• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Norms in society that make no sense?

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,173
MBTI Type
yupp
Saying we'll hang out sometime when you have no intention of doing so.
 

Paisley

Strolling Through The Shire
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
497
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w4
Saying we'll hang out sometime when you have no intention of doing so.
Ya, wouldn't it be great if people were more honest and said, "Chances are we'll never see each other again...." and then leave it there, instead of adding the obligatory social convention of "so let's hangout sometime." Or do you mean it the other way aro.....never mind.
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,173
MBTI Type
yupp
Ya, wouldn't it be great if people were more honest and said, "Chances are we'll never see each other again...." and then leave it there, instead of adding the obligatory social convention of "so let's hangout sometime." Or do you mean it the other way aro.....never mind.
exactly!
 

Siúil a Rúin

To the waters of the wild
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
13,267
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Wealthy people wearing ties and silk scarves. It would be easy to be grabbed and strangled, so I've never understood that. Even high heels for women makes it hard to run away. All these clothing preferences makes a person much more vulnerable to have their wallet stolen. Maybe it is a sign of being above attack? I've wondered if that's why the tough goth, biker, etc. crowd has piercings and chains that makes them vulnerable to physical damage. There might be a weird way that overtly expressing vulnerability is a sign of strength?

Okay, what I'm actually saying is that it makes no sense to me.
 

Cor Luctis

Between the Shadows
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
26,600
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Wealthy people wearing ties and silk scarves. It would be easy to be grabbed and strangled, so I've never understood that. Even high heels for women makes it hard to run away. All these clothing preferences makes a person much more vulnerable to have their wallet stolen. Maybe it is a sign of being above attack? I've wondered if that's why the tough goth, biker, etc. crowd has piercings and chains that makes them vulnerable to physical damage. There might be a weird way that overtly expressing vulnerability is a sign of strength?

Okay, what I'm actually saying is that it makes no sense to me.
Much of what is pushed on women in the name of fashion makes no sense.
 

Infinite Metamorphosis

typology-free life
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
4,536
Wealthy people wearing ties and silk scarves. It would be easy to be grabbed and strangled, so I've never understood that. Even high heels for women makes it hard to run away. All these clothing preferences makes a person much more vulnerable to have their wallet stolen. Maybe it is a sign of being above attack? I've wondered if that's why the tough goth, biker, etc. crowd has piercings and chains that makes them vulnerable to physical damage. There might be a weird way that overtly expressing vulnerability is a sign of strength?

Okay, what I'm actually saying is that it makes no sense to me.
In the case of goths, their appearances — looking like a “freak” — are sometimes being used as intimidation. If you look crazy enough, no one messes with you. Sometimes people expect this type of person to be capable of pulling out some kind of weapon.

Aside from that…honestly, I don't think most people (in 1st world countries at least) go around living their lives in that much fear/anxiety, so they simply never think about it.
 

Infinite Metamorphosis

typology-free life
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
4,536
Much of what is pushed on women in the name of fashion makes no sense.
A bit of devil's advocate/alternative perspective — they don't make sense in relation to what purposes?

Be it social norm or primitive instinct, the females are generally the more “decorated” of the human species. No different from some types of birds, really, except that in our case we have the capacity to alter these dynamics, and it's not a consistent among all human females. When we observe birds, we wouldn't usually think that their decorated qualities make no sense, even when it reduces their abilities to camouflage. This is because it serves a purpose, has a function. If we were to consider camouflage the goal, then we would more than likely consider this to be a nonsensical disadvantage. However, if the alternate goal were to be focused on, the bird being decorative is a useful advantage with plenty of utility.

In the case of humans, who are more complex than the birds, this function can be self-oriented instead. For example, women may dress the way they want to in order to feel pretty, thus contributing to a sense of self-esteem. It may also be used to appeal to a partner or spouse we already have, but this can still an important relationship dynamic if it's used to keep the relationship satisfying by fulfilling a desire.

