Posted March 26, 2012 I’ll point out the biological basis of the two instead of just listing features. That wasn't a definition. It wasn't even close to it. If you don't want to answer, that's OK. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) That wasn't a definition. It wasn't even close to it. If you don't want to answer, that's OK. The same definitions that the dictionary has. Here's some criticisms on the subject from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexualization "Much of the recent writing on sexualization has been the subject of criticism that because of the way that it draws on ‘one-sided, selective, overly simplifying, generalizing, and negatively toned’ evidence (Vanwesenbeeck 2009) and is ‘saturated in the languages of concern and regulation’ (Smith 2010). In these writings and the widespread press coverage that they have attracted, the term is often used as ‘a non sequitur causing everything from girls flirting with older men to child sex trafficking’ (Egan and Hawkes 2008)." Edited March 26, 2012 by Alpha1 Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 The same definitions that the dictionary has. Despite the fact that this isn't even a sentence, I'll accept that. Now: Tell me what those definitions are and why you believe a. taking them to an extreme is the same as over sexualizing? and b. breasts and buttocks that face in the same direction (as I have mentioned, as has been shown to be the case and a large problem) are any form of feminine? Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Similarly, women with lots of estrogen tend to have feminine features. WOMEN tend to have feminine features... Well, um.... So much of your post doesn't actually make sense, not in argument but in language - but a few things: If males don’t get what they want, they’ll harass the females. In humanity this is certainly the case. That's what this thread is ABOUT. And about how to put a stop to it. Complaining about sexual objectification in comics and games is futile, and it’s a bit ridiculous So we should just put up with anything horrible in life ? I don't think so. Just because a study shows something is the case doesn't mean it's right. If a study showed we all felt that all men should be drowned at birth - would that make it OK ? Here's one - a study has shown that half of drivers aged between 21 and 24 text while driving. http://news.yahoo.com/govt-study-more-driv...-164653524.html Does that mean we should stop complaining about it ? What about the villain, Pretty Boy!? A lot of guys are jealous of pretty boys because they know girls like that appearance. They don’t get harassed like a nerd does; there are other reasons why Justin Bieber gets negative comments from guys. And from a hell of a lot of women, I'm telling you... It isn't a gender thing, it's a looks in general thing. ICK. You're probably overstating the money portion, but this isn't hard to understand. A man with a high income would have a easier time competing for a woman with a relatively high income because he probably brings more to the table. Money never occurred to anyone I know who has a partner. Not ONE SINGLE PERSON I agree. It can make a difference albeit limited. This doesn't mean that we should ban peoples’ preferences. There is some evidence that violence in video games can influence children. Does this mean we need to remove it from movies and video games? Actually - I think that would be a very good idea. Eh, wasn’t really arguing, but that news about selling something for curves to 7 year olds didn’t sound mainstream. Is it really, or was it a more uncommon example? No it is very common indeed. Padded tiny bikinis for three yearolds are even in Walmart. Women are affected by eating disorders more, so that’s nothing new. Now THAT is actually not entirely true. The big issue is that men are afraid to discuss it and because there aren't useful indicators for men, like the cessation of menstruation, they tend to be diagnosed later. And you’re going to get rid of human nature how? Education can improve. A hell of a lot of "human nature" is stuff we learn by watching the behaviours of others. I would argue that diversity is because males can be seen as attractive with masculine and feminine features. Women don’t have as much flexibility. OR that women have enough sense to see attractiveness as simply that, not tied in to expected "norms" How is it any better that the woman goes into it looking for social status and money? These aren’t arranged marriages. These are people doing what they want to do. Men are JUST as likely to do that. You quite often hear "He only married her for her money". But none of this is really relevant except the idea that we should shut up because it's normal and we are just whining. I repeat: Complaining about sexual objectification in comics and games is futile, and it’s a bit ridiculous No. Complaining about it is the only way to change things. Saying it is ridiculous is doing exactly what women point out that men do - belittling us for minding. If I said you were only saying this stuff because you have a small one and feel your masculinity is threatened by women, you'd be well offended. And rightly so. You are effectively saying that we are "girly" for minding. Well, fine. Don't expect us not to challenge you. Because you are wrong. I am woman. I can roar. But mostly I can't be bothered. It is posts like yours that bring out the roar in me Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 I’ve never heard anyone claim this. Really? I hear this all the time. Small article on it/mentioning it: http://www.lemondrop.com/2010/09/17/old-me...tive-than-ever/ Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) Really? I hear this all the time. Small article on it/mentioning it: http://www.lemondrop.com/2010/09/17/old-me...tive-than-ever/ Yeah, me too. Here's a few more articles related to it, a bit more scientific/statistical/legal in nature: https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.co...86b871115ce6bd6 <-- a 1985 report by the Columbia Law Review. You can't access the whole article (not without subscribing or purchasing the article, anyway), but just the bit you can read contains some telling statistics: "Recent statistics indicate that of 1200 local news anchors around the country, forty-eight percent of the men and only three percent of the women are over forty. Moreover, while sixteen percent of the men in local anchor positions are over fifty, there are no local anchorwomen in this age group. At the three major