Well that and I assume the author is attracted to women.
Yours,
Hot for (and approving of) Critical of Critical of (but hot for) Dentist
> Dentist comes in. She’s an attractive blond that paid for about 50% of her looks.
The automatic assumption that a blonde woman is hired or is successful because of looks is grossly and deeply sexist. If he thinks that isn't disrespectful then that's a big problem.
> The automatic assumption that a blonde woman is hired or is successful because of looks is grossly and deeply sexist. If he thinks that isn't disrespectful then that's a big problem.
How can you read that and think that it means she was hired for her looks?
And men get descriptors based on their possessions (arguably a valid way to highlight wealth divide), yet women get subjective adjectives on their appearance. Creep.
Remembering an exact description of what every woman I briefly interacted with once looks like many years later, is something I can't really comprehend.
And even if I could recall their appearance, it's not something I would ever consider a salient detail to share with others in describing how my past dental visits were.
yes.
What is wrong with that?
There is honesty in it, and that is commendable.
[Are they hot?] -No> <Ignore>
|
Yes
v
[Are they wearing a ring?] -Yes> <Ignore>
|
No
v
…
I don't even know what that last step would be. It's not going to be sex. The woman is at work and the two don't even know each other.Maybe that's not what the author is thinking. I don't know, because I can't understand what the author is thinking. I'm alienated.