If a women dresses in a way that's considered sexually provocative then she's a whore.But if a man dresses in a way that's considered sexually provocative then he's a faggot.What's the logic here?
>>18682878That dude just kept rose in his shorts lol.
>>18682855>What's the logic here?Both are meant to appeal to the male gaze. It's not that difficult, retard.
>>18682940Why can't you appeal to the female gaze?
>>18682855>>18682944Men are wired to be more visually stimulated, while women are wired to be more emotionally stimulated. That's why looks matter more for women than they do for men. Not saying they don't matter at all, just that looks are lower on the totem pole when it comes to male attractiveness. That's why a man appealing to the female gaze is much more difficult to achieve than a woman appealing to the male gaze, and why you'd have a higher chance of attracting gay men when trying to do so.
>>18682855because women have been socially set as the sexualisee, the observed and men is the sexualiser, the observerbeing sexual is a feminine trait because it implies a sexualiser, an observer to sexualise yourself from. thus making you look more fem and therefore gay-ertheres more to it but thats basically it
>>18682944You can, but not by dressing like a faggotWomen love suits and such outfits
