I don't see why any of this is disagreeing with me
The only thing is while I say women want to be shown adulation, you think they are doing it "for their mates". What's the difference? They want adulation from their mates. Perhaps worship is too strong a word but it's not a magnificent stretch of the imagination to say that women wear, and here is the key part - eye-popping/risque - clothing to be revered.

I fully agree that this doesn't warrant lechery, in fact I even said that before! I'm merely saying that if you wear such clothes then it is obvious that in the U.K. there are guys who's eyes are gonna be on stalks.

My comments are agreeing with the O/P on the paradox that women will happily flaunt with 95% of their tits hanging out yet get offended when a stranger stares. Of course no man should be leching away, I won't be(!), but why complain when you can just cover up!

Can't quite believe my throwaway comment has generated such a response.
( whenanimalsattackhumans clad in global hypercolour, Thu 7 Jan 2010, 9:45, 1 reply)

I think maybe you're right about crossed wires
and the extent of the dressing we're talking about. I agree that there seems to be a certain element of, if she likes the look of the guy then she's happy for the attention and if she doesn't like the look of the guy then she cries foul.

But generally, I just think that lechery ain't the right way to treat people. We're agreed on that.
(Land of Green Ginger It's dreamy weather, Thu 7 Jan 2010, 9:58, closed)