[Shinrei]

The discussion on morality sort of reminded with the fact that I've been wrestling with the concept of objectification of women.

First, here are some views from Wikipedia to get an initial variety of ideas out there.

Quote

While the concept of sexual objectification is important within feminist theory, ideas vary widely on what constitutes sexual objectification and what are the ethical implications of such objectification. Some feminists such as Naomi Wolf find the concept of physical attractiveness itself to be problematic,[34] with some radical feminists being opposed to any evaluation of another person's sexual attractiveness based on physical characteristics. John Stoltenberg goes so far as to condemn as wrongfully objectifying any sexual fantasy that involves visualization of a woman.[35]

Radical feminists view objectification as playing a central role in reducing women to what they refer to as the "oppressed sex class". While some feminists view mass media in societies that they argue are patriarchal to be objectifying, they often focus on pornography as playing an egregious role in habituating men to objectify women.[36] Other feminists, particularly those identified with sex-positive feminism, take a different view of sexual objectification and see it as a problem when it is not counterbalanced by women's sense of their own sexual subjectivity.[citation needed]

Some social conservatives have taken up aspects of the feminist critique of sexual objectification. In their view however, the increase in the sexual objectification of both sexes in Western culture is one of the negative legacies of the sexual revolution.[37][38][39][40][41] These critics, notably Wendy Shalit, advocate a return to pre-sexual revolution standards of sexual morality, which Shalit refers to as a "return to modesty", as an antidote to sexual objectification.[38][42]

Others contest feminist claims about the objectification of women. Camille Paglia holds that "Turning people into sex objects is one of the specialties of our species." In her view, objectification is closely tied to (and may even be identical with) the highest human faculties toward conceptualization and aesthetics.[43] Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy says, given that 'objectification' of women means to make women into sexual objects; it is meaningless because, 'sexual objects', taken literally, means nothing because inanimate objects do not have sexuality. She continues that women are their bodies as well as their minds and souls, and so focusing on a single aspect should not be "degrading".[44]

Now personally, I like to believe that I have an understanding and complete support of equality of the sexes. I have a wife, a daughter, a mother, sisters and female friends, and in the past, girlfriends, who I most certainly view as full human beings and not as objects, even if, like in the case of my wife, I am sexually attracted to them.

But (the "but" had to come), at the same time I have to believe I am hardwired as a male to be sexually aroused by the female body and that tends to be without thoughts towards personality/intelligence etc. Let's be blunt - I'm talking about my Master, Mr. Bates and the consumption of media of beautiful ladies. Of course if it's about dating/relationships, then that's a different sort of attraction.

As for chicken or the egg, I think Playboy and subsequently everything else is there because there is a market, it didn't create or even exasperate that market.

But is this me committing wrong every time? Am I brainwashed by Maxim and beer commercials? Do I contribute to the "rape culture" that I've heard described, by not actively fighting or disapproving of objectification of the female body in the media (and in fact consume it instead)?

Because to be perfectly honest, I'm not convinced checking out hot girls without caring about who they really are on the inside is necessarily a bad thing. I'm not even sure how to deal with the term "objectify". I see beautiful women as a source of sexual attraction, and I'm not sure how I could suppress that. What is the line between sexual attraction and object? Are they one in the same?


Am I approaching this issue from completely the wrong angle?

[Terez]

I can't say how it works for you personally, but there are a lot of variables involved in the objectification of women. The valuation of women based on attractiveness (even if one does not consider it primary) leads to attractive women being preferred in nearly every aspect of life. Attractive women get the jobs, the best tips, etc. and even in the presence of more impressive traits a woman's attractiveness might be her most valued feature. One side effect is that many (perhaps most) men avoid even being friends with women they don't find sexually attractive, which is why ladder theory gets so much press (because it can seem like there is always an ulterior motive even though it's often just the social capital). This is true to some extent from the other side, but to a much lesser degree.

It's been years now since I spammed the HAWT thread with hawt kissing dudes. The fallout was amazing. I also apparently spammed it with chubby girls one time, because I got reps for it.

[Shinrei]

What you say rings of truth (although I'm not sure about the avoidance of sexually unattractive women, has that been proven?).

Of course, some of that is true for men as well. In general, man or woman, physically attractive people have advantages beyond just attracting the opposite sex.

