Examples of media from the last 5 years where women are objectified

_Dara_

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

I sense what this comes down to for those women who decry "objectification" is a fear that they don't look good enough or a response to the pain of not looking good enough.

For men who decry "objectification" of women, I think it stems from the fact they are unable to compete with other men for beautiful women. Basically what they are doing is taking their ball home. Deep down they are bitter that they can't attract those women who are "objectified".

It's a neat theory. Neat but glib.

Triceratops Ballet

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Is that not conflating objectification with something else, ie viewing someone as an object, with judging them based on their appearance.

I guess this is the distinction that confuses me. I can't get my head around the idea that they're different.

Nor do I but I'm an adult I'm able to separate my appearance from my worth (after years of not being able to) That doesn't mean it doesn't have an impact on young people constantly bombarded with those images

And yet, the majority of criticism seems to be coming from adults on behalf of young people.

Is it possible that young people would have fewer problems if adults stopped telling them that they should have problems from being on the receiving end of those images?

Just curious since this focus on youth issues seems to have blown into a big deal within the last two decades. I don't remember these kinds of issues being commonplace when I was a teenager, and there was just as much advertising going on (although from TV, billboards etc) rather than social media.

Though I don't get why this has to be a gender issue, rather than a criticism of advertising and the media industry... after all, it's them that is pushing the importance of the imagery, and pushing it into our lives.

The messaging is changing tho, there's recently been foundation ads with men in them, it's a subtle shift from "this is what a man is, tall dark and handsome" to "this is how you're not like that guy, dye your hair, cover those bags under your eyes and get to the gym"

Err... perhaps the difference is that now it's advertising/media taking over from the direct social pressure that we used to experience before.

But TBH, there's always been a lot of pressure on boys and young men to develop a certain way if they wanted to be successful with girls, with making friends, etc. If you didn't have the body type, appearance or natural charisma, then it was just bad luck. You're stuck being a nerd and will be passed over. This kind of message is very strong in movies, the media, and social conditioning. I know, because I couldn't conform to the accepted standard and did face difficulties because of it.

Shenshen

I can't really think of a recent example of objectification in ads or in the media right now, but I always was puzzled by the line-up of women applauding racing drivers on their way to the podium. I never understood their purpose of being there, other than to function as decorative background. A bit like living wallpaper.

So that's about the only recent example I can think of, all others would be way older, like those 70s ads were women were being used as furniture.

Triceratops Ballet

Deleted User wrote: »

And yet, the majority of criticism seems to be coming from adults on behalf of young people.

Is it possible that young people would have fewer problems if adults stopped telling them that they should have problems from being on the receiving end of those images?

Just curious since this focus on youth issues seems to have blown into a big deal within the last two decades. I don't remember these kinds of issues being commonplace when I was a teenager, and there was just as much advertising going on (although from TV, billboards etc) rather than social media.

The change from traditional advertising to modern advertising and media, is huge though and I think it's underestimated, social media never stops, kids are always connected now, these messages are constantly in their faces. I've a couple of friends who are teachers, and they're always talking about the change in pressures on kids, how kids are so much more anxious now, where I could just go to my room and close the door and ignore the messages telling me I could be thinner/prettier etc for them it's inescapable and so much more personalised.

Deleted User wrote: »

Though I don't get why this has to be a gender issue, rather than a criticism of advertising and the media industry... after all, it's them that is pushing the importance of the imagery, and pushing it into our lives.

I agree, I don't think it is a gender issue, I've as much of an issue with the objectification of men in advertising, and resorting to stereotypes (gormless man/smug woman, goofy dad/ humourless controlling mom) is lazy and condescending to consumers. Like I said a lot of the overt objectification, is dying out a bit now, you don't often see the bikini brigade out on Grafton St any more because consumers are becoming a bit more sophisticated and it's not as simple as throwing some barely dressed models at something to get pictures in the paper.

Widdershins

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

TBH I don't know, I can't think of any instances or examples of positive objectification though. I think when people are objectified extensively it becomes easier, both for others and for themselves to think of them as less worthy or worthwhile, and I don't think that's positive.