networks a similar age and gender based employment pattern is evident." Also, "Whereas for male anchors "gray hair and frown lines and wrinkles are [considered] marks of distinction, . . . [f]or women they're the kiss of ..." <-- that's where the visible excerpt cuts off, but I'm sure you can all guess the next word. http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jun/01/news/mn-36320 <-- This one deals with pay inequality; it's a 2000 article on the status of female anchorwomen and radio hosts in Los Angeles. Key info from this one: "The AFTRA (American Federation of Television and Radio Artists) report, which was obtained by The Times, is scheduled to be released to the union's 1,000 Los Angeles-area members in the coming days. Among the other statistics: * In television, female anchors at KTTV-TV Channel 11 on average earn half of what their male colleagues make. * In radio, female deejays at KLOS-FM (95.5) on average earn less than one-fourth of what their male colleagues earn. * On talk radio, there isn't a female salary to compare, because there is not one woman employed by the union's three local talk stations in a full-time host position. * On average, female TV broadcasters earn 20% less than their male counterparts, while in radio, female radio newscasters and hosts earn an average of 26% less." Oh, and hey, Fox News! --> http://www.ihatethemedia.com/fox-news-anch...rts-video-photo <-- note the age, weight, and businesswear comparison between men and women. The ladies are all stick-thin, with no grey hairs, and look like they forgot to put anything on over their panties. As a more broad-reaching complement to that one, here are 2 more that deal with the sexualization of female news anchors, and the effect it may have on men's memory retention for data: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J057v13n01_03 http://www.miller-mccune.com/media/sexy-ne...-viewers-27562/ Also, WOW do the comments on this one speak for themselves: http://www.mediaite.com/print/megyn-kelly-...ps-down-for-gq/ ...I'm now going to go talk to my friends, to restore my faith in the existence of kind, decent men who treat women as their equals and don't judge them on their looks. Yeah. Edited March 26, 2012 by Kelkelen Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Really? I hear this all the time. Small article on it/mentioning it: http://www.lemondrop.com/2010/09/17/old-me...tive-than-ever/ I hear it frequently as well. I can name a whole lot of men who are quite advanced in years but still considered attractive. Not so many women. I don't even know why Justin Bieber is being brought up. He's just, what, 18 now? Of course most women don't find him attractive; most women are not ephebophiles. It shouldn't be so surprising that lots of adults aren't attracted to children or to people who haven't been adults for much longer than a few months. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Now: Tell me what those definitions are and why you believe a. taking them to an extreme is the same as over sexualizing? and b. breasts and buttocks that face in the same direction (as I have mentioned, as has been shown to be the case and a large problem) are any form of feminine? Feminine -- Traits generally attributed to a woman Masculine -- Traits generally attributed to a man I'm not suggesting that they're identical. It's just another perspective. Would people really care if it was an unattractive woman with a monkey butt and big breasts? No. If she was attractive with no suggestive poses, or enlarged breasts? Yes. I'm still going with the criticisms the Wiki article pointed out. WOMEN tend to have feminine features... Well, um.... So much of your post doesn't actually make sense, not in argument but in language - but a few things: There is a strong and direct correlation between the level of estrogen in women and how feminine they were found to be. In humanity this is certainly the case. That's what this thread is ABOUT. And about how to put a stop to it. "[...] Breiter have used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology to look at the activity in men's brains when they were shown pictures of beautiful women's faces. Breiter and his colleagues found that the same part of the brain lights up as when a hungry person sees food, or a gambler eyes cash, or a drug addict sees a fix." [chorus] You and me, baby, ain't nothin' but mammals, so let's do it like they do on the Discovery Channel. You and me, baby, ain't nothin' but mammals, so let's do it like they do on the Discovery Channel. [/chorus] Here's one - a study has shown that half of drivers aged between 21 and 24 text while driving. http://news.yahoo.com/govt-study-more-driv...-164653524.html Does that mean we should stop complaining about it ? No, but don’t be surprised if people still act like morons by texting while driving. And from a hell of a lot of women, I'm telling you... It isn't a gender thing, it's a looks in general thing. ICK. Hmm? I don’t know what you’re referring to. Is it appearance? I know both sexes suffer from it. Money never occurred to anyone I know who has a partner. Not ONE SINGLE PERSON You’re right. Sort of. Lots of people meet up at the workplace, so they’ll have similar incomes. People say they focus on personality, but statistics show that attractiveness must be factored in more than they say. Actually - I think that would be a very good idea. Fascism No it is very common indeed. Padded tiny bikinis for three yearolds are even in Walmart. She said, “We have products that are targeted towards 7 yr olds that say "if you eat this, you'll get a curvy figure!" That’s what I’m referring to. Maybe I’m just oblivious to it. Then again, I know we have: As for the bikinis, you can go topless in some countries and parts of the U.S. Some say it’ll desensitize the breasts. Some say it’ll sexualize it. Now THAT is actually not entirely true. The big issue is that men are afraid to discuss it and because there aren't useful indicators for men, like the cessation of menstruation, they tend to be diagnosed later. http://www.sc.edu/healthycarolina/pdf/facs...rStatistics.pdf Can you show a source? Estimates suggest that it’s 10 to 1 (female to male). The lowest I’ve seen is 3 to 1. You may be talking about men with eating disturbances, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they meet the criteria. Education can improve. A hell of a lot of "human nature" is stuff we learn by watching the behaviours of others. Does abstinence work? OR that women have enough sense to see attractiveness