Dating women who are just old enough to be legal but only while they look youthful. While being in a societal position where your life is public and you can do whatever you want, the latter of which many look up to. This normalizes dating women for looks, namely for looking young, instead of for having things in common. This doesn't exactly improve how women are viewed. Youngness isn't a woman's biggest asset and we shouldn't encourage the normalization of the view that it is. The fact that some women are complicit in this doesn't change it.

[–] sudneo@lemm.ee 35 points 6 days ago (1 children)

People are allowed to date for whatever reason they want. As long as two adults are freely consenting it's not up to you to be the moral police and decide what should push people to date each other.

They can date for the looks, to look or feel younger, to go outside their comfort zone, for sexual pleasure, for pure intellectual attraction, for material benefit, for [...long list].

This is one of the instances in which the good goal of fighting abuse becomes bigotry. It's basically like religious moralism.

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 14 points 6 days ago

There are a million valid reasons to value and date a person, and their looks, even potentially the youthfulness of those looks, is one the same as any other. We don't live in the world of perfect reason devoid of animalism that you're pretending; sexual attraction is and is always going to be a part of the equation. While we should continue making strides to ensure women are valued for their contributions to society and have more equitable positions and opportunities, I do not believe that means sterilizing or desexifying society nor artificially pretending the inherently inequitable nature of human attractiveness is somehow something that can be forced into equity through social pressure. Life is just simply more nuanced than that.

[–] SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

the latter of which many look up to

When I read your whole comment, I feel like you're ascribing the blame in the wrong place. It's the "many" who choose to look up to these people, using their standards in place of their own, that I would say is the real issue here. Leo doing this does not normalize dating women for looks for me. Neither does Pharrell Williams buying a cybertruck and riding around in it influence or normalize cybertrucks for me. If people want things based on superficial reasons, they'll learn that it's only superficial and doesn't have substance.

[–] Droggelbecher@lemmy.world -4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You're right, those are to blame too. That's why I made the comment. I didn't think it'd reach Leo. I thought I'd make a person or two think about whether that's ok behaviour to emulate and an ok view on women to have.

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago

I think you're making serious assumptions and assuming a binary where none exists.

First off, nobody, here or in mainstream popular culture, is holding Leo's relationships as model behavior. Leo may perhaps have "role model" status, but all avenues to which that moniker can be affixed apply to his body of work, talent, work ethic, etc; there is just nobody in mainstream culture referring to him as a role model in terms of romantic entanglements, at least not seriously.

So with that in mind, let's discuss the binary here. Things aren't either good or bad, they just simply aren't. A entire gulf of experience in neutrality lays between the enviable and damned. So as I see it, the question here, at least the one posed by my comment, isn't "are Leo's relationships enviable role model behavior?," because I don't think that was ever in question, but rather "are Leo's relationships damnedable?", and to that the answer is a clear and resounding no, for me at least.

[–] bluewing@lemm.ee 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

So you want to take agency away from every adult so they conform to your views only?