nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

professore

This was brought up in a thread earlier of the rampant objectification of women in the media and it got me thinking that I couldn't think of a single example - outside music artists who objectify themselves deliberately, or women who do it to appear sexy to other women, e.g. The fashion industry.

Then got to thinking maybe it's me and can't see it. Anyone care to enlighten me?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

professore

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

So because it happens in tabloids it doesnt exist according to you. Weird.

The tabloids are full of crap of all sorts.

Let's look at the front page of the Daily Mail this morning :

Meghan's hug for homeless charity founder a day after her secret visits to Grenfell victims were revealed: 'Emotional' Harry's girl embraces volunteer who is 'deeply inspired' by the royal-to-be

- Royal crap.

'A betrayal and a disastrous mistake': Defiant Boris warns Theresa May she CANNOT let Britain stay shackled to the EU as he draws his red lines on Brexit

- right wing propoganda

Married Paddy McGuinness looks downcast as he emerges after being pictured arm in arm with Nicole Appleton... as All Saints star unfollows him on social media and 'flees her home'

- Scummy man cheats on his wife.

PICTURE EXCLUSIVE: Has she found love again? Single Jennifer Garner walks arm-in-arm with mystery man in Los Angeles...after divorce from Ben Affleck

Some celebrity I never heard of walks with some guy they don't even know

Hello boys: Kelly Brook, 38, leaves little to the imagination in cleavage-baring red one-piece as she poses for stunning Valentine's Day lingerie shoot

Oooh ooh ... a woman being objectified .... oh wait, she posed for this herself so it doesn't count. The photoshoot is oddly disturbing ....

Yeah so it doesn't count. If you enjoy reading that stuff you are beyond help.

Triceratops Ballet

I think a lot of people don't know what objectification means

[Deleted User]

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I think a lot of people don't know what objectification means

I'm one of them. Oh, I think I know what it means. I looked at it in a few dictionaries for reference...

TBH I've heard so many accusations by females as to something objectifying them or other women, that it seems to include just about anything.

There's no clear accepted idea of what it means. At least, I haven't been able to find one that covers all those claims.

professore

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I think a lot of people don't know what objectification means

I think it's something feminists have made up to shame men and make them feel bad about themselves. It's not a real thing. You can't separate sexuality from a person. If you emphasize that side of yourself then that's how people are going to see you. Simple as that.

I had a meeting several years ago with a young attractive female sales rep. She wore such a low cut top I could see part of her nipples. I was actually interested in her service before I met her but after 5 seconds of that I decided that her service must be no good if she feels the need to dress like that to sell it. Also felt annoyed that she thought she could somehow trick me with her sexuality. I can only assume it worked on other men or she wouldn't have done it. Ugh.

It completely put me off listening to anything she had to say if she had such a poor idea of what was appropriate. I would never show up with shorts or a bare top for a meeting like that. In a bar late in the evening I would have had a different view.

I ended the meeting after a few minutes because I found it extremely uncomfortable. Is that objectification?

Triceratops Ballet

professore wrote: »

I think it's something feminists have made up to shame men and make them feel bad about themselves. It's not a real thing. You can't separate sexuality from a person. If you emphasize that side of yourself then that's how people are going to see you. Simple as that.

I had a meeting several years ago with a young attractive female sales rep. She wore such a low cut top I could see part of her nipples. I was actually interested in her service before I met her but after 5 seconds of that I decided that her service must be no good if she feels the need to dress like that to sell it. Also felt annoyed that she thought she could somehow trick me with her sexuality. I can only assume it worked on other men or she wouldn't have done it. Ugh.

It completely put me off listening to anything she had to say if she had such a poor idea of what was appropriate. I would never show up with shorts or a bare top for a meeting like that. In a bar late in the evening I would have had a different view.

I ended the meeting after a few minutes because I found it extremely uncomfortable. Is that objectification?

Objectification is treating a person like an object, a prop, a thing. It is the opposite of personification.
It's not something feminists made up! christ! all people can be objectified.

seamus

Well this backfired horrendously for the OP.

professore

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Objectification is treating a person like an object, a prop, a thing. It is the opposite of personification.
It's not something feminists made up! christ! all people can be objectified.

Well of course it exists ... but not in the way it's commonly presented. Everyone objectifies everyone all the time in one way or another. Unless you have a window into someone's head you make assumptions about them which at least some of them will be completely false.

