Sex Object Test

[oldbadger]

I don't follow. Do you disagree that there is no simple explanation for violence? Maybe I need to see the quote in context.

I would have thought that with your background in training security personnel to overcome the psychological impact of regular conflict, you might lean more toward the belief that psychology can be studied and understood.

Yes..... OK, psychology can be researched, but it's such an inexact science that study and comprehension of it are like willow-the-wisps. I did learn about psychology in specific areas which helped me massively in my work, but I was dealing with %s all the time. I won't bore you with too much of that..... but hundreds and hundreds of peoples-actions held values of 'interest' which caused observation which caused thousands of arrests..... but that is just one tiny corner of term 'psychology'.

You mentioned to Kilgore that women would be most aware of sexual objectivity. Or something close to that. I put it to you that women share equal blame for, and reap most rewards from... sexual objectivity. In today's Daily Mail (I never bought it.... it was a cafe paper :yes: ) there was a huge double page article about 'No cleavage cleavage' and there were 14 pictures of famous women (don't ask me) wearing dresses that parted in the front and ran down to the stomach, leaving a wide gap open between the breasts, thus not pulling them together. They are all obviously successful go-get-it women, and they are all doing fine thankyou, and they are all using every last trick to enhance their bodies and attract attention. And they are getting it!

They don't just get it from men, but from women, who race out to copy them. In fact, in this area, girls are buying dresses which part for about three inches all the way down to the tummy, but they don't seem to have completely caught the trick of it because they (mostly) still seem to be wearing bras, so you get the 'push-me-pull-you' affect with a dress that doesn't need or want it...... all very strange. My wife and I go shopping on Friday nights and we drove past a load of clubbers tonight...... I looked at what they were wearing after seeing the Mail article.

So..... what do you want? What do you expect young women to do?..... because they'll not listen to you, methinks. They might later on, when their feet are buggered up by 5" heels and so forth, but how will you put mature heads on young shoulders?

 

[freethinker44]

Very true. But the chances of that in this case? We're talking about two fairly well established sets of data here. It's not like the APA's conclusions are based on research no more substantial than climate change denial.

The easiest, no-brainer explanation for the apparent contradiction would be that girls today are taking advantage of opportunities that were not generally or as universally available to them earlier, and that they might be taking even greater advantage of those opportunities if there were less sexual objectification. Whether that's true or not would need research and testing.

If girls experience sexual objectification more than boys, wouldn't you expect to see boys doing much better in schools if sexual objectification leads to lower academic performance?

 

[Alceste]

If girls experience sexual objectification more than boys, wouldn't you expect to see boys doing much better in schools if sexual objectification leads to lower academic performance?

Nope, for reasons previously explained in this very thread.

 

[Alceste]

Yes..... OK, psychology can be researched, but it's such an inexact science that study and comprehension of it are like willow-the-wisps. I did learn about psychology in specific areas which helped me massively in my work, but I was dealing with %s all the time. I won't bore you with too much of that..... but hundreds and hundreds of peoples-actions held values of 'interest' which caused observation which caused thousands of arrests..... but that is just one tiny corner of term 'psychology'.

You mentioned to Kilgore that women would be most aware of sexual objectivity. Or something close to that. I put it to you that women share equal blame for, and reap most rewards from... sexual objectivity. In today's Daily Mail (I never bought it.... it was a cafe paper :yes: ) there was a huge double page article about 'No cleavage cleavage' and there were 14 pictures of famous women (don't ask me) wearing dresses that parted in the front and ran down to the stomach, leaving a wide gap open between the breasts, thus not pulling them together. They are all obviously successful go-get-it women, and they are all doing fine thankyou, and they are all using every last trick to enhance their bodies and attract attention. And they are getting it!

They don't just get it from men, but from women, who race out to copy them. In fact, in this area, girls are buying dresses which part for about three inches all the way down to the tummy, but they don't seem to have completely caught the trick of it because they (mostly) still seem to be wearing bras, so you get the 'push-me-pull-you' affect with a dress that doesn't need or want it...... all very strange. My wife and I go shopping on Friday nights and we drove past a load of clubbers tonight...... I looked at what they were wearing after seeing the Mail article.

So..... what do you want? What do you expect young women to do?..... because they'll not listen to you, methinks. They might later on, when their feet are buggered up by 5" heels and so forth, but how will you put mature heads on young shoulders?

You are so close to getting it, while still so narrowly missing it. Yes, young girls in the UK dress in very awkward, uncomfortable, revealing clothing to go clubbing. But do they actually want the type of purely sexual attention they get for it from men? Is that a "benefit"? You are assuming they do want that, and the look is designed to get it. In my own experience, it's generally more to do with wanting to "fit in", getting one's cues from those very magazines and celebrities you mention.

