HOME | DD

snuggleproxy In reply to jekblom [2017-02-22 16:26:11 +0000 UTC]

Zomg~ U can't just b going on the internet n askin' people if they're gurlz!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jekblom In reply to snuggleproxy [2017-02-23 01:09:39 +0000 UTC]

just asking...

I'm noticing that female artists have a different way of portraying female bodies.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

snuggleproxy In reply to jekblom [2017-02-24 23:32:05 +0000 UTC]

Oh, well if itz fer science...
Howzit different-like in ur hypothesis?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

eaterjolly1 In reply to snuggleproxy [2017-05-21 07:54:11 +0000 UTC]

Itz not just a matter depicting, but also a matter of liken-ing.
We'r talkin' 'bout a ting wich I'm noticin is simultaneously simpl and complex 'pendin on wer ya stand. I believe tis gotz to do wit da mona lisa, wich's lied 'bout bein da pinnacle of fem-nes. Ppl socialize tis concept and it bcumz patta fem-ness. Thusly, siply luk at da mona lisa and c da paintin' within a paintin'. Ppl socialized femly tend to pfer drawings wich sim lik 1 ting from far and another ting up close. Wut I noticed ii-ce all.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

snuggleproxy In reply to eaterjolly1 [2017-05-21 11:34:56 +0000 UTC]

Hmm 1 ting from far and another ting up close... Certain'y not teh whole solution, but a facet? I'd believe it. Certainly there must be pfrences dat r moar or less strongly correlated with both social & biological fem. But dat'z just speculation. We need to look @ teh data!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

eaterjolly1 In reply to snuggleproxy [2017-05-21 13:57:55 +0000 UTC]

yis, tis oly merly a facet. teh data! is impertant, bit zeh parsin engines ain't Finnish (or startd) yit. Social & biological fem, must be accountdz! allo noticd dat img'es wit noir elements dat hide meaningful elements or wit blending (ie similar color stufz x background), blurring, or lens flare effects to hide meaningful elements r poplar. &, by "meaningful elementz" I mean fetish or pornz or stufz datz mite az weeel b pronz lik fud an' falling leaves.

Me conjecture wud b dat iz haz to do wit history of pattern & thread observation, tendencies 2 luk in2 ze macro perspective, 2 git patterns 'n fashion distinctive. I tink ze fem eye iz expected 2b moar critical of deats. Simultaneously, dis wud be a distinctly human char not giving evolution much op. If it is sexually dimorphic, den it'd prolly b statistically so far from universally so. Already feeling cross-eyed lukin' at yo favesso xP I'm kiddin, dey gud doe, I always evjoyd ze paintin' witin da paintin' and da pain of stabbin my eyez n' bleedin bloody tearz of joy and awestruckness az a slowly so blind wit admiring beautiful art.

(Double-kidding: iz jus dis one being evil on me brain +Our Place+ )
(Tripple-kidding: diz onez lulz mad it wort it Coffee Break) trollolo let me mak dis link arbitrarily long cuz weeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeea

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

eaterjolly1 In reply to eaterjolly1 [2017-05-23 13:24:29 +0000 UTC]

Naow ya gotz me thinking bout diz and am considering that aesthetic really has universal appeal, but merely is feminine in da occident to be actively pursued. Naow, I wud allo argu dat, so it wud seem many femly favorites seem to not be fully encapsulized memes. That is to say, they lack context. Many of them will be a portrait of a character making a face, but the situation lacks context for why the face was being made. Comments on these works tend to much more often be an application of context in written words, or merely commenting on the authors descriptions or another's description in the comments. Those of da traditional fem seem to have a higher tolerence to this lack of context or meaning to aesthetic/design/'proving what is possible for the medium'. Inversely it seems rather masculine to have a higher tolerence for a lack in aesthetic, or complex design, color picking, composition, angular perspective, background elements, in favor of higher purpose or meaning being or feeling complete, even if that purpose seems predictable or tedious occasionally. (just as aesthetic purely for aesthetic's sake might seem predictable or tedious occasionally)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

snuggleproxy In reply to eaterjolly1 [2017-05-21 17:07:17 +0000 UTC]

>parsin engines
I there's the rub.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

eaterjolly1 In reply to snuggleproxy [2017-05-23 13:05:19 +0000 UTC]

Aye xD

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

snuggleproxy In reply to Paprikax [2017-02-06 04:41:57 +0000 UTC]

 Yus! ~<3

👍: 0 ⏩: 0