That guy or girl who thinks X is the most wonderful person in the world - that's objectification too. In fact this is a lot more common in everyday life than sexual objectification.

suicide_circus

“likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control"

Timothy 2:9-10

Triceratops Ballet

professore wrote: »

Well of course it exists ... but not in the way it's commonly presented. Everyone objectifies everyone all the time in one way or another. Unless you have a window into someone's head you make assumptions about them which at least some of them will be completely false.

That guy or girl who thinks X is the most wonderful person in the world - that's objectification too. In fact this is a lot more common in everyday life than sexual objectification.

What way is it commonly presented?

Objectification is a word with a specific meaning. A half naked woman or man splayed across the bonnet of a car is being objectified. They are being used as a prop. The rights and wrongs of it are irrelevant, it is objectification.

Your example is also hypocritical, you think it's ok for Kelly Brook to allow herself to be objectified by posing for photos in her underwear, but you judged the saleswoman you met who (in your opinion) objectified herself to make the sale.

[Deleted User]

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

What way is it commonly presented?

Objectification is a word with a specific meaning. A half naked woman or man splayed across the bonnet of a car is being objectified. They are being used as a prop. The rights and wrongs of it are irrelevant, it is objectification.

Okay, so they're both objectification. I can understand that.

But this "The rights and wrongs of it are irrelevant". Apart from identifying that it is objectification, how do you determine if it is positive or negative objectification?

Do you mean that all objectification is negative?

Where does personal objectification come into this? Where the person objectifies themselves for <insert> purpose or personal benefits...

Koala Sunshine

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, she has the right to earn a living however she chooses, doesn't mean it's not objectification.

The whole sex sells thing imo is more insulting to the consumer, the idea that people will only be interested in stuff if there's a scantily clad model of either gender is very dated, and is thankfully dying out.

I have never heard anyone say people will only be interested in stuff if there is a scantily clad model. It clearly helps many businesses increase their sales.

Triceratops Ballet

Deleted User wrote: »

But this "The rights and wrongs of it are irrelevant". Apart from identifying that it is objectification, how do you determine if it is positive or negative objectification?

Do you mean that all objectification is negative?

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.

Deleted User wrote: »

Where does personal objectification come into this? Where the person objectifies themselves for <insert> purpose or personal benefits...

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.

[Deleted User]

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

TBH I don't know, I can't think of any instances or examples of positive objectification though.

Really? Surely positive objectification is when you're gaining benefits because of your appearance? Isn't that part of the reason why people dress certain ways when going out on a date, a job interview, etc.

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.

In reality, I wonder if anyone can remove objectification. It seems like an automatic human condition. We tend to judge everything based on it's appearance.

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.

I don't quite get that though. I'm male, 192cm tall and quite thin. I look at the muscular guys in advertisements and I feel absolutely no connection with them except for our gender. I've had conversations with other men about this, and it seems to be a common perspective. It's like going to the gym or beach, everyone else is toned & beautiful, but you're pasty white and skinny... Sure, it would be nice to have that kind of body, but ultimately it means nothing because I've never had it before, and not particularly interested in working to obtain it.

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.

It would seem to me that people like them wouldn't be affected by it (since they themselves are unaffected). It would be the people who are unlike them that might be affected. But then it comes down to other peoples insecurities beyond your own control. no?

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.

Lol. Those kinds of messages were being sent in advertising 30 years ago, since society itself was sending those messages. Trust me. As a skinny and fairly weak man, I've been exposed to quite a bit social expectation of what a "real" man is supposed to be like. Men have been on the receiving end of objectification as long as women. The difference being that there's a greater emphasis on sensual objectification for women (I don't think its really a sexual thing).

kylith

professore wrote: »

I had a meeting several years ago with a young attractive female sales rep. She wore such a low cut top I could see part of her nipples. I was actually interested in her service before I met her but after 5 seconds of that I decided that her service must be no good if she feels the need to dress like that to sell it. Also felt annoyed that she thought she could somehow trick me with her sexuality. I can only assume it worked on other men or she wouldn't have done it. Ugh.

It completely put me off listening to anything she had to say if she had such a poor idea of what was appropriate. I would never show up with shorts or a bare top for a meeting like that. In a bar late in the evening I would have had a different view.

I ended the meeting after a few minutes because I found it extremely uncomfortable. Is that objectification?