I can't help thinking of a work friend who happened to have a larger pair of breasts she wasn't shy about. When we were out, the attention she got from men was often obnoxious, extremely awkward and borderline abusive. As in "don't be throwing your tits around like that if you're not up for it" when she turned down some very crude, unwanted sexual advances.

Thing is, she was actually dressed quite modestly in comparison to most of the women in the club. The shape of her body made most outfits look scandalously inviting on her, even at work. So constant sexual harassment and a series of jerks for boyfriends were her lot in life, at least during her twenties. And she did not understand why. She made no connection between wearing clothes she likes - stylish clothes other women could wear without consequence - and being treated like a piece of meat.

In general, women genuinely don't want that kind of attention, but they're very conscious of fashion and appearance, especially when young. That's because they have internalized the ubiquitous message that their value is largely, or even primarily, defined by their sexual attractiveness to men.

There's a reason you don't usually see women still rocking the three inch mini past 30. The realization that we have internalized a totally retarded and unfulfilling metric for self worth dawns on nearly all of us eventually, and we find a happy balance between comfort and self expression in our appearance.

 

[Alceste]

It feels weird that seven pages in it's just me and a bunch of guys with no relevant credentials or experience discussing female psychology. Where my girls at?

I somehow can't see myself and a bunch of girlfriends trying to explain male psychology to a man. Lol.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

I just think it's cute that you think you know more about the psychological impact of the ubiquitous objectification of women than women - or the APA. Based on what, I wonder? Did you look up any of the dozens of studies Sunstone cited?

Never mind, confidence is sexy.

I wish I could frubal you again.

I think it's fairly clear that sexual objectification negatively impacts things like academic performance. Males still substantially outnumber females in hard sciences, and there's painfully clear evidence that this is due to socially-constructed beliefs. Although this trend appears to be changing, many young females are not brought up to be as inquisitive or utilitarian as males, and certain belief systems about their ability to do math significantly hamper their progress in that field of study.

But it's ok, because their only function is to be a porcelain doll.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don't know where the girls are at either, but I've been keeping up with the posts.

 

[Alceste]

I don't know where the girls are at either, but I've been keeping up with the posts.

Maybe the RF feminists have given up talking about feminist issues in the open forum. Although, come to think of it, I haven't seen much of them anywhere else either lately.

 

[oldbadger]

It feels weird that seven pages in it's just me and a bunch of guys with no relevant credentials or experience discussing female psychology. Where my girls at?

I somehow can't see myself and a bunch of girlfriends trying to explain male psychology to a man. Lol.

How do you know that we aren't all dressed up in minis and stockings?

OK....... I get your point.
YOur previous post is good comment. Mrs says that she dresses, has always dressed, because she likes her choices and never aimed for attraction attention from others. She might have dressed to 'uniform' with her female mates.

So........ OK.
But females choices are surely driven by female fashion, which is driven by ..... manufacturers, design outlets, retailers?

 

[Alceste]

How do you know that we aren't all dressed up in minis and stockings?

OK....... I get your point.
YOur previous post is good comment. Mrs says that she dresses, has always dressed, because she likes her choices and never aimed for attraction attention from others. She might have dressed to 'uniform' with her female mates.

So........ OK.
But females choices are surely driven by female fashion, which is driven by ..... manufacturers, design outlets, retailers?

I wouldn't be surprised if the fashion world has changed somewhat from when Mrs. Badger was a lass. Just saying.

I don't think you can generalize what drives the choices of 3.5 billion people. I am sure it's no different from what drives the choices of the other half. Only a small minority of us, male and female, can afford to be picky at all. Among those, I expect the driving force is some combination of "what's everyone else wearing?", "what am I comfortable wearing?", and "what do I want my outfit to say about me?"

Objectification in media and advertising influences the first and third question. Advertising is overwhelmingly controlled and designed by men, as is fashion.

 

[oldbadger]

I wouldn't be surprised if the fashion world has changed somewhat from when Mrs. Badger was a lass. Just saying.

I don't think you can generalize what drives the choices of 3.5 billion people. I am sure it's no different from what drives the choices of the other half. Only a small minority of us, male and female, can afford to be picky at all. Among those, I expect the driving force is some combination of "what's everyone else wearing?", "what am I comfortable wearing?", and "what do I want my outfit to say about me?"

Objectification in media and advertising influences the first and third question. Advertising is overwhelmingly controlled and designed by men, as is fashion.

The fashion world changes every year or so, or even sooner. I remember 'flares', which my daughter insisted on calling 'boot-tops'. So, yeah, Mrs B has seen a few changes, but .... at a wild guess, I'd put her in your generation.

mid- para...... ok.... fair enough.

last para....... how sure are you that blokes call the tune in the fashion world? I suggest that the manufacturers copy the star's new ideas which were created by the gurus. Are all the gurus geezers?