as simply that, not tied in to expected "norms" “To see if the women would go for short guys who were successful, ABCNEWS' Lynn Sherr created extraordinary résumés for the shorter men. She told the women that the shorter men included a doctor, a best-selling author, a champion skier, a venture capitalist who'd made millions by the age of 25. Nothing worked. The women always chose the tall men. Sherr asked whether there'd be anything she could say that would make the shortest of the men, who was 5 feet, irresistible. One of the women replied, "Maybe the only thing you could say is that the other four are murderers." Another backed her up, saying that had the taller men had a criminal record she might have been swayed to choose a shorter man. Another said she'd have considered the shorter men, if the taller men had been described as "child molesters." Men are JUST as likely to do that. You quite often hear "He only married her for her money". *cough* Gold diggers *cough* No. Complaining about it is the only way to change things. Saying it is ridiculous is doing exactly what women point out that men do - belittling us for minding. I understand, but it’s just the way things are. What I don’t get is condemning generalizations such as, “you throw like a girl”, and then doing the exact same thing to men or society in general. Then feminists start arguing about sexualization in comic books, video games, etc. and acting as if they should be banned, while ignoring romance novels and “hot” male celebrities that girls look up to. I am woman. I can roar. But mostly I can't be bothered. It is posts like yours that bring out the roar in me Really? I hear this all the time. Did you see my article on how they want older AND more attractive men? I don’t think this generalization applies to the majority of females. This is like me using Diane Sawyer, Jon Huntman’s wife, and Michelle Bachmann as examples and saying women get more attractive as they get older. I’ve heard and read plenty of women saying how gross and creepy it is to have forty year old men hit on them or ask for a date. We weren’t even discussing this group either. Fuzzbucket said 50 and 60 year old men were somehow getting more attractive. http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/gr...ractiveness.pdf “It is clear that, in general, young people are rated as more attractive than old people (e.g., Alley, 1988; Henss, 1991; Mathes, Brennan, Haugen, Sc Rice, 1985; Zebrowitz, Olson, St Hoffman, 1993).” Moreover, while sixteen percent of the men in local anchor positions are over fifty, there are no local anchorwomen in this age group. A lot of older women incorporate other things into attractiveness: power, faithfulness, money, and social status. They still want their men delaying the aging process. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/botox-bro-tox...49#.T3DGsdVAH4Y “He's not the only one getting hooked. An increasing number of men are adding Botox -- or, as some are calling it, Bro-tox -- to their wish lists. "Every year it seems like more and more men are getting Botox as … gifts, and it's not necessarily the older men," said Dr. Anthony Youn, a plastic surgeon in Troy, Mich.” "We're seeing a lot of men … who are having these [botox treatments] as gifts as early as in their thirties," he said.” This one deals with pay inequality It’s not a problem in the U.S. The differences is miniscule when the variables are accounted for. He's just, what, 18 now? Of course most women don't find him attractive; most women are not ephebophiles. It shouldn't be so surprising that lots of adults aren't attracted to children or to people who haven't been adults for much longer than a few months. He was just being used as an example of the pretty boy type, and I don't believe I mentioned women liking him. Women. Girls. Whatever. Screwed if you do. Screwed if you don't. I hear it frequently as well. I can name a whole lot of men who are quite advanced in years but still considered attractive. Not so many women. Why does it always have to be about sexism? Why can't the sexes think the opposite sex peaks in attractiveness at different times? Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Why does it always have to be about sexism? If it bugs you so much, why do you have to keep posting in a thread where women are pointing out just how much sexism affects them ? We take your point - you think it's OK for men to be able to make money from sexism, to stare at boobs and butts (preferably enhanced) and you want women to stop whining because we are after all only women, and we shouldn't mind this stuff; we should just read Silhouette novels and ogle hot celebrities (and Justin Bieber is NOT hot.) OK - we got that. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) Gotta say, I don't know any women that read romance novels. The most common books I see women reading are weight loss books. And the only women I know who are into celebrities only care about the female celebrities. Compared to how many men watch tv, watch pornography, play video games, and read comic books, women's expectations of men really aren't being affected by romance novels at all. Especially when we have TV telling us that the best an incredibly gorgeous girl can get is an overweight guy with poor intelligence and fidelity issues. Edited March 26, 2012 by Syaoransbear Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Feminine -- Traits generally attributed to a woman Masculine -- Traits generally attributed to a man I'm not suggesting that they're identical. It's just another perspective. OK, good. Now I know you know what those words mean. Let's go back to where you were trying to substitute "extremely feminine" and "extremely masculine" for "over-sexualized". You care to explain why you think extremely feminine = broken spine, breasts and butt pointing roughly in the same direction? I can honest to God say I have never in my life ever seen a highly feminine woman with her breasts and butt pointing in roughly the same direction, and neither have you. That's because that isn't a trait generally attributed to a woman thus not highly feminine. It is exactly what I said waaaaaaay back, sexualized so that breast men and butt men can see what they want at the same time. acting as if they should be banned Whoa there, buddy. Who is talking about banning anything? Why, that would be you and only you. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Did you see my article on how they want older AND more attractive men? I don’t think this generalization applies to the majority of females. This is like me using Diane Sawyer, Jon Huntman’s wife, and Michelle Bachmann as examples and saying women get more attractive as they get older. I’ve heard and read plenty of women saying how gross and creepy it is to have forty year old men hit on them or ask for a date. We weren’t even discussing this group either. Fuzzbucket said 50 and 60 year old men were somehow getting more attractive. Attractive =/= desiring to be with someone We are saying that, in general, people will agree that men age "like a fine wine" - they get more handsome with age. Whereas women are not thought of in the same way. I'm not sure what anybody hitting on anybody else has to do anything with this. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 Gotta say, I don't know any women that read romance novels. The most common books I see women reading are weight loss books. /me raises her hand. Yes, i read romance novels, yes, i very highly enjoy them. Do i see the reasons why other dont like them, sure. Sometimes i want to slap the charectors in the books. But i take into account that most are written by women, most are period settings where the bahavior is more.. justified. Moden romances just dont interest me. I'm one of very few women who were not appalled by Clan of the Cave Bear for example. Given the society laid out in the series, the sexism and such dont phase me one bit. I enjoy the stories for being the story they tell not because of the actions of the charectors themselves. I have /NEVER/ read a diet book in my life. Medical encylopedias, sexual dysfunctional disorders.. lots of medical and plant based books.. not a single diet book. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 On the subject of romance novels--I don't read them. I know my mother does, and I have some friends that both read and write them. One is published. If someone wants to get into sexism in that industry, this is a good thread for it (the covers alone!), but to be very honest, it would be nice to discuss on its own rather than a "BUT WHAT ABOUT...!!!" sort of thing. If there is a problem in a media, it's worth talking about without using it as a weapon. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 26, 2012 /me raises her hand. Yes, i read romance novels, yes, i very highly enjoy them. Do i see the reasons why other dont like them, sure. Sometimes i want to slap the charectors in the books. But i take into account that most are written by women, most are period settings where the bahavior is more.. justified. Moden romances just dont interest me. I'm one of very few women who were not appalled by Clan of the Cave Bear for example. Given the society laid out in the series, the sexism and such dont phase me one bit. I enjoy the stories for being the story they tell not because of the actions of the charectors themselves. I have /NEVER/ read a diet book in my life. Medical encylopedias, sexual dysfunctional disorders.. lots of medical and plant based books.. not a single diet book. well I don't know you lol Share this post Link to post
Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) No, but don’t be surprised if people still act like morons by texting while driving. No one here is "surprised" at the existence of sexism. Far from it. They are, however, *against* it, as it is wrong. As is texting while driving. Are you suggesting people should just accept thoughtless and dangerous practices without question? You’re right. Sort of. Lots of people meet up at the workplace, so they’ll have similar incomes. Which means that maybe they *aren't* selecting their partners based on financial earnings, but that they are selecting their partners from a circle of peers. Or perhaps it means that women are more likely to meet a partner in the workplace because they might have less free time outside of it than a man does, as in the case of divorced women raising children. Or perhaps it means that women prefer to date people with a similar level of ambition or similar job interests. There's really not sufficient proof to say that people choose their partners based on income, when you consider all the factors. People say they focus on personality, but statistics show that attractiveness must be factored in more than they say. That's a broad statement. Anyone I've ever met acknowledges that you have to be attracted to a potential partner, or it's not going to work out in the long run. However, there's a difference between accepting that all people have their own standards of attractiveness, where not all members of the opposite sex will meet those standards, and accepting that the media shapes our perception of what is normal and tries to market certain forms of "beauty" to us, very successfully -- and is constantly promoting an impossible and unhealthy and overly-sexualized form of "beauty" for women, while not for men. There's nothing wrong with "attractiveness;" the problem is when society creates a very narrow and harmful definition of it, and "sells" that image to the public at large. Then again, I know we have: http://www.sc.edu/healthycarolina/pdf/facs...rStatistics.pdf ...what? Are you unfamiliar with Weight Watchers? That's not a cereal aimed at making little girls grow "a figure," it's aimed at adult women who are trying to lose weight while still loving their curvy, full adult bodies. IMO, your images don't seem to convey what you want them to very often. Can you show a source? Estimates suggest that it’s 10 to 1 (female to male). The lowest I’ve seen is 3 to 1. You may be talking about men with eating disturbances, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they meet the criteria. The criteria for what? For eating disorders? Just because more women than men suffer from eating disorders, doesn't mean men *don't,* period! Clearly, even ten-to-one means that there are plenty of men struggling with the issue. “To see if the women would go for short guys who were successful, ABCNEWS' Lynn Sherr created extraordinary résumés for the shorter men. She told the women that the shorter men included a doctor, a best-selling author, a champion skier, a venture capitalist who'd made millions by the age of 25. Nothing worked. The women always chose the tall men. Sherr asked whether there'd be anything she could say that would make the shortest of the men, who was 5 feet, irresistible. One of the women replied, "Maybe the only thing you could say is that the other four are murderers." Another backed her up, saying that had the taller men had a criminal record she might have been swayed to choose a shorter man. Another said she'd have considered the shorter men, if the taller men had been described as "child molesters." You give no context for this. What kind of "study" was it? How many women were being asked? What demographic were they? Who were the other options? Did they actually speak with the men in person? How attractive in general were the men, height aside? This sounds like a ridiculous faux-news story, the sort that is often handed to female reporters in lieu of real news, for them to report on during the hours that women most often watch television (not that women even necessarily desire these "reports!"). *cough* Gold diggers *cough* ...didn't you just say that women do this, and not men? I will take this as you conceding the point that men are "gold-diggers" just as often as women, then. What I don’t get is condemning generalizations such as, “you throw like a girl”, and then doing the exact same thing to men or society in general. Then feminists start arguing about sexualization in comic books, video games, etc. and acting as if they should be banned, while ignoring romance novels and “hot” male celebrities that girls look up to. I haven't seen anyone here "doing the exact same thing." No one is saying "ALL men do X like Y all the time and it's so pathetic/annoying/unfair!" People ARE pointing out general societal and gendered trends, but I really fail to see the "man-hating" you seem to be perceiving. I love and admire many men in my life, as, I'm sure, do most if not all of the other posters. I try to be as careful as possible when posting, to make sure that while mentioning sexist trends, I don't make assumptions about Men, as a sex/gender, on a whole. I do realize that not all men think and act with one hive mind; which is more than I can say for how you seem to perceive women. Oh, and NO ONE is talking about banning anything. I am fervently, deeply anti-censorship. What we *are* talking about is trends in media that society seems woefully poor at breaking out of. Just because people *can* draw/write/say/advertise whatever the heck they want, doesn't mean it has value, nor that I have to like it. I’ve heard and read plenty of women saying how gross and creepy it is to have forty year old men hit on them or ask for a date. We weren’t even discussing this group either. Fuzzbucket said 50 and 60 year old men were somehow getting more attractive. There's a difference between finding someone aesthetically attractive, and being annoyed when someone makes unwanted advances and is very, very bad at taking 'no' for an answer. When people think of George Clooney as attractive, they aren't imagining him drunkenly ogling their breasts and pushing them repeatedly, despite refusals, to tell him their age and if they have a boyfriend. The "grossness" issue isn't about age, it's about behavior and assumptions. It’s not a problem in the U.S. The differences is miniscule when the variables are accounted for. What are you talking about? This article IS about the U.S. And 28% to 50% differences in pay between men and women performing the same jobs is decidedly unfair. I have no idea how you can think otherwise. He was just being used as an example of the pretty boy type, and I don't believe I mentioned women liking him. You did mention that he was an ideal of beauty that catered to what women wanted, as opposed to beefcake men in comics, who are more of an idea of what men admire or aspire to than anything actually appealing to women. But if he's not really being marketed to women, but to girls younger than he is, then it hardly supports your point. Women. Girls. Whatever. Screwed if you do. Screwed if you don't. I promise you, if you say women when you mean women, and girls when discussing the under-18 crowd, you will be FAR less likely to be misunderstood. Why does it always have to be about sexism? Why can't the sexes think the opposite sex peaks in attractiveness at different times? It isn't always about sexism. Sexism is always about sexism. Individual people can certainly find whomever they want attractive, at whatever age appeals to them. But when society, advertising, films, television, books, comics, toys, and companies all band together to define "attractiveness" as one hyper-sexualized image of the ideal woman, it's no longer about when men 'in general' believe women 'in general' to "peak in attractiveness." It's about creating an unrealistic standard that society actually comes to expect, due to being spoon-fed this standard as normal at every turn. Edited March 27, 2012 by Kelkelen Share this post Link to post
Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) Gotta say, I don't know any women that read romance novels. Hey, dude. I might have said hello to you once on the forums. =U I read romance novels. There are a lot of things I want to say, but most of them have already been said, so I'm just gonna say on the superhero comics topic: I honestly have a very hard time taking anything in superhero comics seriously whatsoever. It's about people with *powers* jumping around in their underwear and going ka-POW to criminals and people who want to take over the world. I'm sorry, I just can't take them seriously. Everything about them is so over the top. Completely reasonably dressed women with understandably figures would almost seem out of place in such a ridiculous world. However, in any other genre, yeah, this is offensive. I'm sick of women that have to be femme fatales, *es, or hysterical in movies. Why can't we have a strong, silent woman? Attractive or no, I don't care. I would honestly love to see a woman that is physically and emotionally strong, and attractive without wearing really revealing clothing and constantly flashing us her ass and boobs. I'd like to see one that was genuinely kind to people and helped those in need, but stood by her principles and morals. And, perhaps most of all, a woman that didn't have to be putting up a macho front, and acting as though being a woman was something to be ashamed of. See, when it comes to sexism in fiction, that's mainly the thing that bothers me. You hardly ever have a woman in anything for kids that isn't a *, a motherly type, or just plain completely boring. However, the men can be all ranges of funny. Why can't we have a funny female character? Because the girls watching need role models? If so, why give them the absolute worst role models possible? I'd like to see more humorous female characters (like Mrs. Puff from Spongebob, she was *excellent*), and more female characters like the one I mentioned above as role models. Hey, boys get funny characters and role models of their gender, why can't girls? And that's my little point. =U I've ranted about this in length before, but I'm too lazy to type it all up again, so whoops. Edited March 27, 2012 by Zovesta Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 Okay, so, I did something bad for my health today and was actualy thinking about things while I was at work. Largely this whole train of thought was set off by seeing a woman walk past me in very tight jeans. So bear with me, there is a question in this, although it may be a little rambly on the way there. I wish to emphasise before I start that I do not, in any way condone rape. There is no excuse for it. Period. I've heard the argument is used in rape cases that the girl was 'asking for it' in the way she dressed. Which is not, in my opinion, much of a defence, but still; it gets used. Now I saw this woman today and I couldn't help but thinking 'why are you dressed like that if not to attract attention from guys?'. It's quite a conundrum, and one I can't work out. Womens fashion seems to be totally geared towards looking sexually appealing to men... yet I know that it's the women buying the clothes, not the men, so they have the buying power. Which leads me to what I can't work out - why on earth do women buy the clothes they do? They're not comfortable (mostly anyway - I know, I have had to wear them) and a large amount of them seem to be very revealing and/or skin-tight. Just... why? I'm not trying to put any of you down here (please don't think that!), I'm trying to understand. But... I don't get how women can complain about being objectified (and lots of them do) while wearing the clothes so many of them do. Womens fashion is driven by women. They have the buying power. And you can bet that if things weren't selling then things would change. So why does so much about the way women dress seem to be designed to feed into the objectification so many of you find so objectionable? Why do women, themselves, define 'looking good' as 'looking sexually appealing to men'? Men don't dress they way they do to get attention from women, by and large. Or not all the time anyway. They can feel they 'look good' without having everything on display. Why don't women seem to think that same way? And why are so many women inclined to look down upon, and make derogatory comments about, those women that *do* decide to dress for comfort and practicality rather than to look appealing to the opposite sex? I just don't get it. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) I would like to point out that given the choice between a man who is 5'5 and lean with pretty features and one who is 6'2 and bulgy-muscular with a face like Captain Wossname from Ratchet and Clank, I would choose the short, pretty one any day of the week. Even if the big bulgy one made more money. ...Some of the people posting on this thread seem to be operating on assumptions which are very easy to form when one is very young, i.e., high-school age, but which exposure to real life generally corrects after a time. Tikindi, to address your question about clothes, I personally almost never dress to please anyone but myself--the only time I actually worry about what others will think of which garments I've got on is when I'm going to a formal event like a wedding or something (and for that I only want to make sure I'm wearing something that is 'appropriate'--something feminine enough to make me fit in with the rest of the girls, something that makes me look attractive and healthy without showing skin or being tight). Generally I wear rather tight jeans because they sort of squeeze my leg-flab into shape and make me look a little healthier and more in-shape than I really am, and I wear vest tops or tight tees a lot because they show off my arms, which are in better shape than the rest of my body. I have a partner, so when I put on clothes that make me look attractive to, for instance, go out and do the shopping while he's at work, I'm not doing it to attract a mate--I already have one. Just because I have a mate, though, is no reason I should wear sweatpants everywhere and generally look like a slob. I dress the way I do so that I can feel comfortable in my own skin and feel like I look healthy and confident and cool to observers (to all observers, not just to potential mates). I bet that girl in those tight jeans put those on that morning and said to herself, 'yay, my butt looks cool and now I feel great!' and attracting a mate was probably the farthest thing from her mind at the time. It is somewhat strange to think that a female gives up her right to be offended by uninvited sexual comments or objectification or rape just because she wanted to look healthy and trendy, though I have seen that attitude many times before. I do cosplay and sometimes do events in historical garb--when I do those, I'm always wearing a corset that props my business up on a shelf for all to ogle (unless I'm playing a male role, which I do more often than some). I wear that (and women who actually lived then wore it) because that is what the social group is wearing, that is what is appropriate for the situation, and if I wear anything else I'm a weirdo--I don't do it to cause the guys in pirate outfits to drool at my chesticles and say inappropriate things to me. I guarantee that corsets were not conceived as a device for displaying which women were okay with being harrassed, and tight jeans weren't either. tl;dr: When choosing clothes, sex never enters my mind. It's all about fitting in with the group, looking healthy, and feeling good about myself. That stuff is coincidentally attractive, not just to males, but to anyone who is attracted to women, but we don't do it because it's attractive to others, we do it because it feels good to know that you are perceived as healthy, cool, and confident. Edited March 28, 2012 by Sadako Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 We-e-ell... women's fashion isn't actually driven by women, either. Clothing design, advertising/marketing, and clothing retail chains are all historically male-dominated businesses. Women have the dollars, but they aren't the ones deciding what they can find on the shelves. And let's face it -- most women today aren't in the mood to sew comfortable clothing for themselves; they don't have the skills or the free time. Also, advertising does a LOT to shape what a country or culture finds attractive. There are plenty of