I’d question what has happened in that young woman’s life that has taught her that the best way she can get ahead in life is with her breasts hanging out. It may be that this ‘objectification’ of herself is behaviour she has learned through past experience. It certainly isn’t the behaviour of someone who has learned that she makes more sales by dressing in a shirt.

When it comes to objectification I think the most telling examples come with female politicians and other women in positions of power such as US judges. The conversation revolves around what they look like rather than their ability to do the job, in a way that men are never spoken about. In situations like that it’s made clear that for a sizeable number of people a woman’s worth is defined by her attractiveness rather than her competence.

[Deleted User]

kylith wrote: »

When it comes to objectification I think the most telling examples come with female politicians and other women in positions of power such as US judges. The conversation revolves around what they look like rather than their ability to do the job, in a way that men are never spoken about. In situations like that it’s made clear that for a sizeable number of people a woman’s worth is defined by her attractiveness rather than her competence.

Sure, I can definitely see that... however, it seems that most of that is coming from media that targets a female purchasing base. Oh, sure there are quite a few men who would consider women that way, but men don't have anything like the gossip magazine industry which is aimed at taking apart women in rather suggestive terms and discussing their appearance. Women's magazines like Vogue or such, also tend to do it quite a bit, all the while complaining about men doing it.

The problem I find with the objectification of women in the media is that heaps of it are driven by women themselves. There is very little demand for women or female niche industries to stop doing it.

kylith

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sure, I can definitely see that... however, it seems that most of that is coming from media that targets a female purchasing base. Oh, sure there are quite a few men who would consider women that way, but men don't have anything like the gossip magazine industry which is aimed at taking apart women in rather suggestive terms and discussing their appearance. Women's magazines like Vogue or such, also tend to do it quite a bit, all the while complaining about men doing it.

The problem I find with the objectification of women in the media is that heaps of it are driven by women themselves. There is very little demand for women or female niche industries to stop doing it.

We’re you not on message boards when Merkle became leader? It is FAR from just the media at this.

I’ll have to reply to the rest later, in Work atm.

Koala Sunshine

kylith wrote: »

I’d question what has happened in that young woman’s life that has taught her that the best way she can get ahead in life is with her breasts hanging out. It may be that this ‘objectification’ of herself is behaviour she has learned through past experience. It certainly isn’t the behaviour of someone who has learned that she makes more sales by dressing in a shirt.

When it comes to objectification I think the most telling examples come with female politicians and other women in positions of power such as US judges. The conversation revolves around what they look like rather than their ability to do the job, in a way that men are never spoken about. In situations like that it’s made clear that for a sizeable number of people a woman’s worth is defined by her attractiveness rather than her competence.

So nobody talks about how Donal Trump looks or how Brian Cowen looked during his tenure as Taoiseach?

Maybe a womam dresses that way because she enjoys the attention she gets and finds she has more power and influence when she dresses like that.

professore

kylith wrote: »

When it comes to objectification I think the most telling examples come with female politicians and other women in positions of power such as US judges. The conversation revolves around what they look like rather than their ability to do the job, in a way that men are never spoken about. In situations like that it’s made clear that for a sizeable number of people a woman’s worth is defined by her attractiveness rather than her competence.

It's female journalists and chat show hosts that make this conversation revolve around what they look like !!!! No men I know care in the slightest what a judge looks like - unless she wore a clown outfit or had her breasts hanging out - then it might suggest some issues with her competence. We're only interested in what the verdict of a case is and if she did a good job or not, what the facts of the case were etc.

Perhaps if she was exceptionally pretty we might notice - but that's hardly objectification.

Why do women think men are the ones driving this? We're not!!!!

Koala Sunshine

At the end of the day people should be free tp objectify whoever they want. If Bob views Dave as a useful goalpost then he is entitled to view him as a goalpost. Dave however is under no obligation to be a goalpost.

lawred2

I love sexy people

MagicIRL

Advertising preys on insecurity and feeds on emotion. Sometimes one, sometimes both. Make someone feel inadequate and make someone feel that your product is the solution to that inadequacy.

Even the “counter”-advertisements that appear to rally for the cause are trying to harness emotion to sell. Take Boots for example. They ran an ad campaign a while back about using “real” (as opposed to the fake stereotypical models?) women in adverts with “real” bodies (as opposed to the fake read: skinny bodies on a typical model).

