or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The diary entries of a little girl in her 30s! ~ Part 2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The diary entries of a little girl in her 30s! ~ Part 2 - Page 33  

post #481 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

Well, I think one needs to keep in mind there's "what one finds attractive" and "what one is comfortable expressing openly." I think you may have a point insofar as the gay community may be more conducive to individuals being more open about their preferences. I think it's really hard to draw any generalizations however.

 

Certainly I would like to account for the percentage of heterosexual males who are homophobic, and the degree to which they would NOT express a desire for more masculine females with candor.  But in the absence of any data whatsoever, I don't want to assume anything.  The end result is the same though, in that I agree it is too hard to draw generalizations (at least meaningful ones).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

I think some of your difficulty is arising from too narrow a defined set of gender roles and sexual orientation. Even reducing female homosexuality down to "girls liking girls," one needn't define "girl" as "feminine." Butch girls are still very much girls. I'm sure at this point you're going to say you know this, but think about it for a moment. Are we talking about attraction to femininity or attraction to girls? That distinction is key, I think. There is certainly a lot of overlap, and both could apply to an individual, but then they aren't dependently linked.

 

Yes, but I would think that attraction to femininity should not be discounted even if it is an independent factor.  For example, a girl such as yourself is homosexual from birth.  But a large part of your understanding of what a girl is (or should be rather) is the result of what you are taught via societal norms.  Even with insight and the realization that such things are artificial constructs (mostly), it can be hard to separate your current understanding of what a girl is from what was ingrained into you during youth right?  So in that sense, I would think you would be attracted not only to girls, but also femininity, as that plays into your idea of what a girl should be.  Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that attraction to femininity seems fairly part and parcel to me on a practical level.  It's not a universal thing by any means, but it does count for something.

 

BTW, I say you not to specifically highlight you, just saying that - oh you know what I mean.  biggrin.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

Some girls are attracted to masculinity, but prefer women to men. Some girls are attracted to masculine women because of the contrast, because they find the idea of a butch girl itself appealing for one reason or another. Either because the dissonance itself is appealing, or because there's still a remainder. This gets into very complex territory: ie. arousal over trying not and quite succeeding or scenarios like "being tricked into thinking it was a guy." There's also an attraction to the idea of a dominant woman, and masculine trails and roles are often associated with this. A girl might be attracted to girls but like domination. Similarly some people are attracted to the idea of an "emasculated" man, that is a male who yields in a stereotypically feminine way --- and I think those types of scenarios raise interesting questions of the role of power in sex. See Foucault.

 

Also one could argue butch girls are a "transition" for some girls who are dealing with issues of identity, having grown up thinking they were supposed to like guys and are perhaps still attracted to the idea of heterosexuality. In that instance a butch girl is closer in their mind to being with a male and subsequently more "acceptable." Maybe they're still in denial, or maybe it's just more familiar. Not sure how much of this I accept, but it's an interesting idea.

 

Some girls are attracted to BOTH women and men. Some people will tell you that they're attracted to an individual and that trying to define that attraction in categories is doing it violence.

 

Given the above, yes I would say that generalizations in attraction would be most difficult to pin down.  But it frankly didn't occur to me (way back when asking) that the differences would be so varied to the degree that they are.

 

Here's a somewhat related question.  If a homosexual girl likes girls that just happen to resemble herself, then would that girl be physically attracted to herself?  I know that must sound like an odd question.  But as it is technically possible, I wonder if it ever happens in real life.  This is a phenomenon that - for obvious reasons - could not exist in heterosexuals (outside of MeHarmony).


Home of the Liquid Carbon, Liquid Crimson, Liquid Glass, Liquid Gold and
Liquid Lightning headphone amplifiers... and the upcoming Liquid Spark!

post #482 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak View Post

Wouldn't a lesbian whose appearance is as others on here indicate and I quote "butch" be insulted being described as butch?

 

It's one of those terms that's safer to use among friends than among strangers. Your friends will know that you're saying the word primarily in a descriptive/categorical way; strangers don't necessarily understand that you're not using it in a judgmental sense, even if they themselves use the word primarily in a nonjudgmentally descriptive way.