studies to support this, like the ones that show the rise of eating disorders in areas where a heavy, curvy figure was always considered attractive, after they are introduced to North American and European magazines. One of advertising and business' main goals is to shape tastes. To market a product, you not only have to find the right market for it, you also need to create that market, mold it and prepare it to desire what you're selling. Not every woman thinks alike. For every one who thinks consciously about the constant exploitative images of women in advertising, there will be several more who just want to "look pretty," and whole-heartedly follow whatever society (and the fashion industry) deems "pretty." Just look at the example of 8-year-olds in low-rise stretch pants and off-the-shoulder tees, or in bikinis; they don't consciously want to attract sexual attention, they don't even know what sexual attention *is,* and they aren't in any way hoping to attract a mate, but they *do* want to look pretty and wear whatever is the norm. And, as we are not The Hive Mind Known as Woman, some of us probably are hoping to attract attention from men -- or women -- or from all society, to show off that they are fit and pretty -- or are hoping to attract attention from one specific person -- or just wanted to feel desirable that day -- or like form-fitting clothes because sometimes they *are* comfortable -- or enjoy trying out different styles and images from day to day, like styles of different decades -- or any other reason they so choose. But hoping that a man will think you are pretty, even that he will find you sexually desirable, does NOT mean you want to be treated as any LESS than one of his human peers. After all, when a man dresses up in a nice fitted suit, or... Speedo bikini shorts or something... he may hope that women find him sexy-looking, but of course he doesn't want them to randomly grope him, or try to get him drunk and take advantage of him, or call him demeaning names, or beckon and cluck their tongues at him. Maybe he's hoping to line up a date, or maybe he just likes knowing he looks good while he's working out, to no particular end. Women are capable of thinking the same way. Why do women, themselves, define 'looking good' as 'looking sexually appealing to men'? Basically because men have defined it that way for a very long time, and ALSO because the whole idea of adult beauty has always carried with it the element of sexual attraction to the opposite sex. I think that even without the influence of advertising, women would still sometimes incorporate an erotic element in their fashion, to some extent. It's just that women's sexual appeal to men has been overemphasized in advertising and fashion design to the exclusion of all other possible aspects, including comfort and the natural shape of women's bodies. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 Just... why? I'm not trying to put any of you down here (please don't think that!), I'm trying to understand. But... I don't get how women can complain about being objectified (and lots of them do) while wearing the clothes so many of them do. Here's a quote I'd like to use: There are any number of reasons a woman might dress up nicely/sexy (and let's not forget that what's sexy to one person may be absolutely modest to another): 1. To pick up other women 2. To impress other women 3. To make their friends jealous 4. To make their boyfriends jealous 5. To display status 6. For their own damn selves 7. To feel more confident 8. To enjoy being admired by other women 9. To enjoy being admired (and only admired) by men 10. To balance feeling bad by looking good 11. To show off those *in' new heels she just bought, the sixteen pounds she finally lost, the hairstyle she's been waiting to try, or the great (name accessory) she got as a gift 12. To live out a Sex And The City, or similar, fantasy she has 13. Because of a bet she won or lost 14. Because going out and flirting with boys or girls helps her forget something that's bothering her 15. Because most women dress that way at the place where she's going 16. Because she was raised to believe looks were the only important thing 17. Because she was taught that sexual attractiveness is the best way for women to gain power over men 18. Because she grew up in a culture where people judge women who don't dress up and look good as "lazy" (I've had a man say that in class) 19. To attract the attention of men, because she wants to talk to men 20. Because she likes getting free drinks when she goes out (jeez. I'd dress in a tube top and high heeled boots if it meant I drank for free every Friday night. Wouldn't you?) 21. To turn on the boyfriend/boyfriend prospect who came out with her that night 22. To advertise she's looking to make whoopie with some guy she meets that night That's twenty-two I thought of just now, and I'm not even a woman, and only one of them invites a proposition from a stranger who was ogling her across the room. I would like to point out that given the choice between a man who is 5'5 and lean with pretty features and one who is 6'2 and bulgy-muscular with a face like Captain Wossname from Ratchet and Clank, I would choose the short, pretty one any day of the week. Even if the big bulgy one made more money. I find it sad that more people don't agree with this-lots of problems I have with Western culture in general is based on this, because the cultural norm is towards a manly, macho guy. So...men in my race are told that they look gay or whatever. Not to mention that it's considered "unacceptable" if you date a shorter man. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 I find it sad that more people don't agree with this-lots of problems I have with Western culture in general is based on this, because the cultural norm is towards a manly, macho guy. So...men in my race are told that they look gay or whatever. Not to mention that it's considered "unacceptable" if you date a shorter man. I reeeally don't go for the macho-macho-man look, either! Everyone's tastes are different. I wish that Hollywood were a little more accepting of variety in appearance; men vary more than women, but still, I don't see a lot of short men, or a lot of minorities. Short men in movies tend to be cast in Rick Moranis-type roles: the painfully-nerdy, awkward, annoying one. Or else, a great sidekick, but of course never gonna get the girl. Le sigh. We all need to shut off the TV and go live some real life! Tall white dudes with broad shoulders, built muscles, and full heads of hair are NOT the only desirable ones! I'd totally date a guy who was shorter than me, except that, at 5'4", I hardly ever find one who is. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 Okay, so, I did something bad for my health today and was actualy thinking about things while I was at work. Largely this whole train of thought was set off by seeing a woman walk past me in very tight jeans. So bear with me, there is a question in this, although it may be a little rambly on the way there. I wish to emphasise before I start that I do not, in any way condone rape. There is no excuse for it. Period. I've heard the argument is used in rape cases that the girl was 'asking for it' in the way she dressed. Which is not, in my opinion, much of a defence, but still; it gets used. Now I saw this woman today and I couldn't help but thinking 'why are you dressed like that if not to attract attention from guys?'. It's quite a conundrum, and one I can't work out. Womens fashion seems to be totally geared towards looking sexually appealing to men... yet I know that it's the women buying the clothes, not the men, so they have the buying power. Which leads me to what I can't work out - why on earth do women buy the clothes they do? They're not comfortable (mostly anyway - I know, I have had to wear them) and a large amount of them seem to be very revealing and/or skin-tight. Just... why? I'm not trying to put any of you down here (please don't think that!), I'm trying to understand. But... I don't get how women can complain about being objectified (and lots of them do) while wearing the clothes so many of them do. Womens fashion is driven by women. They have the buying power. And you can bet that if things weren't selling then things would change. So why does so much about the way women dress seem to be designed to feed into the objectification so many of you find so objectionable? Why do women, themselves, define 'looking good' as 'looking sexually appealing to men'? Men don't dress they way they do to get attention from women, by and large. Or not all the time anyway. They can feel they 'look good' without having everything on display. Why don't women seem to think that same way? And why are so many women inclined to look down upon, and make derogatory comments about, those women that *do* decide to dress for comfort and practicality rather than to look appealing to the opposite sex? I just don't get it. IMO: Because women are trained to hate their appearance so that they'll give more business to the beauty industry trying to 'fix' themselves. And if you hate yourself, you usually seek validation from others. Since females are in competition with other females they don't care what other women think, so they try to get as much attention from men as possible. The best way to do that is by dressing sexually. I mean, you looked at the woman in tight pants. It clearly works. Women like to objectify themselves because they individually benefit from it. Who cares if straddling a motorcycle naked for a Kawasaki ad makes you a sex object, you get the attention of guys, you get fame, you get power, and you get money for posing. Who gives a damn if acting that way objectifies and hurts all women who now have to live up to the new unrealistic expectations you just created(who will then set even higher expectations that YOU will fail to live up to one day). If it's all over billboards, the tv, and the internet, it becomes common enough that people don't realize it's unrealistic. Women complain about sexism a lot, but we're the worst offenders for objectifying and sexualizing ourselves. Maybe if we weren't so damn selfish and thought about how our actions would affect all women, we'd be in a better place right now instead of 37% of women getting plastic surgery, 50% wanting plastic surgery, 90% wearing make-up, and 65% having eating disorders. Women need to smarten up and stop screwing each other over. This doesn't have to be a man's world anymore. Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 When I said that some opinions/assumptions seem to be... those of the immature, I was speaking of the opinion which is being expressed that 'all women want an alpha male/football star and all men want an alpha female/head cheerleader' and 'all women go for super-buff men or men who make lots of money because nothing is important to females except status' and 'all men want a much younger woman who is submissive, physically weak, and conventionally 'hot'. It is those assumptions that seem off to me, and it is those assumptions that I think most people will find are incorrect. If the only male that anyone will mate with is the footballer and the only female that anyone will mate with is a spice girl, then how did anyone other than Beckham and Posh Spice ever get married in the history of the world? There are plenty of attractive people who like all types and torturing oneself about whether one is alpha-male enough is a complete waste of energy. :/ Share this post Link to post
Posted March 28, 2012 When I said that some opinions/assumptions seem to be... those of the immature, I was speaking of the opinion which is being expressed that 'all women want an alpha male/football star and all men want an alpha female/head cheerleader' and 'all women go for super-buff men or men who make lots of money because nothing is important to females except status' and 'all men want a much younger woman who is submissive, physically weak, and conventionally 'hot'. It is those assumptions that seem off to me, and it is those assumptions that I think most people will find are incorrect. If the only male that anyone will mate with is the footballer and the only female that anyone will mate with is a spice girl, then how did anyone other than Beckham and Posh Spice ever get married in the history of the world? There are plenty of attractive people who like all types and torturing oneself about whether one is alpha-male enough is a complete waste of energy. :/ Well, there are some countries where it IS not...............shall we say, looked upon favorably by the masses if you're a woman, and you're not submissive (goes off to weep). I find that patriarchy does sort of instill that attitude in you. And yes, there are derogatory names for women who are like that. Same goes for the men. If you're not a strong drinker (which seems to be a factor in how manly you are in this region at least) you get ridiculed. But yes, I do agree that the meme itself is ridiculous. Share this post Link to post
Recommended Posts