Again I don't know, so I think everyone has a right to earn a living and if they chose want to make money by modelling (which let's face it is the ultimate objectification, you're essentially a walking clothes hanger, and come to think of it linking back to your earlier question it's probably the most neutral form of objectification there is) or stripping then that's their right and prerogative, but I do wonder, if this makes it easier to objectify others. Like for example the topless dudes at abercrombie, right they look good, they like looking good and they can make money doing it. Fine, but does the constant presence of these buff topless guys, contribute to self esteem issues of their peers or guys younger than them. So while the objectification might have little to no impact on the person who choses to objectify themselves, it may contribute to the wider objectification of people like them.

I think it's a really interesting time as advertising is starting to speak to men in the same way as it always has to women, and possibly as a result there's a greater crisis of confidence in younger dudes, thinking they have to be jacked and go to the gym all the time and if they don't have x body girls won't like them.

But it’s one of life’s harsh realities. There will always be better and worse looking people. They need to develop their own self esteem so they aren’t damaged by being confronted with the sight of models.

_Dara_

Widdershins wrote: »

But it’s one of life’s harsh realities. There will always be better and worse looking people. They need to develop their own self esteem so they aren’t damaged by being confronted with the sight of models.

Why are you assuming that anyone who has an issue with it isn't good-looking? Indeed, a lot of models leave the profession because they find it so unfulfilling and sometimes demeaning. I've read so many times about actresses who were models at one point but hated every minute of modelling and didn't even care that it paid well, they just wanted out.

Grayson

tigger123 wrote: »

Plus anytime anything is announced in the newspapers (particularly the Indo or the tabloids) there's usually a pair of rented honeys with a cardboard cut out of a slogan standing next to a CEO or industry big wig.

I tried to find a particular page but couldn't. There's a blog somewhere that covers all those adverts. The typical thing is that it's say national sandwich day. So the national sandwich makers get a "celeb" like Tubridy and get him to pose with two models in Stephens Green golding a sandwich. It then manages to make it to page 3 or 4 of the Irish Times.

Apparently thats a particularly Irish thing and you don't see it in most other countries.

seamus

Widdershins wrote: »

But it’s one of life’s harsh realities. There will always be better and worse looking people. They need to develop their own self esteem so they aren’t damaged by being confronted with the sight of models.

It's pretty lofty to assume that people can just go and do this by themselves while being bombarded with messages from massive marketing machines that tell them the opposite.

It's a bit like saying, "People need to just realise that smoking is bad for them and quit". It's far from that simple. This is why smoking advertising is banned.

It's not in the interests of private enterprise for people to "develop their own sense of self-esteem", so they plough massive funding into methods which convince people that their self-esteem is inextricably linked to the things they buy.

This is why society (and governments by extension), need to protect the individual from this kind of manipulation - especially teenagers and young adults - so that they are afforded the space to develop a sense of self-esteem that's not tied to external appearance or the use of products.

_Dara_

_Dara_ wrote: »

Why are you assuming that anyone who has an issue with it isn't good-looking? Indeed, a lot of models leave the profession because they find it so unfulfilling and sometimes demeaning. I've read so many times about actresses who were models at one point but hated every minute of modelling and didn't even care that it paid well, they just wanted out.

Strange. I didn't get that from his post. I simply got that people should have their self-esteem or self-image that is independent of other peoples opinions.

I can't see the current attitude regarding beauty (or objectification) diminishing any time in the future. It seems to be very general criticism (and different depending on the person criticising) that has no real avenues to resolve the problems involved. Social media and technological advances regarding the internet or VR are just going to encourage that kind of focus, so we should be encouraging people to ignore the external pressure and find their own center. To look the way they want rather than worrying about social proof (but to bear the responsibility for making the choice rather than passing it off on to others).

castletownman

I find the whole debate on the objectification of women and the uproar from feminists surrounding it very rich when you consider some of the female-orientated pop culture.

For example, it's women that made the Fifty Shades franchise as successful it is. You can bet your bottom dollar that there wasn't hordes of men queuing to purchase that literary classic, nor indeed was it the fellas idea to bring the OH to watch it in the cinema. It's sure to be sold out this Valentine's weekend. And you just have to look at the leering of Jamie Dornan by grown women every time he is on a promotional event for the movie to see that there is only one gender being objectified there.

Remember a few years ago when one of the Braxton brothers from Home and Away went on a promotional tour to various nightclubs around the country? I'm sure 36 year old Jacinta from Ballyfermot only attended out of appreciation of his acting talents.

