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

[Deleted User]

LLMMLL wrote: »

Women were rating their sons?

Their sons' girlfriends or their daughters' boyfriends.

I'm sure you have heard women rate men. So in your experience groups of.women talk about groups of men in the same way you've heard groups of men talking about groups of women? Honestly?

Yup. Exchange breasts with muscles but yes.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

In terms of objectifcation it's the same thing whether you describe someone as ugly or attractive.

And in that thread plenty of people commwnt that they don't find some of them attractive.

Assigning numbers to people is like comparing products before making a final purchase. It's far more objectifying.

Koala Sunshine

I've certainly heard women rate men, I don't see the problem at all. If a man has a problem with it I would say it's probably because he is insecure about his looks.

This is the problem imo, complaints about objectification usually stem from insecurity. Trying to change the world to not objectify is a futile endeavour.It is an attempt to make the world cater to your ego. What is much more empowering is developing true self esteem, so that the objectification of others has no effect you.

You can't control the world, but what you can control is how you react to the world. You can develop self acceptance.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

About two decades ago, I worked in Mullingar for an American insurance company processing claims. 300 odd women and 2 men. Me and one other. And honestly, the discussions that those women had about their husbands, daughters boyfriends, sons girlfriends, etc were worse than anything I've heard from a group of men. Then or afterward.

Women were rating their sons?

Whereas I have heard women use the universal scale to describe men to their friends. You might say it's a reaction to men using such a scale to describe women, but I don't think it matters much. They were still describing men in the same manner.

I'm sure you have heard women rate men. So in your experience groups of.women talk about groups of men in the same way you've heard groups of men talking about groups of women? Honestly?

cantdecide

Oaklyn Careful Ginkgo wrote: »

Jesus, is Wikipedia down or something?

Google it for Christ's sake.

Yelling dismissive remarks into a thread about specific comments without addressing specific people is the classic move here on Boards and it's dehumanising... which is the intention, right? Like someone is not worthy of even being addressed directly.

So irony, no?

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

No I'm saying a thread exists where people post celebs. I said nothing about that making rating people's attractiveness acceptable. The thread concerned didn't rate people. It posted pics of attractive people. You really can't see the difference between "I find X attractive" and "I'd give X a 7"?

In terms of objectifcation it's the same thing whether you describe someone as ugly or attractive.

And in that thread plenty of people commwnt that they don't find some of them attractive.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

So it's ok to objectify celebrities but not a non-celebrity?

No I'm saying a thread exists where people post celebs. I said nothing about that making rating people's attractiveness acceptable. The thread concerned didn't rate people. It posted pics of attractive people. You really can't see the difference between "I find X attractive" and "I'd give X a 7"?

[Deleted User]

LLMMLL wrote: »

The argument that "women do it as much as men" doesn't really cut it. Yes women do comment on a man who is attractive but in my experience it's more likely that a group of men will discuss the looks of many women as a whole conversation topic.

About two decades ago, I worked in Mullingar for an American insurance company processing claims. 300 odd women and 2 men. Me and one other. And honestly, the discussions that those women had about their husbands, daughters boyfriends, sons girlfriends, etc were worse than anything I've heard from a group of men. Then or afterward.

And no, I'm not talking about all men or groups of men. I've just heard numerous conversations among male groups "rating" various women. I've never heard a similar conversation with from a group of women. They may talk about a particularly attractive guy but not in the same manner I've heard men talk about women.

Whereas I have heard women use the universal scale to describe men to their friends. You might say it's a reaction to men using such a scale to describe women, but I don't think it matters much. They were still describing men in the same manner.

Some people like to pretend that this is all in the head of feminists or that they're biased and can't see that women behave in the same way but this isn't something made up in a vacuum. There have been big stories surrounding this behaviour and it always involves male groups. For example, a few years back in one of the big accountancy or law firms in Dublin there was a group of guys emailing lists ranking the new female recruits. And I found other similar stories when I googled it there. None involved women being found out to be rating men. To pretend that it's all the same is just wilfully.missing the point.

