Knowing you're sexy
November 15th 2007 08:45
I remember a conversation, years and years ago, when a female friend of mine observed that her cousin knew things she didn't -- how to look at a boy to get him to come talk to you, how to make yourself the centre of attention, and so forth.
On interrogating my friend further, she remarked that she didn't know sexy. There is in fact a whole world of communication (an autistic might observe), and my friend disavowed awareness of any of it -- ways to pose yourself, mannerisms, vocal tones -- how to dress and how not to dress -- a crossed leg, a languid movement, a half-concealed gaze -- and also the perception and interpretation of messages that other people are sending you, or of when they're checking you out.
Some of this might well be genetic; but most of it is probably culturally specific, and more akin to sign language.
From my limited male perspective, this was all very surprising. I suppose I thought that females were born with sexual knowledge, and didn't need to learn it. Moreover, I probably thought that most things people do are conscious -- that "being sexy" is like telling a joke and eliciting a laugh -- that, when I found someone attractive, sexually or aesthetically, this was quite intentional on their part, that they were perhaps engaging in power play, and that they were perfectly aware of what effects they were having, where other people were looking and why, what thoughts and sensations were going on in male minds.
I'm inclined, now, to think that it's not possible for a single mind to run simultaneous simulations of more than one other mind -- you can't contain it all.
Anyway, I doubt I was alone in my delusions. Thus one reason that males blush when caught looking, is that they think they have been "caught" -- their brains have just been read. Thus the rapist might sincerely believe "she was asking for it", and be unable to fathom that she wasn't. And thus Garcia Marquez dramatizes the innocence of women, the overinterpretation of gesture, and the fools men make of themselves in his account of Remedios the Beauty -- where her every action is undertaken with the most complete innocence, and yet viewed by barely-restrained males as criminal provocation.
The trick, though, is explaining why males might think this way. -- I have no answer, but here's five observations.
Firstly, I think a lot of males believe that women think very differently (and that other races think differently). One equates physical difference with mental difference. It's not incredible that women are born with sexual knowledge, though you yourself aren't. And the Mars/Venus idea, the overstatement of sexual differences, is propagated through popular culture.
Secondly, in situations that are overtly sexual, there is (as with all performance) an illusion of naturalness -- and perhaps this is partly responsible for the myth of innateness. -- Most art holds erasing the traces as an ideal -- concealing from the audience the work invested.
Thirdly, many models of women that males have encountered are conscious, and do deploy sexuality -- rock stars, Bond women, Lara Croft...
Fourthly, compare other language realms -- for instance, the language of threat and counter-threat and peace-offering and submission. Now, the rules of this realm are not in fact stable -- what I hold as incredibly offensive you might think a mere nothing, and vice versa. This is particularly evident when a human communicates with non-humans. But how hard is it to adopt a non-self perspective and to think that the other might be innocent. One's initial reaction is: (1) that the rules are well known; and (2) that when people make a rule-engaging move, they act in a perfectly conscious way.
Fifthly, to put it very vaguely, children seem to have difficulty separating other minds from their own, or projecting a world from another person's point of view. -- The mother leaves the room. Now, take some car keys from one box, put them into another, ask the child which box her mother will search, and (on one interpretation) she'll think that her knowledge is also her mother's -- she'll select the box with the keys.
And even among adults... If pain enters your mind, and everything is tinged, everything is pain-coloured, it's quite natural, I'd suggest, to think that other people must know what you're going through. You hurt, and the world hurts. Or you feel guilty, you carry some secret, and you imagine that everyone sees right into you.
It may be true that people are born solipsists, and never reform.
Notes
-- Friday 21 December 2007: About the "language" side of sexual attraction, and about (clapping as an appropriate action, a dance step)...
Timo Airaksinen in The philosophy of the Marquis de Sade, 1991, at p 183 writes:
"Social control is a remarkable phenomenon which has not always been seen for what it is. In social life most aspects of public existence are controlled down to the smallest detail. Hardly anything remains outside etiquette and its associated sanctions. They range from linguistic idioms and dialects all the way to harsh army discipline... The result is a social life where private existence is almost absent. Therefore, we know practically nothing about our fellow humans. Private life disappears and becomes a matter of the person's hazy memories, dreamy rationalizations, and blessed repressions. As the private sector vanishes, the public alone remains as an object of control. Although its rules of regimentation may be broken, the price of guilt must be paid.
It is easy to give examples of social control. Language usage is a typical field. Women and men speak differently; style and dialect identify the speaker and indicate his or her status and values. Table manners, dress, gestures, and personal possessions also tell well-defined stories about ourselves. These fields carry their associated sanctions, too. An angry glance, a small silence, and giggles all indicate that others are entertaining thoughts of revenge ('I won't invite you again!') or pity ('I knew you were an idiot') or causal and reductive explanations ('he must have a stomach disorder'). Thoughts are standardized so that they are not really private at all but rather a perfectly appropriate part of the public story told about the event. The victim knows what the others think of him..."
On interrogating my friend further, she remarked that she didn't know sexy. There is in fact a whole world of communication (an autistic might observe), and my friend disavowed awareness of any of it -- ways to pose yourself, mannerisms, vocal tones -- how to dress and how not to dress -- a crossed leg, a languid movement, a half-concealed gaze -- and also the perception and interpretation of messages that other people are sending you, or of when they're checking you out.