Or take Niall Horan or Harry Styles, or even One Direction when they were around. It's well and good having teenage girls screaming at their concerts, but a sizable chunk of women who attend should be mature enough to contain themselves without getting all hot and bothered. A lot of them would jump on them if they had the chance....and their behaviour would never be criticised.

Most popular rugby players among women over the last few years? Kearney brothers, Tommy Bowe, Conor Murray.

Feck it, even hen parties are a lot more lecherous than stag parties. God help being a male stripper at some of them- unless you take pleasure out of a rake of drunken women grabbing hold of you. Men are a lot more "restrained" on a night out, and aren't allowed put their hands on a stripper in a strip club for example.

It's all well and good calling out the wider media for the objectification of women, but in reality women are a lot more "sexualised" than men in a lot of ways.

_Dara_

Deleted User wrote: »

Strange. I didn't get that from his post. I simply got that people should have their self-esteem or self-image that is independent of other peoples opinions.

Why would he or anyone conflate having an issue with objectification with having self-esteem issues? Someone wouldn't have a problem with it if they were the one being objectified or something? I can't really see the logic there.

professore

Castletownman makes a valid point. Most men wouldn't consider making the kind of sexualised remarks a lot of women casually make in everyday life. It's a complete role reversal where women can talk openly about sex and how hot some guy is and grope away but men are objectifying a woman if they look sideways at her.

The old morality used to keep women and to a lesser extent men in check; the new one exclusively keeps men in check.

I think there is a big swing back coming soon.

_Dara_

You never hear groups of lads discussing hot females? Come on.

_Dara_

_Dara_ wrote: »

Why would he or anyone conflate having an issue with objectification with having self-esteem issues? Someone wouldn't have a problem with it if they were the one being objectified or something? I can't really see the logic there.

So, you never see people who base their self-worth on their appearance? When their appearance doesn't match with their ideal (models, actors, etc), their self-esteem suffers causing negatives throughout the other parts of their life.

Isn't that one of the major objections to objectification? Most of the articles/websites I read recently on objectifying women by men referred to it as such.

For example:
"In other words, for people who base their self-worth on appearance (aka most of us, to some extent), self-objectification may be a double-edged sword. It feels great when you're getting positive attention, but it can easily turn sour when attention is negative or lacking, and these ups and downs can wreak havoc on mental and physical health."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-love-and-war/201211/do-women-want-be-objectified

You never hear groups of lads discussing hot females? Come on.

Sure. I do. Just as I hear groups of women talking about men. Or groups with both men and women all listing what they like in a person, and using a celeb/model as an example. It's a pretty standard conversational topic to talk about the physical attractiveness of the opposite gender.

But... it's terrible when men do it, because [obviously] when men do it, they're turning the woman into a sexual object... the same logic doesn't seem to apply when women do it though.

[I am extremely happy that the women in my life don't consider this objectification concept as being limited to the male gender, and just something that is. Thankfully, it seems to be the internet, media, and feminists that want to promote this as being an issue with men, with other people ignoring it and getting on with their lives]

_Dara_

Of course I know people who base their self worth too much on their appearance. Are they... the same people who have a problem with objectification? I’d imagine it’s a Venn diagram. People who rely too much on their appearance for self worth and people who object to objectification. Two separate things where coincidentally I’m sure there’s some overlap because people can care about more than one thing. But I don’t see an obvious link between the two. Certainly not everyone I know who has a problem with objectification is very into their looks or insecure. It’s a facile argument.

And, what? It’s seen as terrible when men talk about attractive women? GTFO. The thread has jumped the shark.

cantdecide

This thread is pretty much a waste of time until 2 things are established; what exactly is objectification and what exactly is the harm of it?

If it exists and is /puke/ problematic, it exists for both men and women and personally, who cares anyway no more than objectifying a cute puppy to sell loo roll, IMO.

note: I have not said it doesn't exist and I haven't said it is or isn't harmless.

Koala Sunshine

cantdecide wrote: »

This thread is pretty much a waste of time until 2 things are established; what exactly is objectification and what exactly is the harm of it?

If it exists and is /puke/ problematic, it exists for both men and women and personally, who cares anyway no more than objectifying a cute puppy to sell loo roll, IMO.

note: I have not said it doesn't exist and I haven't said it is or isn't harmless.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this. We need a precise definition of what objectification actually is.