Oh, I believe you. I've ranked women with my male and female friends. As they have with me. I don't see it as a big deal. No worse than saying someone is beautiful, sexy, handsome, plain, or ugly. It's not like I or they are saying it directly to the person in question. "Oh! you scored a 8. Well done! now I can accept you". I'm sure there are some guys who behave that way, just as I'm sure there are some women who behave the same. I'd consider both to be rude.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

Not so much a problem with a thread posting celebs that people find attractive. A thread where randomer could be posted and their looks rated, be that a low or.high rating would clearly be problematic.

So it's ok to objectify celebrities but not a non-celebrity?

cantdecide

LLMMLL wrote: »

The argument that "women do it as much as men" doesn't really cut it.

For two and a half years I worked in a very large, open plan floor with hundreds of people and a constant turnover of staff of all ages, colours, creeds and so on and trust me, EVERYONE rates, comments and discusses when they feel comfortable enough to do so. The girls are just clever enough to be way more discrete... but when they trust you, they will speak just as freely (and sometimes more freely) as the guys, IME.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

Do you have a problem with men rating women outside if a work context?

People are entitled to rate and discuss the ratings of the attractiveness of other people if they want. There are threads on after hours where people do just that.

Not so much a problem with a thread posting celebs that people find attractive. A thread where randomer could be posted and their looks rated, be that a low or.high rating would clearly be problematic.

HappyAsLarE

What exactly is wrong with objectifying women? Men instinctively pursue women for sexual gratification. It is a trait selected by nature that increases species proliferation.

Why can’t we accept that men will objectify women but also treat them as equals? Because we will never NOT objectify them.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

The argument that "women do it as much as men" doesn't really cut it. Yes women do comment on a man who is attractive but in my experience it's more likely that a group of men will discuss the looks of many women as a whole conversation topic. And no, I'm not talking about all men or groups of men. I've just heard numerous conversations among male groups "rating" various women. I've never heard a similar conversation with from a group of women. They may talk about a particularly attractive guy but not in the same manner I've heard men talk about women.

Some people like to pretend that this is all in the head of feminists or that they're biased and can't see that women behave in the same way but this isn't something made up in a vacuum. There have been big stories surrounding this behaviour and it always involves male groups. For example, a few years back in one of the big accountancy or law firms in Dublin there was a group of guys emailing lists ranking the new female recruits. And I found other similar stories when I googled it there. None involved women being found out to be rating men. To pretend that it's all the same is just wilfully.missing the point.

Do you have a problem with men rating women outside if a work context?

People are entitled to rate and discuss the ratings of the attractiveness of other people if they want. There are threads on after hours where people do just that.

[Deleted User]

kylith wrote: »

Imagine if you were that nerd. Imagine if, starting from the time you were 12, every day at least one person yelled ‘NERD’ at you in the street. Imagine that at family gatherings people discussed what a nerd you are. every Time you leave the house you wonder if someone’s going to yell NERD at you. Some people follow you around calling ‘nerd’.

How do you think that affects one’s self esteem?

But sure, they’re only women/nerds. Who cares if they’re made feel uncomfortable?

I have a shaking disorder which is easily seen by others. I get regular attention from strangers about it. They'll look at me sideways, some will suggest that I'm on drugs, ill, or any number of other stupid or ignorant ideas. In school, I was bullied relentlessly because I was different, and I did become a nerd, was called a nerd regularly, and I grew up hating most people. I developed into a rather shy person, with a nature distrust of other people. I realised that teenagers are generally mean people. I realised that girls can be spiteful, abusive, and ignorant.

And guess what? I got over it. I also realised that not everyone behaves that way, and that I didn't need to explain my shakes or lifestyle to others. I moved on. And in time, I met plenty of other people who had similar experiences to me, and I realised that it's actually a fairly common way to grow up.

