Breast Implants and Eyeglasses
 

Do you see any similarities? I do, but I might be nuts, so i'd like to ask the panel.....

Are breast implants in young women the eyeglasses of this century?

Breast implants are not necessary, eyeglasses can be.

no. similarities, not differences.

But you asked, "Are breast implants in young women the eyeglasses of this century?" My sentence was essentially a "no."

As far as similarities: they usually come in pairs, they can be small or big and they can bounce around.

bounce around.....funny

ok, let me give you an inkling of my direction of thought.

as far as atracting a mate and procreating, do you see a correlation?

no.

In raw evolutionary terms glasses are a sign of flaws.

no.

you might do better if you talk about contacts.

Lacking experience with the former, I will ask: "Do they get steamed up when you come into a warm house in the winter?"

Re: Breast Implants and Eyeglasses
 

I asked A.L.I.C.E..


Ok, so she's a robot.

i have alice talking to jabberwacky at the moment. alice is much faster

I'm not sure if this is as true as it once was, given the vastly higher incidence of nearsightedness among literate societies.

When I was reseaching myodisc glasses, I ran across a page devoted ot photos of girls with really really thick glasses, maintained by a guy with a fetish for same. I'd post it but I don't see it now (pardon the pun); at the time (must have been 2 or 3 years ago) it was on the 1st page of Google hits for "myodisc."

yeah, well, i was thinking that maybe a girl that gets tits for graduation has a much better chance of finding a mate of higher quality than if she had not gotten them ( physical qualities to be specific).
torrere and jag have a point about the contacts. I was more thinking about the way glasses have made it possible for people to function at higher level than if the technology was not available, thereby becoming more attractive to a potential mate.

ie, will the proliferation of breast implants have an impact on the natural selection process? i believe eyeglasses have. will fake tits?

You can get good tits without the plastic surgery and are commonly both blindingly obvious and some pretty awful, I think not.

You're exchanging messages between AIs? Do you actually have a job? :P

Define "mate of higher quality" please.

got boring pretty quick. alice seems to be the real deal. i think jabberwacky just exchanges user inputs.

yes, i have a job. it's one of those "wait around and then spring into action" type jobs. fits nicely with the cellar.

Mate of higher quality:

It is the job of all living things to reproduce their DNA.

Male sexual response is wired to look for appropriate procreators: young, healthy, receptive, feminine, with wide hips capable of surviving childbirth and healthy breasts to produce milk so that the young that will survive.

Female response is probably similar, looking for appropriate alpha males that can produce quality offspring, protect the cave, successfully hunt and/or gather and maybe even raise their place in society. (Not being a woman, I find it hard to understand how the response differs...)

That's "higher quality". And once it no longer applies, as it inevitably will; once the woman has mothered and produced those offspring, once the man has spent years hunting and gathering both their bodies will make new signals to the world and present them as, strangely, inappropriate mates; then comes the "second wives syndrome" for couples including men too shallow to recognize and overcome their base instinct.

I would expect that while young,(most) females are more attracted to bigger, stronger, handsome, etc. maybe not. maybe they like cerebral, whitty, wise. it matters not. the point is that, being more physicaly attractive herself, as men are all pigs and usually can't see past their hard wiring that UT described, she will have more choices available to her. therefore, if the relationship holds up, she will reproduce with (her idea of) a superior mate as compared to her more limited "best of the available" men, had she not fooled them with her boobs.

Tit implants make it easier for a near-sighted man to notice a gal's charms. ;) As far as them having an impact on natural selection, I always knew you men were pretty shallow, but Jeez, do you need to be so obvious about it?:rolleyes:

I am getting ridiculed by the young guys I hang out with her in Oregon.Maybe I am getting old.But I honestly want to connect with someone I empathise with. And if she has no "male attracting boobage"-Hey thats cool.

Sigh.I'm doing it again.

I wore glasses for 25 fucking years, blind as a bat. Had lasik done 2 years ago for anything but vain reasons. Best money I ever spent, I CAN SEE!

I LOVE nice tits, the bigger the better of course but I said nice. Not a pre-requisite in my book, but it is icing on the cake.

That said I think anyone who spends the money and takes the risks of any kind of surgery purely for vain reasons should be taken out back and shot.

I started losing my hair when I was 17, now I keep it trimmed to about 1/16 inch. It was the hand I was dealt, it's no big deal, live with it in other words. Fake boobs look like crap anyway, nice boobs look nice.

not shallow. it's about that initial attraction. you can meet a girl with a great rack, but if she is a drama queen or something, the relationship won't happen, or last. tits got her foot in the door, but she has to pry the rest open with her other charms. some men are shallow enough to endure a bad personality for an excellent body, but that's not going to last very long, usually.

So, exactly how bad was your vision? And what is your new correction, and were there any side effects?

My vision is so bad (my glassses are -13 on the left and -25 on the right), and coupled w/ my history of retina issues, I'm afraid to touch lasik for fear of making things worse. (I probably wouldn't qualify anyway because of that history.)

Fuck me, I thought I was bad with -6/-6.

Yeah, in my fascinating quest to get glasses made to that prescription, I scared several opticians (most of the big chains seemed to get queasy about anything over -10 or -12 or so), and one even told me my dr. must have made a mistake! (Actually I did have to talk my dr. into doing the right lens. SOP for such a large disparity between the eyes is apparently to prescribe a "balance" lens on the other side. But I told him if he REALLY wanted me to cut back on my contact lens wearing hours, I needed an acceptable correction in both eyes. So he did it.. it was impressive, he had to double up on the testing lenses because it was past the limit of the strongest lens he had.) But I quickly learned from some of the local privately-owned shops that the only way to handle it without ridiculous weight was a material called myodisc, so I just opened up with, "Have you ever filled a prescription using myodisc lenses?" If they said, "huh," I knew not to bother. If they said yes, it was worth talking. I eventually found a shop that was more interested in talking to me about my lens requirements than in showing me their extensive selection of designer frames, and that's who I went with.

[edited to correct SEVERAL dumb typos]

How about giving them a plug, Steve.:confused:

Holy shit. And they let you drive??

Seems as I recall that numbers beyond like -10 meant that one was "legally blind." I just checked several web pages that claim to provide authoratative information, and they say that if one's corrected vision is no better than 20/200 then one is legally blind.

I'm at -6.50 in both eyes ... which is a lot, but convenient because I don't have to remember which is the left contact and which is the right contact.

The question, however, remains ... what does one's eyeglass prescription mean expressed in terms of the Snellen Fraction? (that's the name of the 20/x number used to report visual acuity).

How thick are your lenses? Last time I changed my glasses (barely ever wear them now) they're around 3-4mm at the outer edge and that was the thinnest, most expensive I could get, if I could get some nice thin ones, not really worried about the cost, I'd jump at it. Contacts suck for long hours of comptuer use.

The "Day and Night" 30 day extended wear contacts are great, and don't give me problems when on the computer, and as you know, I'm on the computer [b]a lot[/n].

I only keep them in for two weeks, take a couple days off, put 'em back in for another two weeks and then discard.

I originally got them because I was tired of having patients bend or break my glasses.

oh boy.

when i started this thread, i thought, maybe we'll get some philosophical debate, or some arguments about natural selection, and if i'm lucky, someone will admit to having implants, and maybe we can get a picture. or maybe just a lot of talk a bout boobs.

sigh

I'm starting to think the problem is more my monitor, a 12" PB is wonderfuly portable and virtually indestructable but after 4 hours straight in illustrator I'm going crosseyed. Got my eye on one of those lovely 17" Samsung 1280x1024 17" LCDs. Or maybe wait and see what goodies apple brings out this week and splash some red on my next statement with 30" LCD.


LJ - You know how threadjacking works ;)

LJ--Sorry to bust (pardon the pun) your bubble.... I'm sure if anybody has had "work" done they'll come forward. (Besides, I gave everybody a chance to post boobage--albeit not necessarily their own :) -- and most didn't bite.)

wolf, my corrected vision is 20/40 on my right eye and 20/20 in the left. Needless to say my driver's license has a "corrective lenses" restriction. I wasn't exaggerating when I said in the "were we better off in the 1950s" thread that my vision could not have been corrected nearly as well using techniques available then.

jaguar, my right lens is about 8mm at the thickest (that's an estimate, I can never find a ruler when I need one). But the curvature is extreme; the center is significantly thinner. The left is 5 or 6mm at the thickest, but is not as curved. I'll post pics if I can get any that do justice to them!

Bruce, it was Philadelphia Eyeglass Labs in Haverford.

Steve, for what it's worth, I had LASIK done, -9.5 and severe astigmatism in both eyes, and they told me from the beginning I was an "ideal candidate." Seems that the tendency to regress after the surgery is actually greater in people with less strong prescriptions.

With the retina problems you mentioned, I don't know, but it's such an amazingly life-changing procedure, you should at least talk to a LASIK surgeon about it. If nothing else, they could maybe get you down to a more livable prescription.

I don't know. I may revisit the subject sometime. But I did talk to my ophthalmologist about it a while back & he wasn't enthusiastic. And I trust him a lot because of the whole history he's had helping me deal with the retinal hemorrhages. (His take was basically, he doesn't object to lasik in general--although he does feel a lot of people don't educate themselves properly on the potential risks--but for people with really extreme needs, the amount of corneal alteration that needs to take place is high enough that it becomes problematic.)

As for a "livable" prescription---ehhh. I'm living with what I have now. The only real limitation is that it can be awkward to read street signs at night in an unfamiliar place, so I have to choose those expeditions carefully (see birthday, Undertoad). I don't think I'd be willing to accept the risks for anything short of complete elimination of contacts & glasses.

As Bill Clinton said - "I feel your pain."

At my last VA physical, I was informed that my eyesight had degraded from 20/50 in 1990 to 20/200 in 2004. But, looking at the progession, it seems to have stabilized.

I looked into the Lazik, but the doctor there said that someone of my age bracket (33) should wait before having it, because the eyes change as we age. I've worn glasses since I was 6, so it's no big thing to me.

I would not stop someone from getting Lazik, but warn them to look into it, and try to get the best doctor they can. Would you trust a moron to aim a laser into YOUR eyes?

As for titties, I loves 'em. Can't get enough. Ever notice, on "The Honeymooners", sometimes Alice (Audrey Meadows) has "Erectus Nippleanius"?

For me contacts are simple enough that the risk of something going wrong, no matter how minute, it not worth it.

I remember when my mum looked at getting it done free in a clinical trial, they sent her this massive disclaimer (about an inch thick) which included the encouraging line "Noone has gone blind yet but you may be the first", with the bolding.

Oh yeah the disclaimers on approved medicines & procedures are nothing compared to the ones on experimental stuff!

Apparently "myodisc" means the lens is ground concave on both sides (like the lenses you draw pictures of in Physics 101).
That must make your eyes look funny.

There's also high-index glass, up to about 1.9 or so index of refraction, which can help. You have to sign your life away in the US to get them, as they don't meet shatterproofing standards.

I'd like to get LASIK done, but I'm too chicken that 20 years from now I'll go blind as a result.

hmmm..hot librarians! okay I prefer the glasses to fake boobs (fake boobs don't feel right...or look right..) but then again, I'm a tall lean whiteboy from kansas with long hair and somehow an accent that no-one can place :))

Say WHAT? Oh Jim, the board gods are not pleased...:p

Why? Because there will be fewer women flat as boards?

That's correct, but I think there's also something different to the material too or my glasses would weigh a helluva lot more than they do.
That's also correct! :cool: It looks kind of like your eye is at the end of a long tunnel. The effect is, I'm told, especially disconcerting in my right eye. I'll try to post a pic sometime if I can get a good one.

Don't look too closely, you'll poke your eyes out!