[Aptorian]

Shinrei, on 03 April 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

But is this me committing wrong every time? Am I brainwashed by Maxim and beer commercials? Do I contribute to the "rape culture" that I've heard described, by not actively fighting or disapproving of objectification of the female body in the media (and in fact consume it instead)?

Shinrei, on 03 April 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

Am I approaching this issue from completely the wrong angle?

Yes. The idea that you are worried about masturbation should tell you that you're putting yourself into some kind of neo-victorian self-flagellating mind prison. People have been fapping to pretty eyes, nice hair and round curves since the dawn of humanity. Or what ever is the feminine equivelant of a nice rack and an ass that wont quit. Porn is just a tool of the fantasy, it's the window into what ever taboo subject you're not getting (enough of) in your daily life.

There's just as much evidence that pornography has led to fewer sexcrimes as there is to it encouraging it. Just as there is evidence that access to sexworkers is just as likely to lower the amount sexual crimes as there is of prostitution increasing it.

I am in danger of summoning Worrywort or Studlock on myself here but the term "Rape culture" used in the context of modern Western society is often times misgiven and other times just laughable. Our society as a whole is not a rape culture. Looking at boobs and watching porn is not rape culture. The aesthetically pleasing observation of another sexes qualities is not rape culture. It's human nature.

You're going to be a very depressed, very sad person if you spend your life worrying
about all the ism's you have oppressed or insulted that day.

This post has been edited by Apt: 03 April 2015 - 02:21 PM

[Maark Abbott]

Quote

An ass that won't quit

You summoned me?

[Shinrei]

I wouldn't say I'm worried about it, and I long long ago made peace with masturbation.

Sorry if I made it sound like I'm losing sleep over this, I most definately am not.

[Terez]

Shinrei, on 03 April 2015 - 02:11 PM, said:

Of course, some of that is true for men as well. In general, man or woman, physically attractive people have advantages beyond just attracting the opposite sex.

As I said, it's not even close to being equal. This is very apparent in visual media, from Hollywood to news reporting. And when bosses are predominantly male, their preferential treatment of attractive women becomes a rather significant problem in the workforce.

As for rape culture, it's not a term I throw around, but it does exist in certain environments, and has little to do with porn in and of itself. It encompasses certain problems such as the tendency to disbelieve women who have been raped (using examples of false allegations to dismiss all allegations), the tendency to blame the victim (choice of clothing, etc.), the normalization of taking advantage of women when they are intoxicated or even unconscious. (See Steubenville, and the way the victims and perpetrators were treated in that town.)

These things are related but not synonymous.

This post has been edited by Terez: 03 April 2015 - 02:47 PM

[Shinrei]

It is certainly obvious it isn't close to being equal between men and women.

What I'm wondering is, is this phenomenon exasperated by the media portrayed images? I honestly don't know, but my instinct suggests that discrimination wouldn't be terribly different if we had a media that didn't subscribe to the "sex sells" mantra.

How do we reasonably address discrimination based on looks?

Also, I'm not sure I have the terms completely straight - is objectification of women considered leading to discrimination? Or is the objectification the discrimination itself? Or is discrimination objectification? I admit, part of my trouble is I admit I don't entirely understand the concept of objectification, which is why I'm not articulating this well.

[Nicodimas]

I am going to tackle just one element of this argument on this response.

Shinrei, on 03 April 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

It is certainly obvious it isn't close to being equal between men and women.

What I'm wondering is, is this phenomenon exasperated by the media portrayed images? I honestly don't know, but my instinct suggests that discrimination wouldn't be terribly different if we had a media that didn't subscribe to the "sex sells" mantra.

How do we reasonably address discrimination based on looks?

Also, I'm not sure I have the terms completely straight - is objectification of women considered leading to discrimination? Or is the objectification the discrimination itself? Or is discrimination objectification? I admit, part of my trouble is I admit I don't entirely understand the concept of objectification, which is why I'm not articulating this well.

