conditioned association. That’s the point. Still not “inherent.”
    
    “Omit the anatomy and see how much context you sell.”
    
    Sure. Now omit the context and see how much bare anatomy sells. Oh right, that’s why porn has genres, costumes, settings, and storylines.
    
    “You quite literally do [get horny from photons].”
    
    No. You get visual input from photons. Interpretation happens in the brain. By your logic, a baby looking at porn would pop a boner. Try again.
    
    “You’re arguing against how eyeballs work.”
    
    Nah, I’m arguing against how your brain works; specifically, its need to reduce complex psychological responses to caveman-tier hot take bullshit.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments