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

kylith

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

LLMMLL

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.

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"?

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.

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?

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?

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

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.

LLMMLL

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

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Their sons' girlfriends or their daughters' boyfriends.

Let me get this straight. You've heard numerous women saying something like "my son's girlfriend is a 7"? Are you sure you're not exaggerating?

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

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

It's rating attractiveness, everyone does it automatically, it's merely making explicit what is already implicit.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

It's rating attractiveness, everyone does it automatically, it's merely making explicit what is already implicit.

That's a bizarre argument. We all have thoughts and opinions that we don't air for various reasons. Even if you do assign numbers to people in your head (I doubt you go that far), that doesn't mean it's a positive step for society to make that explicit.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Let me get this straight. You've heard numerous women saying something like "my son's girlfriend is a 7"? Are you sure you're not exaggerating?

No. Not using a scale, like numbers, to describe people. But going into strong detail about the attractiveness, appearance, behavior of the person along with judgments? yup.

The women I've heard using a numbers scale were generally single/dating.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

That's a bizarre argument. We all have thoughts and opinions that we don't air for various reasons. Even if you do assign numbers to people in your head (I doubt you go that far), that doesn't mean it's a positive step for society to make that explicit.

I see it as negative for society to try to shame people for discussing their sexuality and who they find attractive or not attractive.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

I see it as negative for society to try to shame people for discussing their sexuality and who they find attractive or not attractive.

But discussing that in a certain way can be harmful to society.

Why only women? Men get the same treatment in papers. "Jack shows off his ripped abs as he .........etc"

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why only women? Men get the same treatment in papers. "Jack shows off his ripped abs as he .........etc"

Go count the stories in the daily mail celebrity section (which is a typical example of this) and count the number of stories about men vs the number of stories about women. The male stories are almost non existent in comparison.

Triceratops Ballet

Deleted User wrote: »

Why only women? Men get the same treatment in papers. "Jack shows off his ripped abs as he .........etc"

because the op is spinning off from another thread, about gender bias in advertising. He believes that women are not objectified in the media and was looking for examples.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

But discussing that in a certain way can be harmful to society.

By harmful to society you mean some people's egos will be bruised.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

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.

So your point is that it's perfectly ok to insult someone like yourself? Maybe even the right thing to do? Because in the end you got over it so it doesn't matter what anyone said or did to you?

And I don't think any feminist has ever said that only women experience discrimination or unwanted attention.

The point is that the behaviour you experienced was wrong and so it a lot of the behaviour women experience.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

By harmful to society you mean some people's egos will be bruised.

No I mean that people feel they are assessed based on their looks alone, be they attractive or unattractive.

LLMMLL

Grayson wrote: »

So your point is that it's perfectly ok to insult someone like yourself? Maybe even the right thing to do? Because in the end you got over it so it doesn't matter what anyone said or did to you?

And I don't think any feminist has ever said that only women experience discrimination or unwanted attention.

The point is that the behaviour you experienced was wrong and so it a lot of the behaviour women experience.

This line of thinking crops up all the time. "I was able to handle it therefore everyone else just needs to toughen up". Sure it's great of an individual can handle nastiness directed at them but wouldn't it also be great if we took steps to discourage nastiness? They're not mutually exclusive things.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

No I mean that people feel they are assessed based on their looks alone, be they attractive or unattractive.

Tough, do you think you have the right to dictate to others their vlaue systems abd what they think?

People are free to assess other people whatever way they want, and so they should be. If a person has a problem with that they need to get over their own insecurities. So what if someone asseses you based in looks.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

So your point is that it's perfectly ok to insult someone like yourself?

I'm not sure how you got that from my post. The point is that it happens to a lot of people, and objecting to it, isn't going to change most peoples behavior. The people who care about others feelings will go out of their way to be polite and not be an ass. The people who don't care, are going to behave the way they want anyway.

Maybe even the right thing to do? Because in the end you got over it so it doesn't matter what anyone said or did to you?

I'm saying that we learn and adapt based on our circumstances. The pain i experienced while younger made me better equipped to deal with the other crap i've had to face later.

And I don't think any feminist has ever said that only women experience discrimination or unwanted attention.

No, they don't. They just say that it affects men differently, and therefore such discrimination or unwanted behavior towards women is worse.

The point is that the behaviour you experienced was wrong and so it a lot of the behaviour women experience.

And I didn't suggest that it wasn't wrong. I didn't try to excuse it. I said to ignore it and move on with their lives, and to stop caring so much about external opinons... because as far as I can see, it's part of human nature, and unlikely to disappear.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

Tough, do you think you have the right to dictate to others their vlaue systems abd what they think?

People are free to assess other people whatever way they want, and so they should be. If a person has a problem with that they need to get over their own insecurities. So what if someone asseses you based in looks.

Nobody's dictating anything to anyone here. You can drop that nonsense. I'm talking about mutual values in society. About how we treat and value people.