Attractive people will always have a leg up in the world. I am glad you brought this up as I always find this fascinating. I don't think their is anything wrong with this at all. I think ultimately it always comes down to the end user as a person who is doing the rating and judging. If a person judges a person completely based on their looks overall that is very telling of that persons value set. There is nothing wrong with appreciating a person based off their looks. Their is no reason to feel "bad" about that as is a cultural element that is usually meant to weed out the stronger people from the weak in social situations. A more dominant person will always have less fears in expressing themselves in various forms. Of course people form the initial impression on a person based off what the primary stimuli will be. That is reality. However, I think we have all met that totally attractive person that is a total A-hole..or idiot by now?

Objectification I think will come from that person's value set and how they treat people based off what their eyes see. They would dismiss the argument that their is more to a person than just that. I would imagine there is varying degree of this in each person. Nobody is perfect.

Quote

a media that didn't subscribe to the "sex sells" mantra.

Is it the media pushing this, or the viewers themselves? I believe the media noticed the correlation a long time ago and went with it in what the end-user really wants. Media portrays a different sort of fantasy. Escapism is a big deal in what they are selling the end user overall. You are dealing with a fake actor/situation that usually is perfect in every situation socially...usually the looks match the behavioral pattern they are selling in the character. The evil character is usually imperfect physically in some way or view. That to me is a bigger argument in what they media does truly sell with objectification.

[Nicodimas]

http://plato.stanfor...bjectification/

Here is a really long article on this subject.

[Maark Abbott]

Nicodimas, on 03 April 2015 - 03:47 PM, said:

However, I think we have all met that totally attractive person that is a total A-hole.

I seem to be receiving a lot of summons to this thread today. What gives?

[Puck]

A couple of things.. Studies indicate that the 'sex sells' mantra is a fallacy. It actually doesn't, and is, in some cases, even harmful to the product they're trying to sell. I'd have to prawl google again, but what I remember reading not too long ago can be summed up as:

Consumers can have negative reactions when faced with a 'sex sells' ad when the product has nothing to do with sex to begin with. Condoms? Sure. Plumbing equipment? Much less so. This applies especially if the customer in question is female. Also, 'sexy' ads are indeed more likely to be remembered by men, HOWEVER that does not increase brand recall; basically, a sexy car wash ad may stay in a man's mind, but WHICH car washing brand it was will probably go right by said man, while a woman (we're talking roughly 50% of potential customers here) might even choose to expressly not go to that car wash.

More on topic, my personal opinion is that there's a difference between, uhm, being aroused by/appreciating a woman's looks and, say, only going by looks when it comes to hiring her for a job. I think we humans are hardwired to look for whatever it is that we subconsciously find attractive (well, mostly). As long as one remains mindful that there's a person behind the looks and there's no such things as 'beauty equals goodness'.

I'm also all for porn and the Playboy and such. Beats victorian age pseudo morals. I just think one should, again, remain mindful of the fact that such things are only abstractions made to trigger certain reactions and that there's a huge difference between porn and reality.

I do agree with the quote Shinrei cites from Wikipedia insofar as I think there have been negative consequences of the sexual revolution, though I'm certainly against going back to how it was before that (even so the so-called sexual freedom of today rubs me the wrong way on a regular basis). Ideally, there should be a balanced approach of acceting that not everyone cares about it.

[Tattersail_]

Okay where is this Hawt thread that Terez mentioned? I've been lacking in my use of this forum.

On the subject of objectification I really don't care. It's false or unfixable. I have some gorgeous looking female and male friends and some not so good looking in terms of appearance but I don't see them as different. They are just my friends. I value different things in each one of them. I don't care about issues like this because it doesn't matter what I think. If I see something myself that I disagree with then I will step up to the plate. Yet something happening in a different county or country and not in my immediate vicinity, I've come to understand I couldn't care less. I be nice to the people I meet, I work hard, I just have faith that others will do the same. I don't want to have a negative impact on someone else's life. It's a good opening post because there is are so many situations out there.

This post has been edited by Tattersail_: 03 April 2015 - 06:59 PM

[amphibian]

Apt, on 03 April 2015 - 02:19 PM, said:

I am in danger of summoning Worrywort or Studlock on myself here but the term "Rape culture" used in the context of modern Western society is often times misgiven and other times just laughable. Our society as a whole is not a rape culture. Looking at boobs and watching porn is not rape culture. The aesthetically pleasing observation of another sexes qualities is not rape culture. It's human nature.

