bmacs27 says... I agree, I restricted my point to things that can easily be changed. That was intentional. Those were the sorts of comments she was complaining about (e.g. that she's being "intentionally unattractive"). Men would receive similar criticism. If straight up sinewy stud wore baggy assed stained hoodies to his weatherman job, or thick rimmed glasses and a pocket protector with suspenders then a handful of people would give him shit for it. I promise you. They would. A handful more will talk about how they don't give a fuck and want to jump on his magnetic pole. The rest will talk about how they hate "wintery mix." You seem to miss my point. I think it's demeaning to suggest that being sexualized is the problem, or even that it is gendered. Cat calls, come ons and so forth should be seen for what they are. Compliments. The problem is exactly what you said in the last paragraph. What you look like, and the value of what you say should be seen as completely orthogonal dimensions. Unfortunately, in this world they aren't. That's lame. shatterdrose said: Men aren't judged by looks as much as women. And you're talking about clothing and things easily adjusted, such as shaving. Both of those are generally considered unkept, for good looking men or ugly men. Has nothing to do with physical merit. Plus, if you look at, for instance, TV Anchors, how many of those men are in super good shape? Especially sports announcers. How many overweight men do you see on tv, and how many over weight women? Save for Candy, of course. (Wasn't her name Candy? Cindy? Mandy? Andy? Damn I'm bad with names grrr) Point stands, women are held to a much higher standard for physical attractiveness than men in order to be considered "worthwhile" or "have anything relevant to say".