 

[Alceste]

The fashion world changes every year or so, or even sooner. I remember 'flares', which my daughter insisted on calling 'boot-tops'. So, yeah, Mrs B has seen a few changes, but .... at a wild guess, I'd put her in your generation.

mid- para...... ok.... fair enough.

last para....... how sure are you that blokes call the tune in the fashion world? I suggest that the manufacturers copy the star's new ideas which were created by the gurus. Are all the gurus geezers?

I'm in my 30s, at least for the time being. I grew up in the 80s. Fashion was ghastly. Make-up was fluorescent. Hair was large, and so were female shoulders. I would have very much have preferred for my awkward puberty years to have happened in the 60s or 70s. The photographic evidence still humiliates. But fashion is getting very far off topic, unless you are arguing that the cut of one's clothes is interchangeable with the concept of sexual objectification. I would say Marilyn Monroe was sexually objectified even more than modern celebrities, so I don't think clothes are particularly relevant.

As to how I can say that advertising (overwhelmingly) and fashion (moderately) are controlled my men, I can simply look it up.

http://www.3percentconf.com/index.php/where-are-all-the-donna-drapers

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/fashion/thursdaystyles/08FASHION.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I am still operating on the assumption that this video is the same one I watched a year or so ago, and IIRC, it also contains a segment on the fact that advertising is overwhelmingly controlled by men (97%).

Stars don't have ideas. Designers and advertisers give them free clothes and whatnot, hoping their designs will be worn to this or that gala event and captured in the tabloids. Nobody gets more free stuff than celebrities.

 

[oldbadger]

I'm in my 30s, at least for the time being.

Ahhh........ Mrs B is in her 'autumnal' 40's,

I grew up in the 80s. Fashion was ghastly. Make-up was fluorescent. Hair was large, and so were female shoulders.

Ah yes..... I called 'em Dallas shoulders....... yes...

I would have very much have preferred for my awkward puberty years to have happened in the 60s or 70s. The photographic evidence still humiliates. But fashion is getting very far off topic, unless you are arguing that the cut of one's clothes is interchangeable with the concept of sexual objectification.

.... Well, some of the 'cut' of clothes...... yeah, definitely.

I would say Marilyn Monroe was sexually objectified even more than modern celebrities, so I don't think clothes are particularly relevant.

Oh my goodness, yes. A walking talking cultured developed sexual object, in a person. An I right in saying that women were jealous of her? Many of them? They wouldn't have been if they had lived that life for a week.... or less.

As to how I can say that advertising (overwhelmingly) and fashion (moderately) are controlled my men, I can simply look it up.

OK..... Now..... So I give it up to you...
Question:- If advertising was to be controlled by women, would sexual objectification reduce, stay the same, or increase? I get the feeling that women and feminists distance themselves from women in power, high wealth, high business positions. Would high power go-get-it female advertising execs be as ruthless as the males?
Ergo..... given that sexual objectification should reduce, how can it?

I am still operating on the assumption that this video is the same one I watched a year or so ago, and IIRC, it also contains a segment on the fact that advertising is overwhelmingly controlled by men (97%).

I've given you that........ but the question remains, would ruthless female ad execs change anything?

Stars don't have ideas. Designers and advertisers give them free clothes and whatnot, hoping their designs will be worn to this or that gala event and captured in the tabloids. Nobody gets more free stuff than celebrities.

Sure....... so the designers offer freebies, and the stars select future fashions from their favored choices of what to wear. ??

 

[Alceste]

Ahhh........ Mrs B is in her 'autumnal' 40's,

Ah yes..... I called 'em Dallas shoulders....... yes...

.... Well, some of the 'cut' of clothes...... yeah, definitely.

Oh my goodness, yes. A walking talking cultured developed sexual object, in a person. An I right in saying that women were jealous of her? Many of them? They wouldn't have been if they had lived that life for a week.... or less.


OK..... Now..... So I give it up to you...
Question:- If advertising was to be controlled by women, would sexual objectification reduce, stay the same, or increase? I get the feeling that women and feminists distance themselves from women in power, high wealth, high business positions. Would high power go-get-it female advertising execs be as ruthless as the males?
Ergo..... given that sexual objectification should reduce, how can it?


I've given you that........ but the question remains, would ruthless female ad execs change anything?


Sure....... so the designers offer freebies, and the stars select future fashions from their favored choices of what to wear. ??

If I were wearing a bikini top in a photo where I'm chopping wood, mowing the lawn, weeding, lounging around the house, drinking wine or reading a book (the stuff I do), would you agree that the message conveyed by the picture would not be "ready and waiting for immediate penetration"? Something more like "must be hot outside", am I right?