You're going to be a very depressed, very sad person if you spend your life worrying
about all the ism's you have oppressed or insulted that day.

There is a big problem with concepts like "feminism" or "rape culture" in that people, who don't agree with the concepts, seize upon aspects of what is supposed to be a piece of the concept and distort that to the point of making the concept seem useless or evil. The whole context is important and people who often have vested interests in reducing the concept to uselessness get voices magnified by angry groups like GamerGaters or purposefully maintained cesspools like 4chan. They are not the only groups that do this, but they are the most accessible to this discussion due to being primarily online and heavily composed of very vocal young men who have deeply flawed and incomplete grasps of history, facts and all too much anger and disregard of other people.

If I take a toy away from a three year old and give it to a two year old and the three year old cries, I'm bad. But what if the three year old has monopolized the toys all day, shoved the two year old around and needs to share better? Then taking that toy away isn't bad. Context matters.

The same dynamic of needing context to fully understand and utilize rape culture is needed. Rape culture is about trivializing sexual assault, minimizing consequences to those that commit it and refusing to acknowledge all too common behaviors within societies that contribute to sexual assault happening way more than any "oh it's just a bunch of crazy people" statistics would reasonably predict. The aftereffects and trauma of rape are considerable. Western society doesn't make it easier by making the prosecution process full of opportunities to stifle the complaint, make it difficult for the person assaulted to move on (hard to do that when the trial/evidence gathering time can be measured in years), and still not punish the person who committed the assault due to extremely skeptical juries that all too often do not take rape/attempted rape seriously - because rape culture has led them to believe in only the "stranger ripping clothes off a blonde lady at night in the park" fantasy version of sexual assault.

Most women are inculcated in the fear of physical and sexual assault from an early age. They learn how to ward off creeps and/or the physically aggressive, how to de-escalate situations in ways that let them escape unharmed, how to avoid certain areas and people at certain times and so on. This fear is something most men never have to worry about. I never worried about people groping me at bars, got spoken to about dressing primly or feared for my safety due to a rejected romantic proposal. Rejecting a man is perhaps the most dangerous thing a woman can do in Western society. It's bizarrely easier for a woman to acquiesce to some limited form of unwanted advances or "just deal with them" entirely and then never mention them to other people than it is to hold a man to that line between "ok behavior" and "not-ok behavior". That's fucked up, wrong and needs to change - and all too often, the people behind anti-feminist movements or groups that deny rape culture have histories of abuse and assault. They are far more invested in preserving their own agency to violate personal boundaries than they are in making sure other people are ok. That's why the concept of rape culture is important and why people need to stop denying its presence.

As for sexual objectification, I view it as occurring when a person is reduced solely to being an offering to be used for sexual purposes. It is a controlling of a person by someone else to be solely this or that, rather than the multi-faceted being almost all of us actually are in real life. As others have said in this thread, there's a tremendous amount of variables in this, but all too often, women - particularly women who aren't ethnically white - get shunted into being little more than deliverers of sexual gratification. All too often, women aren't allowed to be thought of as skilled creators of content, prime movers in business deals, or willingly and cleverly engaging in the dynamic between sex, eroticism, advertising, earning money and so on. Bjork doesn't get as much credit for her album production as Kanye West does and it's due to her gender (and to some degree a failure to control the narrative to the degree Kanye does, but that's possibly a structural issue as well as a missed opportunity).

Kim Kardashian springboarded to true fame and millions of dollars in business deals on the basis of a sextape and weirdly enough, white media/white comedians (Jenny Johnson and more) have never stopped shitting on her for that. Yeah, sure, a sextape going viral isn't a great thing, but it is obvious in her business dealings and eye-popping career earnings since then that this is a smart woman who is utilizing her body to make astounding amounts of money in a way that is fully empowered and consciously thought-out. I respect the heck out of Kim Kardashian, even if I view certain things she and the rest of the Kardashian clan do as deplorable or needing improvement.

But huge chunks of people seem to love slut-shaming women. That is also sexual objectification through attempted control of women's bodies. It's a thousand times worse than the "moral decay" of nudie mags and the consequences of being positive about sex and human pleasure.

[Shinrei]

I understand the "context is everything", but at the same time I really wonder at the choice of terms. I think all of the problems and issues you contextualize in the ideas of rape culture and objectification are very real.