I still have that shaking disorder. I regularly spill coffee on myself while holding a mug with two hands. I still have comments thrown my way. I still have people call me various names or make uninvited remarks about my lifestyle. And I'm very capable of ignoring them. It doesn't make them disappear, but I learned to place value on the people who didn't behave that way.

There are a lot of muppets in society. At all age ranges. And honestly, the best way to get past it, is to realise that they're, in reality, a minority... and most people are genuinely good (but selfish) people.

Feminists or those who complain about what a woman has to endure seem to think they're the only people who ever negative receive attention from others... Is such attention uncomfortable? Yes, it is. Is it completely avoidable? I don't think it actually is. You can reduce it by choosing your friends or associates carefully... but there are always going to be random muppets who behave outside your comfort zone.

Which is why I no longer get angry at remarks/jokes about my shakes. Or my height/weight. Or whatever it is that some random person decides to push under my attention.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

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]

The argument that "women do it as much as men" doesn't really cut it. Yes women do comment on a man who is attractive but in my experience it's more likely that a group of men will discuss the looks of many women as a whole conversation topic. And no, I'm not talking about all men or groups of men. I've just heard numerous conversations among male groups "rating" various women. I've never heard a similar conversation with from a group of women. They may talk about a particularly attractive guy but not in the same manner I've heard men talk about women.

Some people like to pretend that this is all in the head of feminists or that they're biased and can't see that women behave in the same way but this isn't something made up in a vacuum. There have been big stories surrounding this behaviour and it always involves male groups. For example, a few years back in one of the big accountancy or law firms in Dublin there was a group of guys emailing lists ranking the new female recruits. And I found other similar stories when I googled it there. None involved women being found out to be rating men. To pretend that it's all the same is just wilfully.missing the point.

Koala Sunshine

kylith wrote: »

It’s not about insulting. It’s about remarking on a woman in the street so that she feels like a piece of public property for all and sundry to comment on. Like she shouldn't be out if she’s not pretty enough, thin enough, or not smiling enough.

That hardly degrades someone to a mere object. Objects don't receive comments from sane people.

Just because someone makes a comment about another person does not mean that person is public property.

kylith

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

The pertinent question is are they being objectified in that example, are they reduced to the status of mere objects. I would say no, nobody insults a coffee cup or a toaster.

It’s not about insulting. It’s about remarking on a woman in the street so that she feels like a piece of public property for all and sundry to comment on. Like she shouldn't be out if she’s not pretty enough, thin enough, or not smiling enough.

cantdecide

_Dara_ wrote: »

You'll get on with your life but why should anyone be made to feel uncomfortable by a total stranger? And really, "What harm does it do?" is a sticks and stones mentality. As a teenager, I had an eating disorder, and comments from strangers could really mess with my head at that point in my life. Think about that for a second.

I was a big, fat, curly haired, quiet, jam-jar specced country kid and I was teased and bullied mercilessly all through my primary education and it ruined my whole life at the time. I literally did't engage with school because if was so profoundly negative to me. But as an adult, I just hardened up. I had to make some sense of the things that I was feeling as a teenager as a result of my experiences.

Some people are just rotten and many people on their worst day can be quite rotten. I believe the road to madness is expecting retribution for jerks being jerks. It's about power, I have no doubt and my experience is showing them you couldn't care less is the only way of reclaiming your power. Matters of schoolyard bullying are quite close to my heart but really, if you need to tell adults about sticks and stones, then I really don't know what to say. You can't physically stop jerks from being jerks and they'll find all kinds of creative ways to do what they do, IMO.

Koala Sunshine

kylith wrote: »

Imagine if you were that nerd. Imagine if, starting from the time you were 12, every day at least one person yelled ‘NERD’ at you in the street. Imagine that at family gatherings people discussed what a nerd you are. every Time you leave the house you wonder if someone’s going to yell NERD at you. Some people follow you around calling ‘nerd’.