Boots couldn’t give a fúck about “real” women with “real” bodies. They just want you to buy their products. By getting people to feel like they are making a difference by taking a stand they can captialise and maximize their profits.

Nothing will change when it's so damned effective. Even the new trend of "online outrage" is a god-send to Advertising agencies. The amount of exposure they get as a result just makes their job easier. Just look at Hunky Dorys when they slapped youngwans in their underwear onto the side of Dublin Bus to promote rugby or something - hardly anyone noticed until "the internet blew up" and "twitter responded" :rolleyes: to the whole campaign. I doubt Hunky Dory's ever had such a successful advertisement.

professore

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't quite get that though. I'm male, 192cm tall and quite thin. I look at the muscular guys in advertisements and I feel absolutely no connection with them except for our gender. I've had conversations with other men about this, and it seems to be a common perspective. It's like going to the gym or beach, everyone else is toned & beautiful, but you're pasty white and skinny... Sure, it would be nice to have that kind of body, but ultimately it means nothing because I've never had it before, and not particularly interested in working to obtain it.

This is interesting too. I've never been skinny, 6' tall and played sports when I was younger, and keep in reasonable shape to this day. I feel I look OK for an old guy.

I have the frame for the abbed body but to get that I would need to put myself through a ridiculous regime of fasting and brutal training. Here's a guy that did it in "only" 2 years : https://www.startgainingmomentum.com/ripped-2-years/

I can only imagine what it would be like for someone who is very skinny or very heavy - or the wrong body shape. So it's then steroids to get that look.

Then say you do work to get that body - sacrificing your life goals, friends and career to single mindedly pursue physical perfection.

Now suddenly women are more interested in you. You are still the same person - but now you are being objectified. You are going to get some quality women that way. What an empty way to live.

professore

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

At the end of the day people should be free tp objectify whoever they want. If Bob views Dave as a useful goalpost then he is entitled to view him as a goalpost. Dave however is under no obligation to be a goalpost.

Aha but if Dave identifies as a goalpost then Bob has to call him a goalpost, even if he secretly thinks he is a teapot.

professore

lawred2 wrote: »

I love sexy people

How you doin? :cool:

Widdershins

I don't know...Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau's appearance seems to be of interest to lots of people. There's a thread on my FB rating the looks of each successive Romanian presidents.

Is paying attention to appearance really objectification? If that's all that's ever taken into account, maybe, but in most examples I've seen,its just *sometimes* focused on.

suicide_circus

Does a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body extend to being sexy for money? If not, where is the cut off point for women's bodily autonomy? Answers on a postcard please.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

_Dara_

suicide_circus wrote: »

Does a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body extend to being sexy for money? If not, where is the cut off point for women's bodily autonomy? Answers on a postcard please.

Most women outside of the more extreme feminists seem agree with the above. I know I'm OK with it. I think a woman posing beside a new brand of Campbell's Soup or whatever looks daft but they're welcome to look as daft as they like.

Triceratops Ballet

Deleted User wrote: »

Really? Surely positive objectification is when you're gaining benefits because of your appearance? Isn't that part of the reason why people dress certain ways when going out on a date, a job interview, etc.

In reality, I wonder if anyone can remove objectification. It seems like an automatic human condition. We tend to judge everything based on it's appearance.

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

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't quite get that though. I'm male, 192cm tall and quite thin. I look at the muscular guys in advertisements and I feel absolutely no connection with them except for our gender. I've had conversations with other men about this, and it seems to be a common perspective. It's like going to the gym or beach, everyone else is toned & beautiful, but you're pasty white and skinny... Sure, it would be nice to have that kind of body, but ultimately it means nothing because I've never had it before, and not particularly interested in working to obtain it.

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

Deleted User wrote: »

Lol. Those kinds of messages were being sent in advertising 30 years ago, since society itself was sending those messages. Trust me. As a skinny and fairly weak man, I've been exposed to quite a bit social expectation of what a "real" man is supposed to be like. Men have been on the receiving end of objectification as long as women. The difference being that there's a greater emphasis on sensual objectification for women (I don't think its really a sexual thing).

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"

I feel all of this is just wide of the point tho because judging people on their appearances, isn't the same as objectifying them

Koala Sunshine

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

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

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

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"

I feel all of this is just wide of the point tho because judging people on their appearances, isn't the same as objectifying them

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".