I do agree that more options need to be more available to be used for different functions. Women shouldn't need to shop for men's items just to find something that has certain functional purposes. I wonder if society pushes them onto women, or if those things are more popular and therefore the market strives to meet marketing demands while ignoring the minority (which brings in less profit). I wonder if the reason they're popular is that they're serving a different purpose — one you don't personally see the value in, but a valid one just the same, since what people consider valuable is subjective.

Perhaps the problem is priorities rather than the fashion. Using things that are perfectly useful, but less than ideal for the setting(s) they're being used in. Meaning, the priority is to meet one purpose when it would be better to meet another.


EDIT: For anyone who may be thinking it…yes, men can too, etc. etc. I'm not trying to adhere to gender roles excessively, that just wasn't the topic I was discussing at this time.
 
Last edited:

Cor Luctis

Between the Shadows
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
26,600
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
A bit of devil's advocate/alternative perspective — they don't make sense in relation to what purposes?
Short answer: practicality, economy, even personal safety. Noting the difference in what is pushed on women vs. men highlights this point.

Be it social norm or primitive instinct, the females are generally the more “decorated” of the human species. No different from some types of birds, really, except that in our case we have the capacity to alter these dynamics, and it's not a consistent among all human females. When we observe birds, we wouldn't usually think that their decorated qualities make no sense, even when it reduces their abilities to camouflage. This is because it serves a purpose, has a function. If we were to consider camouflage the goal, then we would more than likely consider this to be a nonsensical disadvantage. However, if the alternate goal were to be focused on, the bird being decorative is a useful advantage with plenty of utility.
In nature, at least among birds, it is usually the male of the species that has the more flamboyant appearance. As I understand it, a primary purpose is to attract a mate.

In the case of humans, who are more complex than the birds, this function can be self-oriented instead. For example, women may dress the way they want to in order to feel pretty, thus contributing to a sense of self-esteem. It may also be used to appeal to a partner or spouse we already have, but this can still an important relationship dynamic if it's used to keep the relationship satisfying by fulfilling a desire.
But why is "pretty" so often synonymous with impractical, costly, and even unsafe (think stiletto heels in an emergency) when women are concerned? Why aren't practical clothes considered pretty? In some cultures, they are. Look at Indian salwar-kameez outfits. Many are gorgeous, but they are far more practical than the party or formal wear marketed to American women.

I do agree that more options need to be more available to be used for different functions. Women shouldn't need to shop for men's items just to find something that has certain functional purposes. I wonder if society pushes them onto women, or if those things are more popular and therefore the market strives to meet marketing demands while ignoring the minority (which brings in less profit). I wonder if the reason they're popular is that they're serving a different purpose — one you don't personally see the value in, but a valid one just the same, since what people consider valuable is subjective.

Perhaps the problem is priorities rather than the fashion. Using things that are perfectly useful, but less than ideal for the setting(s) they're being used in. Meaning, the priority is to meet one purpose when it would be better to meet another.
The notion of value is inherently subjective. Some valued things or concepts are more objective than others, though. Consider economy (getting more for your money), practicality (being able to accomplish more daily tasks, more efficiently and conveniently), or even safety (the ability to avoid injury, or respond in an emergency). Yes, many people don't place much value on one or more of these, or at least they don't act in a way that suggests that they do. It makes no sense to me that clothing marketed to women is far less supportive of these values than that marketed to men. On the flip side, clothes marketed to men provides far less range for the more subjective value of personal expression than that aimed at women. Both sides get cheated.

Popularity has a strong social component, including upbringing, peer pressure, and even requirements like the make-up and heels often required of female flight attendants. Many people are "willing" consumers of items pushed on women for practical benefits such as keeping or advancing in a job. It is worth noting that, for most jobs, job performance does not in any way depend on the use of these so-called popular female styles and items. The ability of "the market" to shape consumer demand by portraying items as popular, or even by encouraging their popularity, is well known. It is worth asking to what extent this market is deliberately reinforcing societal or cultural norms, and vs. just trying to make money. There are also plenty of examples of items losing their popularity over time as norms shift, suggesting that actual demand is a combination of push-pull. Either way, broad forces are at work that can leave outlier customers with few options.
 
Top