How do you think that affects one’s self esteem?

But sure, they’re only women/nerds. Who cares if they’re made feel uncomfortable?

The pertinent question is are they being objectified in that example, are they reduced to the status of mere objects. I would say no, nobody insults a coffee cup or a toaster.

kylith

cantdecide wrote: »

Not being flippant but what is the literal harm. Explain it. Explore it. How would you convince someone that harm has occurred apart from a moment of discomfort at the hands of a cretin and I don't see damage occur (unless she biffs him, of course).

Here's a similar example...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRsPheErBj8

Clearly, Homer causes an uncomfortable atmosphere by dehumunising a stranger on the street based on judgments about their characteristics.

It's incredibly rude and obnoxious but what is the literal harm?

Imagine if you were that nerd. Imagine if, starting from the time you were 12, every day at least one person yelled ‘NERD’ at you in the street. Imagine that at family gatherings people discussed what a nerd you are. every Time you leave the house you wonder if someone’s going to yell NERD at you. Some people follow you around calling ‘nerd’.

How do you think that affects one’s self esteem?

But sure, they’re only women/nerds. Who cares if they’re made feel uncomfortable?

Koala Sunshine

"The action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object"

How does one know if a person has the status of an object, and how does one make another have the status of an object?

Those people who hold signs up in town would probably qualify if I understand the definition correctly. They are reduced to fixtures and fittings.

Triceratops Ballet

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

So can women only be objectified? It seems that way from the definition.

No, that's just how a dictionary works, they usually give you the meaning of a word and a common example of it's usage

Koala Sunshine

_Dara_ wrote: »

OK... you need to be spoonfed. You say you don't want a Google definition but you're getting one.

So can women only be objectified? It seems that way from the definition.

Triceratops Ballet

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

I want to hear what the posters on the thread believe to be objectification, I want to engage in discussion about it. I'm not interested in a google definition as that may differ from posters on this thread.

I gave you a definition of it and you didn't like it, talked about using someone as a goalpost or something. When you know full well the subject is the sexual objectification of women/men in the media.

_Dara_

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

That's why I'm asking what objectification is?

OK... you need to be spoonfed. You say you don't want a Google definition but you're getting one.

objectification
ɒbdʒɛktɪfɪˈkeɪʃ(ə)n/
noun
noun: objectification; plural noun: objectifications
the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object."the objectification of women as sexual possessions"

the expression of something abstract in a concrete form."the objectification of images may be astonishingly vivid in dreams"

Koala Sunshine

Oaklyn Careful Ginkgo wrote: »

Jesus, is Wikipedia down or something?

Google it for Christ's same.

I want to hear what the posters on the thread believe to be objectification, I want to engage in discussion about it. I'm not interested in a google definition as that may differ from posters on this thread.

Koala Sunshine

_Dara_ wrote: »

Again, you don't know what objectification is, do you? It's not about hurt feelings. Any number of different things can cause hurt feelings. Are they all objectification? Please look up what objectification is. You don't seem to really get it.

I probably shouldn't really be bothered responding to you, but since your replies aren't really doing you any favours, it's fine.

That's why I'm asking what objectification is?

_Dara_

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

Why is wolf whistling objectification but saying GTFO is not, in both cases the recipient's feelings are not being considered?

Again, you don't know what objectification is, do you? It's not about hurt feelings. Any number of different things can cause hurt feelings. Are they all objectification? Please look up what objectification is. You don't seem to really get it.

I probably shouldn't really be bothered responding to you, but since your replies aren't really doing you any favours, it's fine.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Jesus, is Wikipedia down or something?

Google it for Christ's sake.

Koala Sunshine

_Dara_ wrote: »

The example you gave wasn't objectification. You have looked into what it is, right? Can you explain how telling someone to GTFO on a message board is treating them as an object? Please elaborate.

Why is wolf whistling objectification but saying GTFO is not, in both cases the recipient's feelings are not being considered?