Turn on thread page Beta

From the dawn of time, how come make-up wasn't a unisex thing? watch

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    I never take debates personally lol it's fine.
    Thankyou, I said all I wanted to say
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    I believe several religious leaders could argue that very well. As I'm not an expert on religion (I know a little about Christianity and Islam, but no where near as much as some) I'm not the best person to argue the case. I'm just stating that there is a counter argument to it.
    Maybe but none of their theories have any scientific evidence hence why they are generally ignored by the science community.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TwinkleToes92)
    Even you'll admit though whilst evolution is solid in some areas i.e we evolved from other species. It has some major weaknesses when being applied to human behaviour.
    That's evolutionary psychology, it's very different from evolutionary theory.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    How is it being misued? I was just pointing out that it's not actually fact. My own views on it are that we genuinely don't know (agnosticism ftw), so I look at both sides of the argument. It's not established fact and therefore you can suggest things from it but you cannot say it is definate. There are holes in the theory of evolution too.
    Please, please look up the difference between the day-to-day use of the word "theory" and scientific theory. Look, I've even given you links. Scientists aren't arrogant enough to ever state something as fact - everything science concludes is a theory that best fits the empirical evidence. Yes, we don't know 100% that evolution is true, but we don't have billion-year-old CCTV footage of the development of the world to check. Evolution is the explanation that best fits the evidence. Nothing is fact. Ever.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm guessing it was because it started off to enhance femininity, like red lips and pink cheeks are associated with the feminine exterior, along with long black lashes. Makeup started off to enhance these to attract males, so I guess it just stuck. Red lips and cheeks aren't masculine, therefore men never needed to enhance them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It's just the way mother nature intended it. At a very basic level, the female has to look healthy and attractive for the male to want her whilst the male, although his looks do play a part in long term relationships, needs to have the sort of personality that means he will stick around and care for the offspring. So typically, and instinctively, women start to want to look beautiful and apply make up to make their skin look smoother and clearer, to make their eyelashes look fuller and their cheeks and lips flushed. Men, typically, are considered more attractive when they have a mild, healthy build up of muscle and the "triangular" body shape (wide shoulders, narrow hips and bum). The fullness of their hair, lips, lashes, the flush in their cheeks and the clarity of their skin is less important. Besides, the female hormones create more skin problems, for instance redness around the nose, jaw and between the eyebrows, spots, excess oil and dryness. During puberty a male can experience these issues too, but by adulthood it usually clears up on it's own.

    note: this is a very shallow and summarised explanation for why women wear make up and men do not.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Men in ancient Egypt wore make-up. Especially around the eyes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Preeka)
    I suppose that's true. I don't know about all those people in the past because I would assume egyptian men and women wore make-up of some sort ( I could be wrong but that's how it is in my head). But if it was a norm in the past, why has it been discontinued? Surely it would do businesses good if both men and women were consumers of make up.
    Hm you're very right in that businesses will do well if make up were advertised, a few big mainstream marketing campaigns to get men on make up and boom, we have ourself the modern western man covered in it.
    the cosmetics industry has been growing so much in the last 40 years, look how 'bad' women used to look back then compared to what they look like now. The focus has just been on women, but I guess now that the industry has been prevalent for long enough it could drag the males in too.
    It should be acceptable soon I believe. Give it 20 years maximum.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)
    I think it was unisex in the old days, on films the ancient egyptian or persian men always have eyeliner on....back in the days when men were men and fought each other in hand to hand combat with swords they wore make up and skirts, nowadays men might have ditched the make up but they behave like nancies.
    Reminds me of Bannockburn...:moon:

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -Invidious-)
    Reminds me of Bannockburn...:moon:
    Everything reminds Scots of either Bannockburn or Murrayfield 1990.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    The middle species are conveniently missing in a lot of cases.

    . So you believe the complexity of an eagle's eye was completely random?
    If you'd actually done any proper research into the topic of evolution you wouldn't trot out trite little numbers like this. The whole 'gaps in the fossil record' and 'irreducible complexity' thing has been thoroughly, throughly debunked. Go spend like 60 seconds on Google.

    Just something to think about: If we were 'intelligently' designed, rather than the product of successive modifications over countless millions of years, why on Earth are so many of our physiological systems so ridiculous? Seriously, a first year engineering student could design a more elegant, robust and sensible system than some of the things in our body.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    :rolleyes: It's hardly ignorant to look at both sides of the argument. What's more ignorant is to look solely at one side (be it religion or science) and ram it down other people's throats as fact.
    Thats where you went wrong, you assumed they're both equally as plausible. I repeat, evolution is not a stab in the dark there is evidence, there is no such evidence for creationism, that is pure speculation. Clearly the Bible doesn't count as evidence because if you can say that, then I can say evolution must be correct because thats also written down in a book.

    (Original post by .Ali.)
    Obviously there is significant evidence suggetsing
    that evolution may be happening for it to be accepted as a plausible theory, but it still isn't established fact.
    Not suggesting, it IS established fact. To deny that evolution is fact is like to deny the moon landing happened, its staring you right in the face the massive body of evidence is right there (doesn't stop some whackjobs trying though). We can watch bacteria evolving before our eyes in labs. Cows are good for meat because we selectively breed them that way by putting our own spin on evolution and shaping it artificially. Others are good for milk for the same reason. We have such a mind boggling array of breeds of dogs because we've selectively bred certain characteristics over time, someone in Germany wanted a good dog for this or that and selectively bred the traits they wanted and generations later here we are with all these varied breeds. Natural evolution is the same thing but driven by adaptiveness to your environment and by sexual attractiveness. We can see the fossil records. We can see it all.

    (Original post by .Ali.)
    That's the supporting eviudence, which I have never denied. However there are holes in the theory, and there are other theories, such as the various types of creationism amongst others. When you're presented with one body of evidence it looks convincing, but when you look at different arguments side by side, it gets a little more complicated.
    Please point out some of these holes for us. I do hope they're a tad more intelligent than the usual rubbish such as "If we desended from chimps why are chimps still around" which is the single most common complete and utter misunderstanding of evolution there is. No-one claimed that we have decended from chimps, we are merely related to them. They and us both evolved from a common ancestor, we are cousins. Just because you are related to your cousin and have common ancestors somewhere in your family history, doesn't mean you were a decendant of your cousin nor does it mean your cousin must be dead for you to be alive.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    The middle species are conveniently missing in a lot of cases.

    . So you believe the complexity of an eagle's eye was completely random?


    Actually, you'd be suprised. In Ancient Egypt they used to use honey on wounds to help encourage healing. When science started making breakthroughs, it was scrapped for a while as it was thought of as 'just a myth'. Now in certain medical dressings, honey is used as it does actually encourage healing. A lot of 'old' medicines are helpful.
    No it was not. thats why there are thousands of different fossils of animals with varying complexities of 'eyes' before it. The evolution of the eye is well known there are various examples of different stages of development. I couldn't name them because I'm not a biologist but 5 minutes in a high school Biology classrooom will tell you. Go look it up if you really are as interested in being impartial as you suggest.

    EDIT: Also if the eye is intelligently designed, then why is the optic nerve in humans so stupidly placed, it has to wrap round the other side and also we have a blindspot in our vision (its not a black spot the brain fills it in with the texture of the surounding area but its definitely there, google it to do a quick test to see it involves drawing a dot on paper, focussing at a certain part a certain distance away and you can make the dot disappear because it enters the blind spot). If its intelligently designed why these quirks? All the various animals redundancies etc etc. Why give us wisdom teeth and appendixes. The answers are rather trivial to find through evolution I'll let you do that yourself/
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.