It can be reminiscent, but doesn’t mean that’s the only way such a article works.
Chains on a person is reminiscent of slavery, but we don’t identify women wearing a gold chain around their neck as slaves. It likely even predates slavery all together, wearing jewelry.
Not always historically traceable where ideas come from, nor the deeper reasons why they work, or how divergent they are.
Take when Pandora was getting ready to write a feminist essay on my avatar. One could easily cull from it a tale of male chauvenism at work, but doing so negates the right of females to be every bit the mythological villian males can be, and we don’t exactly have a shortage of butt ugly male mythological creatures bring similarly hunted or killed for bring nasty little shits.
May be damn well be that the original impulse to write stories about scary ass monsters has nothing to do with gender inequality, and that the tale if Medusa, like the tale of the Amazonians, are actually evidence that Greeks were in a position to accept the idea of females being independent and equals, or even leaders in their own right. Every feminist should be proud of Medusa for this very reason… but that impulse to write about heroes slaying monsters has nothing to do with gender, it’s origins lie elsewhere, and can effect a greater range. Take the Pagan and Christianized myth of St. George the Knight (there was a real St. George, coidentified with him, not a story for here) slaying the dragon. Nobody gives a shit about the dragon’s identity, bit you see the larger scope of where that story lays in the field of Saints and Martyrdom, of making vices of violence into virtues. How many thousands of years prior had we been doing this on the village level via oral tradition? How many other species share this trait? I’ve seen documentaries of lions saving the young, not even their own, at great risk to their own life. Baboons make habit of it, elephants, sometimes even Buffalo.
Not always obvious. Perhaps cognitively, I’m needing to emphasis long necks ad a specialized minimalist sense if sensual style right there for some unknown diagnostic reason, cause I know the traits associated with a woman who cares about emphasizing this, in these way, using these patterns herself, suggests a lot about her cognitive and genetic state.
Hmmm? Maybe, doubtful, who fucking knows.
Reminiscent isn’t necessarily that. Notice none if the women I showed character wise wasn’t submissive? Not dominant either? Might be a pattern to this? Maybe the women guys like me are most attracted too, are themselves most equipped to handle these situations and want the playful intimacy and attention guys like me offer. Nature may of balanced itself out naturally here. I find most women shallow and boring, largely unresponsive. Very few offer any sort of internal challenge, are generally not worthwhile. Catching a eye is one thing, but do they have worth beyond that, deserving of my interest? I’m a inexhaustible well of knowledge, exploration, creativity, duty, compassion, hatred, love, wisdom, laughter and comedy. Maybe your average hair salonist will drive me utter batshit bored, and her sense of adventure of getting a tattoo and visiting the grand canyon isn’t that impressive to me. That’s a emotional and intellectual batan death march of a relationship for a guy like me. May just damn well be receptivity to sex and exploration is also a damn good indicator of long term compatibility on the mental level. A lot of theory supports this.
I never read this 50 Shades of Grey bullshit, but he sounds like a very shallow understanding of who we are. Women tend to be insanely attracted to guts like me in a literary sense, but that stops at reality. I’m not exactly bring hunted down and begged for kinky sex play. All these guys tend to be xNTJs, and there aren’t many of us. You think they would make a targeting app by now for helping women find us, not that I would be too cooperative. Just weird the massive disparity women give of obsessive fantasy and getting the guy too in real life.