 

And, yeah, adding to what MuppetFace says, a Bieber haircut is kind of a hybrid pixie/brush cut; a couple different feminine hair tropes without looking entirely like any of them. Most butch women I know prefer to shave their heads, get buzz cuts, or a good old-fashioned barbershop short back 'n' sides.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coq de Combat View Post

What I really like about Nokias phones (apart from being finnish lol) is that they're at least trying to go their own way. In a world where you can barely distinguish an Android from another Android or an iPhone because they all seem to copy eachother, you get this:

 

Nokia's often had great industrial design; they lost their way for a while in the 2000s, though; my first mobile was a Nokia; it was tiny and worked great...

 

I wanted my second to be a Nokia too, but the only Nokia products Cingular was offering at the time looked like this...

 

 

...so I got something else instead. And the rest, as they say, is too uninteresting to recount.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixClaw View Post

If gear presented music naturally does that mean it is neutral?

 

Heir Audio's products have become a really hot FOTM. I personally consider the 4.A to be a great IEM and arguably an excellent performer for the price (though it's pretty far from being a top-of-the-line item), and hope the eventual backlash from the current fan enthusiasm doesn't end up hurting Heir.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgray91 View Post

Oh and FiiO's new upcoming E12 has a crossfeed:
Really. *sigh* IF they are going to be $200 ~ $300, then I don't feel too bad buying the UHA-4. All for the crossfeed, and more importantly, virtually no channel imbalance at low volume.

 

Fiio's always been good at trying to target a high performance/cost ratio. If they can't make a high-quality portable amp for less, that implies to me that getting both good sound and high output in a small package is just plain going to be expensive, regardless of who's doing it.

post #483 of 21760
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post

 

Yes, but I would think that attraction to femininity should not be discounted even if it is an independent factor.  For example, a girl such as yourself is homosexual from birth.  But a large part of your understanding of what a girl is (or should be rather) is the result of what you are taught via societal norms.  Even with insight and the realization that such things are artificial constructs (mostly), it can be hard to separate your current understanding of what a girl is from what was ingrained into you during youth right?  So in that sense, I would think you would be attracted not only to girls, but also femininity, as that plays into your idea of what a girl should be.  Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that attraction to femininity seems fairly part and parcel to me on a practical level.  It's not a universal thing by any means, but it does count for something.

 

 

Oh, I'm not discounting femininity by any means. Like I was saying, there's often quite a bit of overlap. However I'm saying one shouldn't always see "girl = feminine," and modern conceptions of gender tend to favor a free-floating distinction. In other words, "femininity" is accidental and not part of a girls' substance, in contrast some view femaleness as being part of that substance, even down to a cellular level (*cough* Von Balthasar...).

 

You raise a good point however with regard to gender roles. However, again, one needs to ask: is one attracted to gender roles, or is one attracted to an individual? It's a tricky question, and I don't think there's a right or wrong answer. I will say that I do think what makes a girl a girl isn't completely subsumed by the symbolic order: that is, there is a remainder which escapes any attempt to attribute a girl's being as such to social norms. When one is attracted to girls, could it be that it extends beyond the social construct ingrained into one's schema?

 

However to throw a wrench into the works, I'll ask another question: is one ever *completely* homosexual? Or heterosexual? Some say no. In other words, just because I'm "homosexual from birth" doesn't mean I can't be attracted to masculine social norms, even allowing a definition of sexuality as attraction to such norms.

 

And like I said before, sometimes the attraction is there because the girl is not adhering to those gender roles. It's not like another female wont recognize her as such because she fails to meet the social criteria. If one accepts that we are able to move beyond mere appearance and know things as they are to some degree, this should not come as a surprise. And even if you adhere rigidly to the idea that our attraction is defined by conceptions which are themselves defined socially, one must allow for the fact that these conceptions often change over time. One can eventually learn to accept and subsequently replace "girl = femininity" in their mental schema to accommodate greater variability. So that is to say: my understanding of what a girl is can change as I grow older and meet others who don't fall into that neat and tidy schema. We are adaptive in that sense.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post

Here's a somewhat related question.  If a homosexual girl likes girls that just happen to resemble herself, then would that girl be physically attracted to herself?  I know that must sound like an odd question.  But as it is technically possible, I wonder if it ever happens in real life.  This is a phenomenon that - for obvious reasons - could not exist in heterosexuals (outside of MeHarmony).

 

I don't think so, because desire is relational in most cases. We desire the Other, and a large part of attraction stems from that Otherness.


