Memories of the 28th Century

'I saw a member yesterday with her cleavage so deep it was down to the floor,' Rep. Marcy Kaptur tells fellow Democrats at a private meeting
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...assment-294974

This is true, and it isn't just women.

It was good to see a woman commenting that women’s clothing may seem inviting to some men. Humans, like all animals, constantly send out messages about their sexual status and interest. The goal is to attract mates, but the behavior doesn’t end when humans cease to be consciously interested in reproductive activity. While showing skin may be more attractive, just the size and shape of a bundle of clothing can be as attractive. The amount of coverings just suggests the immediacy of the interest. I don’t know how it feels to be a woman looking at men, but I suspect that the reaction is similar, the size and shape are more important than any specific it if anatomy, and generally women would use appearance as an initial screening, rather than for final judgement. But because it is for initial impression, women want to make the best possible first impression. The type of clothing and grooming tell a story about the woman and who she wants to attract. Some women are perfectly successful at making initial contact while wearing conservative business clothes. But I don't think that the clothing invites; the clothing may indicate whether an individual is interested, but that does not constitute an invitation.

Men use very similar techniques, but men show off different parts of the anatomy, or similar parts differently, and women are less likely to take action.. For example, women like to display the size and shape of their breasts, while it is more desirable for men to have a wide, muscular chest, and broad shoulders, and conservative masculine business clothing allows these characteristics to be quite apparent without skin being shown.

Then there is also the matter of socio-economic class, and that can easily be shown in clothing and in locations where potential mates may be met. But all this mating behavior is often unconscious. Our subconscious minds are constantly on the prowl, and our casual, selections of clothing are influenced by the subconscious monitoring plans for where one will be. The subconscious is also more aware of the effects of clothing and behavior than is the conscious mind.

Rep. Marcy Kaptur's suggestion that women be subject to a dress code would certainly be advisable with men like Trump, even though it would restrict the personal freedom of the women. If that suggestion were adopted, then I think we would see a trend toward women's business clothing that displayed the characteristics that the women wanted to display. Many women would look more subtly sexy, and for many men understated sexiness is preferable.

On the other hand, there are men who have so little self control that they would continue to grab buttocks, breasts, etc. with reckless abandon, until women started defending themselves.

I believe that more than just sexual condition and availability are displayed in clothing styles, but I haven't been able to figure out all the details, because the communication is almost completely unconscious, as with scent cues among humans, which are seldom, if ever, noticed consciously.

It might be a good idea to honor Rep. Marcy Kaptur's comments by accepting that there are and will be sexual overtures, both wanted and unwanted, but the one who makes the move will not find out whether it is wanted until the act has taken place. Whether the act would be criminal could be determined by whether it continues after the victim demonstrates that it is undesired.

We should also accept that most women and men are looking for mates most of the time, and want to have their way with the ones that attract them. We should embrace this and enjoy it.