>Justin Schwartz wrote:
>>To him they are better looking. De gustibus, etc. --jks
>
>i'd assumed charles was kidding, so i teased him back. but if not, i'll
>say this: it's the classic thing that men in my classes say when we talk
>about why women's bodies are more prominent in various media than are
>men's. OF COURSE! it's because men are naturally ugly while women are
>naturally beautiful. men are dirty and stinky, as well! heh. criminy!
The idea that "women" are categorically better-looking than "men" must be a relatively new one in the long history of sexism (to say nothing of a longer history of patriarchy). That is probably because heterosexism is one of the newest oppressions -- born only in the late nineteenth century, according to Jonathan Ned Katz -- in the history of class societies in the world.
Yoshie