Some of this might well be genetic; but most of it is probably culturally specific, and more akin to sign language.
From my limited male perspective, this was all very surprising. I suppose I thought that females were born with sexual knowledge, and didn't need to learn it. Moreover, I probably thought that most things people do are conscious -- that "being sexy" is like telling a joke and eliciting a laugh -- that, when I found someone attractive, sexually or aesthetically, this was quite intentional on their part, that they were perhaps engaging in power play, and that they were perfectly aware of what effects they were having, where other people were looking and why, what thoughts and sensations were going on in male minds.
I'm inclined, now, to think that it's not possible for a single mind to run simultaneous simulations of more than one other mind -- you can't contain it all.
Anyway, I doubt I was alone in my delusions. Thus one reason that males blush when caught looking, is that they think they have been "caught" -- their brains have just been read. Thus the rapist might sincerely believe "she was asking for it", and be unable to fathom that she wasn't. And thus Garcia Marquez dramatizes the innocence of women, the overinterpretation of gesture, and the fools men make of themselves in his account of Remedios the Beauty -- where her every action is undertaken with the most complete innocence, and yet viewed by barely-restrained males as criminal provocation.
The trick, though, is explaining why males might think this way. -- I have no answer, but here's five observations.
Firstly, I think a lot of males believe that women think very differently (and that other races think differently). One equates physical difference with mental difference. It's not incredible that women are born with sexual knowledge, though you yourself aren't. And the Mars/Venus idea, the overstatement of sexual differences, is propagated through popular culture.
Secondly, in situations that are overtly sexual, there is (as with all performance) an illusion of naturalness -- and perhaps this is partly responsible for the myth of innateness. -- Most art holds erasing the traces as an ideal -- concealing from the audience the work invested.
Thirdly, many models of women that males have encountered are conscious, and do deploy sexuality -- rock stars, Bond women, Lara Croft...
Fourthly, compare other language realms -- for instance, the language of threat and counter-threat and peace-offering and submission. Now, the rules of this realm are not in fact stable -- what I hold as incredibly offensive you might think a mere nothing, and vice versa. This is particularly evident when a human communicates with non-humans. But how hard is it to adopt a non-self perspective and to think that the other might be innocent. One's initial reaction is: (1) that the rules are well known; and (2) that when people make a rule-engaging move, they act in a perfectly conscious way.
Fifthly, to put it very vaguely, children seem to have difficulty separating other minds from their own, or projecting a world from another person's point of view. -- The mother leaves the room. Now, take some car keys from one box, put them into another, ask the child which box her mother will search, and (on one interpretation) she'll think that her knowledge is also her mother's -- she'll select the box with the keys.
And even among adults... If pain enters your mind, and everything is tinged, everything is pain-coloured, it's quite natural, I'd suggest, to think that other people must know what you're going through. You hurt, and the world hurts. Or you feel guilty, you carry some secret, and you imagine that everyone sees right into you.
It may be true that people are born solipsists, and never reform.
***
Notes
-- Friday 21 December 2007: About the "language" side of sexual attraction, and about (clapping as an appropriate action, a dance step)...
Timo Airaksinen in The philosophy of the Marquis de Sade, 1991, at p 183 writes:
"Social control is a remarkable phenomenon which has not always been seen for what it is. In social life most aspects of public existence are controlled down to the smallest detail. Hardly anything remains outside etiquette and its associated sanctions. They range from linguistic idioms and dialects all the way to harsh army discipline... The result is a social life where private existence is almost absent. Therefore, we know practically nothing about our fellow humans. Private life disappears and becomes a matter of the person's hazy memories, dreamy rationalizations, and blessed repressions. As the private sector vanishes, the public alone remains as an object of control. Although its rules of regimentation may be broken, the price of guilt must be paid.
It is easy to give examples of social control. Language usage is a typical field. Women and men speak differently; style and dialect identify the speaker and indicate his or her status and values. Table manners, dress, gestures, and personal possessions also tell well-defined stories about ourselves. These fields carry their associated sanctions, too. An angry glance, a small silence, and giggles all indicate that others are entertaining thoughts of revenge ('I won't invite you again!') or pity ('I knew you were an idiot') or causal and reductive explanations ('he must have a stomach disorder'). Thoughts are standardized so that they are not really private at all but rather a perfectly appropriate part of the public story told about the event. The victim knows what the others think of him..."
| 98 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Al Brunswick
Furious Bits
It therefore requires the receptor to be understanding the sexyness projected, we all have generalisations of classic sexyness (Lara Croft LOL) but we also have descreet subtle differences, I might find a slim petite body more sexy than a well shaped figure with ample facilties.
I feel maybe you have morphed this basic theory into another concept altogether, the audacity of the sexy. Sexy guys won't feel guilty or blush for being discovered, rather they will be proud of displaying their admiration for the efforts of the subject in presenting herself in such a stimulating manner.
And for their part, Sexy females will soak up such admiration as reinforment that they are projecting their sensual feelings adequetly.
Wow too long for a comment sorry LOL
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
No evidence to support but when you've got it you've got it.
Comment by Anonymous
Comment by Michaelie
Flick Wit
Michaelie
Comment by Miswanderlust
Killer Beats
Ramble On
Hipnotherapy
Mis