I asked earlier for a definition and someone said "treating someone like an object". I made the facetious comment about people being used as goalposts to deminstrate the definition given was insufficient.

Murky terms such as "objectification" are great for those who wish to push their agenda while avoiding the need to be logically consistent.

professore

_Dara_ wrote: »

You never hear groups of lads discussing hot females? Come on.

Not in a mixed gender workplace I haven't

kylith

professore wrote: »

Castletownman makes a valid point. Most men wouldn't consider making the kind of sexualised remarks a lot of women casually make in everyday life. It's a complete role reversal where women can talk openly about sex and how hot some guy is and grope away but men are objectifying a woman if they look sideways at her.

The old morality used to keep women and to a lesser extent men in check; the new one exclusively keeps men in check.

I think there is a big swing back coming soon.

Rubbish. I have _never_ heard women catcall men in the street the way men do women.

kylith

kylith wrote:

Rubbish. I have _never_ heard women catcall men in the street the way men do women.

Rubbish. I have.

professore

Here's an example : https://m.independent.ie/style/celebrity/celebrity-news/danny-odonoghues-girlfriend-anne-de-paula-sizzles-in-empowering-sports-illustrated-swimsuit-issue-36603125.html

An article written by a female journalist. In there she says that Ms De Paula is a survivor of sexual abuse. There is a picture of her naked with some writing on her. Does this not do more harm than good? She is a very beautiful sexy young woman portraying herself as a sex object. She is the girlfriend of some singer.

Other than her beauty, celeb boyfriend and sex abuse there is nothing else of note mentioned about her. The perfect life - sexy celebrity with victim status. Literally an object. That's the model for young women today. I would be horrified if my daughters took her as a role model.

The cynic in me wonders if she was ever even abused - it's such a pre requisite now that the media are not interested unless you've been abused.

This article is clearly not aimed at men. I think I will need to change my view to one of women being objectified but by other women. As a man I'll look at the pictures - won't read the article. That's a problem. There's little point - these articles are all the same.

professore

kylith wrote: »

Rubbish. I have _never_ heard women catcall men in the street the way men do women.

I haven't heard anyone catcall anyone else in the street for years. Exception was in a northern European city and groups of Muslim teenagers were doing it on a regular basis at my daughters. Am often out and about with her in town and it never happens. Can happen to her late in the evening she says.

Triceratops Ballet

Koala Sunshine wrote:

Murky terms such as "objectification" are great for those who wish to push their agenda while avoiding the need to be logically consistent.

Koala Sunshine wrote:

I asked earlier for a definition and someone said "treating someone like an object". I made the facetious comment about people being used as goalposts to deminstrate the definition given was insufficient.

Koala Sunshine wrote:

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this. We need a precise definition of what objectification actually is.

If it's not treating people like objects then what is it?
Op do you know, you started a thread on it?

Triceratops Ballet

professore wrote:

I haven't heard anyone catcall anyone else in the street for years. Exception was in a northern European city and groups of Muslim teenagers were doing it on a regular basis at my daughters. Am often out and about with her in town and it never happens. Can happen to her late in the evening she says.

Yeah I've never had men holler at me in the street when I'm with my dad either! Funny that!

suicide_circus

Mating calls are quite prevalent in the animal kingdom

Koala Sunshine

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

If it's not treating people like objects then what is it?
Op do you know, you started a thread on it?

What does it mean to treat someone like an object?

optogirl

suicide_circus wrote: »

Mating calls are quite prevalent in the animal kingdom

so is sh**ting on the ground and eating raw meat

cantdecide

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

What does it mean to treat someone like an object?

My bins were just collected now. I could hear the noise but didn't rush out to ask them their names and how they're feeling today and life in general or about their hobbies and passions. I just accepted the lads as part of the service of bin collection and not a jot more. I think I just objectified my bin men.

suicide_circus

optogirl wrote: »

so is sh**ting on the ground and eating raw meat

Camping and steak tartar?

silverharp

cantdecide wrote: »

My bins were just collected now. I could hear the noise but didn't rush out to ask them their names and how they're feeling today and life in general or about their hobbies and passions. I just accepted the lads as part of the service of bin collection and not a jot more. I think I just objectified my bin men.

when you think about it most men that do manual jobs are treated like robots , and your average office based air conditioned feminist doesn't give the foggiest about who keeps cities and technology humming