The point of the comment is to point out the common misconception that the value of one [token of a currency] has anything to do with the strength of a currency. As described in the comment, the value of a singular token of a currency can be chosen arbitrarily.
This, of course, doesn’t mean the map is factually incorrect.
Your field of view is wider than it is high. So if you look at something higher than it is wide (which many living things are) it’s more centered and clearer to see.
I’m not a native english speaker. I’m sorry if my spelling makes my comments difficult to read.
I think I mostly understood the point by now.
(I still don’t get why the man would be uncomfortable with the alternative hypersexualization, since he already perceives the initial depiction as hypersexualized, but that doesn’t seem to be central to the point anyways.)
It’s not a real quote. It’s the meaning I understood this post to imply.
(My interpretation was already challenged by @Crozekiel below.)
It didn’t load for me either. It did load when I opened the post in my browser.
(I think the difference is that it adds ?format=webp in the browser.)
https://pictrs.blahaj.zone/pictrs/image/65a49e6b-bf3c-4cf1-82ce-0f223ac8dadb.jpeg?format=webp
the man in the comic became uncomfortable seeing it
I don’t understand this point. The reason they’re uncomfortable with it is because they’re drawn in a sexualized manner? But even if all else is true, men in comics are already drawn in a way that many men think is attractive.
At least that’s how I understand the point of the “power fantasy”. Or do they mean literal physical strength with the “power fantasy”? Because the sexualization of men is definitely not limited to muscles.
Assuming the power fantasy is not just about physical strength, but also (or only) about extreme attractiveness (as perceived by men):
That is an idea that could be true. Are there statistics about how close the typical male hypersexualization is to women’s interests compared to how close the typical female hypersexualization is to men’s interests?
Did I misunderstand the post?
The point seemed to be that sexualization of men and women is different because not all women like the typical sexualized male man (as per the example given). That being different implies that men do all like the typical sexualized woman. Which is wrong.
(edit: just realized I did a reverse menandfemales)
Women have differing tastes. Men on the other hand all like the same.
Just like many women don’t like extreme muscley figures many men don’t like extreme hourglass figures.
Not all women are the same. Not all men are the same either. Claiming otherwise is sexist in both cases.
The concept of animating comics could still be inspired by Disney. Even if they use japanese comics instead if american comics.
To be fair, 8.5 is marked as 1 in 3000, meaning that 2999/3000 women look worse. Even 6.0 is marked as “Top 15%”.
So definitely not something they “expect” most women to look like.
I wonder how many people would actually sort them similar to how they’re sorted in the first picture.
Because to me the distribution of attractive people between 5.0 and 10 seems to be completely random.
Couterpoint to eating human bodies?