One example of how feeling that you're only assessed on your looks can be bad for society is the prevalence of eating disorders/ body dysmorphia etc.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

This line of thinking crops up all the time. "I was able to handle it therefore everyone else just needs to toughen up". Sure it's great of an individual can handle nastiness directed at them but wouldn't it also be great if we took steps to discourage nastiness? They're not mutually exclusive things.

Don't we already have a system of politeness and what is considered acceptable behavior? Most people conform to those systems. The people who wolf-whistle, throw abusive comments, etc are those who choose not to follow such a system...

You seem to be looking for a stronger system like a set of laws with punishments for those who break those conventions on behavior.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not sure how you got that from my post. The point is that it happens to a lot of people, and objecting to it, isn't going to change most peoples behavior. The people who care about others feelings will go out of their way to be polite and not be an ass. The people who don't care, are going to behave the way they want anyway.

That's not true. For example, it used to be quite common to hear nasty stuff about gay people. It's rare to hear it now. I'm sure there's are people who still want to say these things but since the middle ground has shifted they can't get away with it. I know people with mild facial deformities where the most awful things were said to them in the 80s/90s by randomers on the street whereas now it would be completely unacceptable. Things Can and do change.

No, they don't. They just say that it affects men differently, and therefore such discrimination or unwanted behavior towards women is worse.

Do you think calling a gay peron a f****t is the same as calling a straight person a breeder? Or calling a black person the n word and a white person a cracker. Are they the exact same to you?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't we already have a system of politeness and what is considered acceptable behavior? Most people conform to those systems. The people who wolf-whistle, throw abusive comments, etc are those who choose not to follow such a system...

You seem to be looking for a stronger system like a set of laws with punishments for those who break those conventions on behavior.

Not looking for a law.

Yes we have a system of politeness but we had that system when I was growing up and what's considered polite back then has changed. Why can't it change further?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

That's not true. For example, it used to be quite common to hear nasty stuff about gay people. It's rare to hear it now. I'm sure there's are people who still want to say these things but since the middle ground has shifted they can't get away with it. I know people with mild facial deformities where the most awful things were said to them in the 80s/90s by randomers on the street whereas now it would be completely unacceptable. Things Can and do change.

Yes, things can and do change. Agree totally there.

However, I've yet to hear any practical ways for change to apply to this area? I'm just hearing criticisms that it's happening.

Do you think calling a gay peron a f****t is the same as calling a straight person a breeder? Or calling a black person the n word and a white person a cracker. Are they the exact same to you?

Ahh well... For me, words' meanings are carried by the emotion/intent behind them. I've lived in countries where white people were a minority, and have been called whitey, pinky, etc. Just as I've heard black friends call each other the n word in friendship and it being passed off as acceptable.

Still... the articles on objectifying women don't seek to raise the awareness of objectification of men, will dismiss it as being different for the genders and tend to focus on women's concerns.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

Nobody's dictating anything to anyone here. You can drop that nonsense. I'm talking about mutual values in society. About how we treat and value people.

One example of how feeling that you're only assessed on your looks can be bad for society is the prevalence of eating disorders/ body dysmorphia etc.

As I said before, the solution is working on the individual's self esteem so they aren't vulnerable to the comments of others. Trying to control the thoughts and comments of the world is futile and merely treating the symptom.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Not looking for a law.

Yes we have a system of politeness but we had that system when I was growing up and what's considered polite back then has changed. Why can't it change further?

Yes, it changed. I can remember when holding a door open for a woman, holding out her coat to help her put it on, etc were considered the mark of a polite man. You'd be amazed at the numbers of women who have given me dirty looks simply because I held the door open for then as I was leaving the same building. Not seeking approval, although a simple acknowledgement would have been nice. And then there are those who get annoyed because I didn't hold the door for them.

Personally, I would have no problems with there being more courtesy and politeness... but I would love for women to determine what is acceptable and what is not, rather than leaving it to the individual to decide. Then, at least, we'd have a clear system to shove to rude people and say do this.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes, things can and do change. Agree totally there.

However, I've yet to hear any practical ways for change to apply to this area? I'm just hearing criticisms that it's happening.

Criticisms are practical. How do you think the attitude to gay people changed. Because the key "practical" events were decriminalisation 1993 and the recent marriage equality. Its impossible to pinpoint how these gradual social changes take place but direct practical measures are a small part. Some people will respond to criticism of their attitudes. Others will respond to their friends and peers changing attitudes in a cascade. The idea that if change is to be made there must be some kind of masterplan on how it will be achieved is mechanistic in the extreme.

Ahh well... For me, words' meanings are carried by the emotion/intent behind them. I've lived in countries where white people were a minority, and have been called whitey, pinky, etc. Just as I've heard black friends call each other the n word in friendship and it being passed off as acceptable.

Could YOU call a black friend the n word? If only intent matters it shouldn't be an issue.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

As I said before, the solution is working on the individual's self esteem so they aren't vulnerable to the comments of others. Trying to control the thoughts and comments of the world is futile and merely treating the symptom.

So should gay people have just toughened up and not tried to change homophobic attitudes? Because they had quite a success in changing attitudes. Seems like it makes sense to try and change attitudes.