It's not the clothes. It's the pose. This is pretty much what I wear to work, but I don't lounge around in this pose.

As to whether "women" (again, billions of people - generalization is silly) were jealous of Marilyn Monroe, I sincerely doubt it. I have never heard a woman say so. The persona she put out was shallow and stupid - very few of us envy stupidity, superficiality and helplessness in other women.

I don't know where you'd get the idea that feminists would distance themselves from powerful women. We ARE powerful women, and we like to work together, share our ideas, help one another succeed and celebrate each other's successes. Yes, there are some women who resent other women for success, just as there are men who resent other men for the same reason. As a general rule, though, men tend to be more competitive with one another, I think.

I don't know how the concept of "ruthless female ad execs" entered into the equation. Can you explain why the adjective "ruthless" has suddenly appeared? If you don't mind, I'll answer as if that qualifier had not been introduced, since it confuses the issue unnecessarily.

The obvious consequence of a more egalitarian gender distribution in advertising is that we would see more ads depicting women as we see ourselves, and fewer ads depicting women as seen by men. The idea that it would result in equal or greater sexual objectification of women is simply absurd.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Just jumping in for a second to say you're doing a great job, Alceste. I've been busy IRL on the Feisty Feminist Front.

 

[oldbadger]

It's not the clothes. It's the pose.

I've got to come back to you on that last post....... can't do that now.

I was looking thru' adverts for hunky naked men hanging over car bonnets and stuff, when I came to this pic..... my wife was standing behind me with a coffee for me and she asked about the pic eek. I explained that I needed to dig for pics in a debate with a tough Canadian feminist. She said, 'Ummm.... that's not going to help much.'
I agreed.
Then she laughed and said, 'It's OK.... you can win with that one!'
I asked, 'How in Hell's name can I manage that?'
She said, 'It's just showing how women can be mechanics too!' :biglaugh:

Sorry...... :sad: It's my Missuss's fault.... :sad:

 

[Brickjectivity]

That person's arms are too skinny to do any mechanical work, butt other than that everything seems perfectly normal.

 

[Alceste]

I've got to come back to you on that last post....... can't do that now.

I was looking thru' adverts for hunky naked men hanging over car bonnets and stuff, when I came to this pic..... my wife was standing behind me with a coffee for me and she asked about the pic eek. I explained that I needed to dig for pics in a debate with a tough Canadian feminist. She said, 'Ummm.... that's not going to help much.'
I agreed.
Then she laughed and said, 'It's OK.... you can win with that one!'
I asked, 'How in Hell's name can I manage that?'
She said, 'It's just showing how women can be mechanics too!' :biglaugh:

Sorry...... :sad: It's my Missuss's fault.... :sad:

Lol. Mrs. Badger is quite a wit. If you want pictures of hunky half naked men looking ready to bang, image search Kalvin Klein ads. Most of them actually feature both men and women looking sexy. But keep in mind it won't help you here, since I have already acknowledged that men are also sometimes sexually objectified in ads, just not to anywhere near the same extent as women.

It's a classic mistake to argue against a point that has been posited to be generally true as if it has been posited to be always true in every circumstance. When it comes to men attacking feminism, there's even a dedicated hashtag for that particular straw man: #notallmen.

 

[oldbadger]

Lol. Mrs. Badger is quite a wit. If you want pictures of hunky half naked men looking ready to bang, image search Kalvin Klein ads. Most of them actually feature both men and women looking sexy. But keep in mind it won't help you here, since I have already acknowledged that men are also sometimes sexually objectified in ads, just not to anywhere near the same extent as women.

They do not help .........
A man in undies, advertising undies, or a man advertising fragrance will be showing skin, and it might help if he looked like men want to look.
I want a naked hunk hanging over the bonnet of a big truck.......,.. with the slogan 'Buy a Big-Task Truck! They sure can pull!
If you see anything, give me a nod...........

It's a classic mistake to argue against a point that has been posited to be generally true as if it has been posited to be always true in every circumstance. When it comes to men attacking feminism, there's even a dedicated hashtag for that particular straw man: #notallmen.

I don't think I'm coming from there....... I'm not coming from anywhere, it's where I'm gpoing to that counts....

I must come back to you on your big post, but will need more time..... more prep.

Back later

 

[Alceste]

They do not help .........
A man in undies, advertising undies, or a man advertising fragrance will be showing skin, and it might help if he looked like men want to look.
I want a naked hunk hanging over the bonnet of a big truck.......,.. with the slogan 'Buy a Big-Task Truck! They sure can pull!
If you see anything, give me a nod...........


I don't think I'm coming from there....... I'm not coming from anywhere, it's where I'm gpoing to that counts....

I must come back to you on your big post, but will need more time..... more prep.

Back later

How about this...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2SrpARP_M0o