Women often wear clothes that accents their breasts and butts, which have strong sexual connections. The most similar example I could think of was a guy showing off his penis the way women show off their breasts.

Men demonstrate their sexual power differently: 1- confidence 2- intelligence 3- ambition, 4- sense of humor, etc. Physical appearance is just one among many attributes (attractive people are attracted to attractive people, other people may emphasize other attributes—just an observation).

And this groin accent, this is something that women find distracting in your culture and it would give men a competitive advantage?

Yes I do believe women would find it very distracting if mens penises were outlined closely at work. Mostly for negative reasons, because women find most average men unattractive in general.

Yes I think it would give attractive men with large penises a competitive advantage.

Somebody please come put their incel back in its box. Please.

I've 38 years old and been with approximately 50 women, just so you can recalibrate your incel meter.

It's not changing anything of my view about you, considering what else you wrote here.

This is basically your #1 fault. You make a stupid claim. I tell you more details and ask you to adjust your worldview based on the info you've received. You then say "nope, not changing a thing!"

There's actually nothing stupid about maintaining the fact that you come off like an incel, despite you insisting that you've gotten laid.

Or, your idea of an incel is incorrect. To me, you are close to an incel type because lameness makes women disgusted. I guess we'll never know...

No, it's pretty spot-on and you are espousing many of the ideas. That you once allegedly gotten laid, or even a few times, doesn't really change that. You don't actually need to never have had sex to be an incel. It's a mindset. You can disagree with me all you want about that. I don't really care because you have not posted ONE reasonable point in this entire damn thread!

> To me, you are close to an incel type because lameness makes women disgusted.

It's not a surprise you think that. All your posts here are reactive nonsense, "flipping the script" almost literally sometimes in order to defend your regressive views that don't comport with today's society.

We have a great opportunity here- the revival of the codpiece!

Or at least the use of packers. Oddly, enough we don't seem to see men utilizing these apparatuses too often. Given their supposed advantage, I wonder, why is this?

There is some historical evidence this is possible within societies. See Léon Cogniet's Louis Philippe I[1]. However, I don't exactly have any evidence that our society today, specifically in the workplace, that this holds true.

1. Painting, 1792. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:L%C3%A9on_Cogniet_-_...

You don't see them because men would be fired for sexualizing their sexual organs the way women do.

Why don't you subscribe to the more reasonable explanation that accenting male genitalia doesn't confer an advantage and instead seem to be advocating for a "it does, but it's illegal," stance which doesn't seem to be rooted in reality?

Based on your comments, what seems to be driving your position instead is an assumption that there is a grave social injustice aimed at men. Is it not?

My main point is that women are already so coddled, and allowed to use their sexuality in the work place so much, that OPs company not hiring one chick is basically irrelevant.

Is this unlike the idea that women's bodies are inherently sexual? The idea that women's sexuality has power over men (usually as described by men) comes up a lot in discussions about the sexualization of women's bodies. Is this something different than that?

Is the idea that women spend an absurd amount of money to look hot at work similar to the idea that womens bodies are sexual in the first place? I think women sexualize themselves for the most part. Obviously there are some conservative women, and some full on prostitutes with day jobs, so sure all types exist. But in general I think women use their sexuality too much at work.

> I think women use their sexuality too much at work.

When you mention "using sexuality at work," what is your mental model for this?

Is it something other than:

- A woman does something that I perceive as sexual

- She benefits from this because either my peers or myself respond to this favorably

- This connotes an advantage she has over them or myself

- This puts me at a comparative or direct disadvantage compared to her

Let's refocus back on the codpieces, folks, we have a good idea here.