As I said, body hair on women might have a purpose in societies which are not technologically advanced
Due to the technological advancement we have conditioned ourselves to think this, but as “the architect” designed we have it and we’re supposed to like it (by your “architect” logic). It’d be like if your house was designed with window screens but you didn’t like them so you took them off, they were put there by the architect for a reason and you are altering the house by taking them away. We’re supposed to believe that altering the same house by adding a coat of paint is bad, yet altering it by removing window screens is A-Ok.
The crux of your issue seems to be that you’re so theistic you believe some immortal being directly beams thoughts to your head individually, and thus those thoughts must be “what god intended.” Since it’s no longer 0BC the rest of us know you’re not really talking to the bush.
You came up with a bad hypothesis and then backed it up with a shoddy study that doesn’t draw the conclusions you think it does. Correlation != causation, and I doubt the studies mention “cause god said so” anywhere anyway. It doesn’t make sense because you’re reading too deep into these studies in an attempt to justify your biases through your religious framework.
Know what? If god didn’t want us to get tattoos he wouldn’t have invented tattoo guns, same as razors, howboutdat?
A better analogy would be a house designed with security bars on the windows. In a low crime area, the bars could be removed because they make the house less attractitve.
I believe in what’s called intelligent design. This is the belief that the universe including life was the result of an intelligent agency. The nature of the designer such as whether it is immortal is unknown. If the Brandeis study is correct, the designer created men to innately find body hair on women unattractive.
After further thought, I think my blemish hypothesis is correct. The survey said that men find tattoos on women attractive as long as they’re small and hidden. This means that men prefer seeing plain skin on women. The reason could be that men’s brains interpret a tattoo as a blemish. A blemish on the skin such as a mole could indicate a health problem.
The designer created humans with artistic ability.
If you remove the bars you still lessen your security, no matter how safe you think the neighborhood may be, and you’re still going against the architect’s design despite your subjective opinion on the beauty (or lack thereof) of the bars. In fact Mosquitos are one of the world’s most dangerous animals to this day and those would be the bugs that hair blocks, we still “need” our bars, by your own logic.
So yes, god (at least with a small “g” unless you specify Allah, Yaweah, Jehovah, Xenu, JHVH-1, El, Prometheus, Ra, Quetzalcoatl, Khnum, etc). Your theory only holds up as “true” (and tenuously at that, if ) if your god is real. Pascals wager is fun and all but until such time as you can prove the existence of such a creator, your conclusions are unprovable.
After further thought, I think my blemish hypothesis is correct…The reason could be
You don’t even believe your own rationalizations and refuse to let your conscious mind see it. You would have said “is.”
The designer created humans with artistic ability.
But not the ability to distinguish art from sickness?
Fun fact, my god told me tattoos are hot and body hair is natural, and my god is bigger than your god, so therefore you’re wrong.
Due to the technological advancement we have conditioned ourselves to think this, but as “the architect” designed we have it and we’re supposed to like it (by your “architect” logic). It’d be like if your house was designed with window screens but you didn’t like them so you took them off, they were put there by the architect for a reason and you are altering the house by taking them away. We’re supposed to believe that altering the same house by adding a coat of paint is bad, yet altering it by removing window screens is A-Ok.
The crux of your issue seems to be that you’re so theistic you believe some immortal being directly beams thoughts to your head individually, and thus those thoughts must be “what god intended.” Since it’s no longer 0BC the rest of us know you’re not really talking to the bush.
You came up with a bad hypothesis and then backed it up with a shoddy study that doesn’t draw the conclusions you think it does. Correlation != causation, and I doubt the studies mention “cause god said so” anywhere anyway. It doesn’t make sense because you’re reading too deep into these studies in an attempt to justify your biases through your religious framework.
Know what? If god didn’t want us to get tattoos he wouldn’t have invented tattoo guns, same as razors, howboutdat?
A better analogy would be a house designed with security bars on the windows. In a low crime area, the bars could be removed because they make the house less attractitve.
I believe in what’s called intelligent design. This is the belief that the universe including life was the result of an intelligent agency. The nature of the designer such as whether it is immortal is unknown. If the Brandeis study is correct, the designer created men to innately find body hair on women unattractive.
After further thought, I think my blemish hypothesis is correct. The survey said that men find tattoos on women attractive as long as they’re small and hidden. This means that men prefer seeing plain skin on women. The reason could be that men’s brains interpret a tattoo as a blemish. A blemish on the skin such as a mole could indicate a health problem.
The designer created humans with artistic ability.
If you remove the bars you still lessen your security, no matter how safe you think the neighborhood may be, and you’re still going against the architect’s design despite your subjective opinion on the beauty (or lack thereof) of the bars. In fact Mosquitos are one of the world’s most dangerous animals to this day and those would be the bugs that hair blocks, we still “need” our bars, by your own logic.
So yes, god (at least with a small “g” unless you specify Allah, Yaweah, Jehovah, Xenu, JHVH-1, El, Prometheus, Ra, Quetzalcoatl, Khnum, etc). Your theory only holds up as “true” (and tenuously at that, if ) if your god is real. Pascals wager is fun and all but until such time as you can prove the existence of such a creator, your conclusions are unprovable.
You don’t even believe your own rationalizations and refuse to let your conscious mind see it. You would have said “is.”
But not the ability to distinguish art from sickness?
Fun fact, my god told me tattoos are hot and body hair is natural, and my god is bigger than your god, so therefore you’re wrong.