Edited by MuppetFace - 9/15/12 at 6:48am
post #484 of 21760


I had one of those! It was a great phone. I also had one of these:



I might have had a Nokia before that as well, but I can't find a picture of it in the Nokia history, and I think it was a Cellular One-branded phone, so it might not have been Nokia.

I think Nokia is in a similar situation as RIM - ie, "Not Android or iPhone" - and Nokia doesn't have the corporate market to keep them going (at least not in the US).

My last experience with handheld Windows was back in the Win CE days where you had to use a stylus to do everything. I actually liked it - but the ActiveSync was horrible, and that's where the Blackberry had it beat all to he11 in the corporate market.
post #485 of 21760
Thread Starter 

Yeah, I had those phones as well. So many different faceplates on the market for them....

post #486 of 21760

@ jgray91

@Coq de Combat

 

 The person who was quoted with the ballsy statement you two are talking about wasn't a Nokia CEO it was the Vice President Asjii Vanjoki. The statement was made concerning rumors that Nokia was looking into partnering with Google and adopting Android throughout their whole handset range. Asjii responded to the rumors by saying Nokia switching to Android would be like peeing in your pants for warmth during winter.

post #487 of 21760
Ha! I found a picture of my first phone on the 'net - I even had the same pleather case! It does say Nokia, but I have no idea what model it is.

post #488 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak View Post

@ jgray91
@Coq de Combat

 The person who was quoted with the ballsy statement you two are talking about wasn't a Nokia CEO it was the Vice President Asjii Vanjoki. The statement was made concerning rumors that Nokia was looking into partnering with Google and adopting Android throughout their whole handset range. Asjii responded to the rumors by saying Nokia switching to Android would be like peeing in your pants for warmth during winter.

Well, it seems I confused that with Stephen Elop's famous Burning Platform.
post #489 of 21760

Back then the local slang for those old nokia phones were  "ice shaver" and "soap bar" deadhorse.gif

post #490 of 21760

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardgedee View Post

 

I remember this phone! My mom had one in red back when they were on AT&T in the early 2000's. She still keeps it in a drawer somewhere...

post #491 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardgedee View Post

I wanted my second to be a Nokia too, but the only Nokia products Cingular was offering at the time looked like this...


Nokia lost their mind after 2000. I think the point they jumped the shark could probably be traced to this one:




then a couple of years later they brought out the weird keypad that wasn't a keypad you posted. I can't remember EVER seeing anyone actually using one of those in the real world. When those came out, everyone I know moved from Nokia to Motorola, Ericsson, etc. Perfect example of a company delivering what they thought we *needed*, not what we *wanted*.
post #492 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

 

No worries, I was in a grumpy mood when I wrote that response. It actually came across as more defensive and pissy than I intended it to, so sorry as well. My posts about the subject weren't exactly clear in a lot of places, and I tend to get several trains of through vying for expression at the same time, so that makes things more confusing.

 

beerchug.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post


Nokia lost their mind after 2000. I think the point they jumped the shark could probably be traced to this one:

then a couple of years later they brought out the weird keypad that wasn't a keypad you posted. I can't remember EVER seeing anyone actually using one of those in the real world. When those came out, everyone I know moved from Nokia to Motorola, Ericsson, etc. Perfect example of a company delivering what they thought we *needed*, not what we *wanted*.

 

 

Stupid editor...

 

Anyone remember "You bought an N-Gage didn't you?"


Edited by maverickronin - 9/15/12 at 11:31am
post #493 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixClaw View Post

Back then the local slang for those old nokia phones were  "ice shaver" and "soap bar" deadhorse.gif

The Dutch slang for those is "refrigerator"
post #494 of 21760

fixed width, y u no work....

 

frown.gif


Edited by maverickronin - 9/15/12 at 12:36pm
post #495 of 21760
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

Nokia lost their mind after 2000. I think the point they jumped the shark could probably be traced to this one:

then a couple of years later they brought out the weird keypad that wasn't a keypad you posted. I can't remember EVER seeing anyone actually using one of those in the real world. When those came out, everyone I know moved from Nokia to Motorola, Ericsson, etc. Perfect example of a company delivering what they thought we *needed*, not what we *wanted*.

 

To be fair to Nokia, they were still making good phones in the 5xxx and 8xxx series, albeit not particularly groundbreaking technically. It was the American carriers who, for whatever reason, only wanted to stock their novelty phones.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The diary entries of a little girl in her 30s! ~ Part 2