Thank you for visiting Buffy-Boards. You obviously have exceptional taste. We just want you to know that:
1. You really should register so you can chat with us!
2. Twelve thousand people can't be wrong.
3. Buffy-Boards loves you.
4. See 1 through 3.
Come on, register already!
I thought Michelle Trachtenberg was one of the best actresses in a very competent cast. When you looked at Dawn, you saw Dawn but when you looked at other characters, you saw the actor playing a role. She completely sold Dawn as a character. Ignore the writing which was for a younger actress.
They are not my definition, they are a scientific definition. It makes them as universal as any other scientific definition.
That's like me saying a female having male organs doesn't make them masculine and then claiming it's a valid point. It's not, because masculine features are well defined and feminine features are well defined.
Femininity and masculinity as you are using them are a social construct. If you want to use the scientific definition then it simply means "quality of the female/male sex", which literally doesn't mean anything aside from the fact that a female is feminine and a male is masculine.
You say young people look more feminine. Well people with curves are also more feminine in our culture. So what if someone that isn't attracted to Michelle is not attracted to her because she's not "curvy" enough. In this case the person would be attracted to a feminine trait, so what you are saying about them being attracted to masculinity is completely false.
I'm a scientist and even I recognize that femininity, masculinity and gender are a social construct. Biology is a whole different thing. And I'm sorry but female having male organs can be either feminine or masculine, and they aren't any less of a woman for it. Again, this is all social construct. Biologically they have a male organ, but their gender is female, and they can very well be feminine, as well as masculine, because again those are cultural and social constructs.
I find some posts on this thread sort of offensive, it is possible to say you prefer Michelle without insulting Dakota
I think Dakota is more beautiful but I didn't slag off Michelle. They're both gorgeous!
If someone is attracted to females and they're not attracted to feminine looking females or smooth looking females, then they MUST be attracted to the opposite (rugged looking females and masculine looking females). I made no assumption!
Um yeah, like @Blaze says, that's your idea of femininity.
By your standards I'd be a masculine woman. And like you say, with that logic, why didn't my partner just go for a dude? It's just like, the same thing.
Well I'm glad he didn't see me like a leper of the genders.
@Luis Fernando Sorry to burst your bubble, but do you know you are an animal? I'm not being rude! I mean, you are a part of the animal kingdom. The ONLY defining feature of abstract ideas like femininity and masculinity in the natural world are sex organs. No skin or voice or behaviours or anything. Just the genitals.