I was on a French course last summer and my professor (female, since English doesn`t allow me to differentiate) was French. Holy crap. Every single day was a new discovery into her explaining with great enthusiasm how all of our mistakes were actually sexual innuendos. Je suis mangé = I was eaten (i.e., eaten out) La base (pronounced 'base' like you would in English, not proper French) = fuck Faire sauter = to fuck This went on every day for at least two weeks until we got better. One of our in-class activities was to describe our ideal or current mate. She had one guy describe how large her breasts were to be. 'Eeerrrm... pas trop grandes...' 'Ah oui, juste à la main!' she replied, clasping her hands over her own breasts.
I fucking love salad sometimes. Nothing better than a nice chilled salad on a summer day to complement a grilled burger. I could really go for a chicken caesar salad right now... Fuck yeah.
An honest question: where does the line get drawn between a man looking at your tits being flattering, and offensive? Because let's be real here: you girls like it when your twins get some attention. It'd be like a guy getting upset at a girl for checking out his ass. And even then, I would be weirded out if it was really overt (because the rumors hold true: I have the glutes of Adonis). There's a limit, though. I'm curious where that limit is, if it can even be defined.
If she finds him hot, it's flattering. If she's repulsed over the idea of fucking him, it's offensive.
Hahahaha. Amateurs calling others amateurs. Become a dirty old man, and enjoy without being creepy. It's way more fun.
A lot of creepy old men think they are pros, too. When in fact, I can still feel your eyes. When you're lounging at the beach with shades? God made a 6th sense for occasions just like that. Unless you mean being creepy and not giving a damn. Cuz then you win outright.
It's in the length of the gaze, and you are correct. Anyone want to tag some arbitrary and pointless numbers to that?
Jesus Christ I keep thinking tomorrow is Monday for some horrible reason. Oh, right, I remember now. Does anyone remember Made in Canada? Great show.
Yeah, this is kind of an answer I was fishing for. I figured it had to do with some combination of the duration of the gaze and how obvious it was. And the difference is 5.2 minutes. Anything longer than that is just fuckin' weird.
11:30, I'm drunk, girlfriends parents just left, and now I am watching The Wrath of Khan. "The needs of the many out weight the needs of the few, or the one."
I think the late, great Greg Giraldo summed it up best in regards to cleavage. I had a fun night, tonight. Got to see Robin Trower (of Procol Harum fame) play at a local venue. And I scored his autograph. As soon as everyone is finished not caring, I give you permission to try your very hardest not to be jealous. Despite not knowing his solo work very well, I still had a great time. And most importantly, there were no.........power failures
The length of the gaze is definitely part of it, but I'd also like to add context. The context of my looks being appreciated (or "appreciated") whether just by looking or being commented on depends a buttload on context. When I'm out at a bar and I catch a guy glancing at my tits? Appreciative. If I'm on the subway and the guy sitting across from me is starting at them for twenty minutes? Lecherous. If it's a glance down and then back up? Appreciative. If it's that shudder-inducing wide-eyed, slack-jawed perve stare? Lecherous. If I'm on a date and the glance is a bit lingering? Appreciative. If I'm talking to someone in a professional setting and the glance is a bit lingering? Lecherous. I really despise this attitude for a number of reasons, mainly because it essentially says that it is the woman's choice whether she was harassed or not, and puts the blame of harassment on a woman deciding to be a bitch on a whim, rather than the man who was being the creep doing the assaulting in the first place. It is always said by men who want to lash out at a woman after being rejected, as if a man who was either more attractive or richer could come by and reenact the same exact scenario and have it not be considered harassment. Now, unfortunately, I'm sure that this can be the case with some breeds of women, but this "argument" comes up in every single god damn conversation about boundaries with women and it drives me crazy. That being sad, yes, what kind of man you are in relation to the women you're oggling does have an effect on whether or not you're being perceived as being lecherous. Are you old enough to be the girl's father? Are you homeless and/or crazy? Sorry, you're always going to be lecherous. If not, then a glance in an appropriate setting is appreciative.
No, that's not what it's saying. At all. It's saying that there is context to the "gaze classification", for lack of a better term. You go on to describe a number of situations of just such context. That "classification" is influenced a lot by your interpretation of who is doing the looking. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Attraction is very much something that is out of a person's control; you can't just say "I will like him", and do. If you are attracted to the person looking at you, you're more likely to appreciate the attention. If you don't like the guy looking at you, you won't appreciate it.
I do remember the last time I really lingered on looking at a lady young enough to be my daughter. I also remember thinking that I wondered what her mom looked like. Just because someone appears to be looking at you, it does not mean they are thinking about you.