However, I have to question the wisdom of the term "rape culture" itself. I realize it is meant to call attention to these societal issues with how we handle sexual assault and victimization.

The vast majority of people are horrified by the act of rape. So to hear those words "rape culture" it makes it sound like an accusation that society condones rape and even actively supports it. As you say, context is everything, but most people don't have the luxury of encountering the term "rape culture" with your very eloquent explanation included. So it shouldn't be surprising that people are going to react very negatively and defend "their culture" against the term, picking it apart and conceptualizing it outside of its intended context. The term is an immediate turn off for people, meaning it perhaps causes more misunderstandings and defensiveness than actually helps with the issue.

I personally can attest that I reacted very negatively to the term at first, and my instinct was to argue against what I misconstrued as an attack on a generally functioning society of good people who don't rape and wish to stop others from doing so.

[Terez]

Shinrei, on 04 April 2015 - 12:21 AM, said:

The vast majority of people are horrified by the act of rape.

Perhaps as phib says people tend to define it, i.e. the violent act in a dark alley committed by a stereotypical predator, but the behavior of the Steubenville community showed that with a slightly broader definition and familiar perpetrators, rape is not so horrifying to most people at all. What was horrifying to them was that these young men's lives were destroyed. (Probably hyperbole, but you get the picture.)

[Shinrei]

Terez, on 04 April 2015 - 12:29 AM, said:

Shinrei, on 04 April 2015 - 12:21 AM, said:

The vast majority of people are horrified by the act of rape.

Perhaps as phib says people tend to define it, i.e. the violent act in a dark alley committed by a stereotypical predator, but the behavior of the Steubenville community showed that with a slightly broader definition and familiar perpetrators, rape is not so horrifying to most people at all. What was horrifying to them was that these young men's lives were destroyed. (Probably hyperbole, but you get the picture.)

And we need to change this interpretation. Absolutely.

I'm just questioning the wisdom of a term that isn't immediately unpacked within its context, and subsequently acts as a turnoff rather than an educational tool.

[Illuyankas]

Rape-excusing culture being too many syllables, presumably.

[Shinrei]

Illuyankas, on 04 April 2015 - 12:42 AM, said:

Rape-excusing culture being too many syllables, presumably.

That's actually not bad. Rape-rationalizing culture might be even better, since I think the first reaction to that phrase would be the question "What do you mean by that?" which can allow the conversation to start.

[worry]

"Rape culture" is both uncomfortable and accurate. If I said America had an art culture, nobody would get defensive or feel accused of being an artist. Some might feel reflective about whether and how they contribute to art culture at large, and conclude at the individual level they do a lot, some, a little, or none, and it would all be fairly besides the point. You might as well argue your individual album purchase didn't cause Beatlemania. You'd be right, and you'd be missing the forest for the trees.

The fact is nearly 1 in 5 women are raped: http://www.cdc.gov/v...datasheet-a.pdf
97 of 100 perpetrators are never punished in any regard: https://rainn.org/ne...e-no-punishment
There are currently -- as in 2015 A.D. -- seven US state governors unwilling to comply with the bipartisan, decade-plus-conceived Prison Rape Elimination Act: http://www.huffingto...html?1427362226
That's not 7 out of 1 million or 7 out of 1,000, it's 7 out of 50.

I'm personally not sure this "functioning society" exists:
1 in 3 college men say they would have "forced intercourse" if they could get away with it (from Jan 2015): http://www.newsweek....emantics-297463
Meanwhile nearly 80% of college presidents believe rape isn't a problem on their own campuses, in a denial-meets-NIMBYism hybrid: http://www.huffingto..._n_6875002.html
Rape culture is, in part, denying what rape is and who does it (or is capable of doing it), and when and where they do it. It's also about denying its own existence, and how it interrelates to sexual harassment, street harassment, other kinds of assault, women's body ownership, etc. I've found that men, even well meaning personally respectful men, just have a blind spot for how ubiquitous this is for women on a day-to-day basis. Like aside from rape, the aggressions (micro and not so micro) are legion, and fed by the constant overbearing message that men have a right to be pleased by women, and women have the responsibility to please. And since that's at heart about power, not sex/attraction, it's rooted in the same dynamic rape is.