I'm kinda with petey102 on this one. If someone takes the time to write you a reasonable and thoughtful message, a response is warranted. When I was online dating, I adhered to that policy. Of course, the 'your cute' and 'whatsup' messages require nothing unless you're so inclined to do so.

I think I'm having Kinja issues. Apologies!

Oops! I'm apparently operating at a Renaissance level of technological literacy right now.

Modeling has never been designed to present 'normal' or average bodies. The entire premise is to associate the desire for rare and extreme beauty with the desire for the product.

Wrong. Renaissance women as portrayed in paintings were painted in an exaggerated fashion to display wealth and privilege. This was to create a strong contrast between the vast majority of women that were slender because they were laboring and starving en masse.

What does the availability and consumption of a certain product have to do with the modeling of that product? Models for all products have largely been people with unique and unattainable features (represented by unusual beauty). Point being, if models use aesthetic uniqueness and the subsuequent desire that is linked…

Body acceptance is far from the same thing as modeling. Models and modeling has always been aligned toward abnormal outliers - usually of extreme and unusual beauty.

Modeling is not, nor has it every been, for the purpose of presenting normalcy. It's for presenting an extreme ideal for the purpose of marketing.

Sure, but we still need to ask whether identifying with fashion subcultures is done 'for oneself', or for the purpose of being seen as attractive or fashionable by others.

I rarely hear men proclaiming that they dress 'for themselves'. And those who do say that are usually wearing shorts and a t-shirt. Most men I know have zero problem admitting that we dress for two groups of people: people that pay us, and people that we want to sleep with. No shame in either.

You might be the only one...

Let's see, parodic critique of shallow women and poor behavior responded to with a NiceGuyTM trope? Check. The FriendZone TM trope? Double-check. The RapeTM trope? Triple check.

And you deserve the 'men' you get with a preference like that.

I'm sure that the motivations vary, I'm just saying that dressing like that is certainly not in any immediate, rational, or functional self-interest.

Why does this video have to show both sides? It's true that this cuts both ways, but I'm not so sure that its omission is necessarily condoning the reverse condition. In fact, I think that the media portrays men as more shallow than women, which is the reason why this video is becoming popular.

To be fair, the women in this video aren't 'hot', they seem to be pretty average to me in terms of looks (but less in terms of body size diversity).

Given the masses of women tottering in ankle-breaking heels while wearing mini-skirts and sleeveless tops in the cold weather, they're sure as shit not dressing for themselves.

So you're the one destroying the planet with the over-production of cheap goods and exploited labor...and just basically doing your part to flood the landfills and keep children in the sweatshops for 18 hours/day.

Jeans with blazers should be punishable by flung acid.

This describes the vast majority of male experiences and perceptions when dealing with women in bars and clubs.