Saruhashi

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 would say that there needs to be some kind of system set up to help young people deal with stuff like that.

You know, give the kid being called a "nerd" the appropriate tools to manage it and cope with it.

I'm feeling like we can't actually control bad behavior and I'm not even sure what an appropriate punishment for calling someone a bad name or saying something awful to them ought to be.

If 99 people call me a nerd but it only really starts to get to me at person 100 then there is a problem there in that we can't punish person 100 and we can't even really retroactively punish the other 99.

The better solution would be to prepare me for that kind of stuff and help me deal with it.

I'd rather have the tools to deal with someone calling me "fatty" once in a while than to have to go to the hassle of lecturing everyone who will listen every time some clown points and laughs my giant belly.

I wonder though if it's actually cathartic for people to read articles and such where objectification of women is condemned? Maybe that is the coping mechanism?

We can't really escape from the fact that women in action movies etc (which seem to be the most popular these days) are going to be in top physical condition. We can't get away from the fact that men will be more attracted to certain "looks" and everyone on the planet knows which looks are deemed most attractive. So maybe the only relief from that is reading or listening to the odd rant.

Getting rid of "Grid Girls" and the ladies on the darts is definitely a massive victory there.

However, as women's sports become more popular and more mainstream you are going to see more and more athletic women being help up as the "ideal".

Better to give people the tools for dealing with reality that to try and alter reality in ways that may not even be possible.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Criticisms are practical.

Constructive criticism is practical. Telling everyone that the whole male gender is responsible for objectifying women is not.

Look at the type of criticisms thrown at the fashion industry. It's not exactly Criticisms against the fashion industry, per se, but that the majority of photographers are male, the majority of designers are male, the majority of management is male. It's not that the women in the fashion industry are objectifying women, it's that the men are. Even when the labels are run by female photographers, female designers, etc they're responding to the male influence rather than objectifying women themselves.

How do you think the attitude to gay people changed.

Well... let's see. Probably because they shoved it in peoples faces, and stopped hiding it behind closed doors?

Because the key "practical" events were decriminalisation 1993 and the recent marriage equality. Its impossible to pinpoint how these gradual social changes take place but direct practical measures are a small part. Some people will respond to criticism of their attitudes. Others will respond to their friends and peers changing attitudes in a cascade. The idea that if change is to be made there must be some kind of masterplan on how it will be achieved is mechanistic in the extreme.

And criticism of gay people still exists. There are still people who will insult them. Just like the comment that women throw at male posters, it probably happens more than you expect.

It will take time for the gay movement to be completely accepted into society. Probably need a few generations to die off with their old-fashioned ideas... and even then, you will still find people uncomfortable with expressions of intimacy from gay people, who are willing to express their discomfort publicly.

Could YOU call a black friend the n word? If only intent matters it shouldn't be an issue.

Me? No. Just as I could never use the c*nt word. Or a dozen other insults which I think are horrible... but then i see no value in insulting other people verbally. My ignoring them is far more effective.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

So should gay people have just toughened up and not tried to change homophobic attitudes? Because they had quite a success in changing attitudes. Seems like it makes sense to try and change attitudes.

I don't think you really understand how being gay became more accepted. They did toughen up. They did seek to ignore the insults and discrimination. Or face it head-on. "I'm gay and I'm proud", and other kinds of slogans. They refused to be pushed into the background... They didn't moan about people objectifying them all the time. They set their values by other gay people, not by the people who insulted them.

People changed their attitudes to gay people because they had little choice in the matter. Being openly gay became more popular in spite of the criticism, and gained support out of admiration for that stand.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

So should gay people have just toughened up and not tried to change homophobic attitudes? Because they had quite a success in changing attitudes. Seems like it makes sense to try and change attitudes.

At the end of the day there is nothing wrong with valuing looks, people should be free to value whatever they want. There is however something wrong with persecuting and harassing people.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Constructive criticism is practical. Telling everyone that the whole male gender is responsible for objectifying women is not.

It doesn't have to be what you view as constructive for it to work. Fact is, a lot of companies are at least trying to engage in this front. Lots of companies at least superficially responding to criticisms. You can criticise these criticisms all you want but at some level they're working.

Look at the type of criticisms thrown at the fashion industry. It's not exactly Criticisms against the fashion industry, per se, but that the majority of photographers are male, the majority of designers are male, the majority of management is male. It's not that the women in the fashion industry are objectifying women, it's that the men are. Even when the labels are run by female photographers, female designers, etc they're responding to the male influence rather than objectifying women themselves.

The criticisms I've heard of the fashion industry just criticised the industry and didn't focus on whether it was men or women behind it. But I haven't actually sought out this criticism so maybe I'm wrong and the majority of the criticism is anti-men. Where do you see this criticism?

Well... let's see. Probably because they shoved it in peoples faces, and stopped hiding it behind closed doors?

That's a bit simplistic. It was a lot of factors. But criticising Was a big part of it. It certainly wasn't gotten by being quiet.

And criticism of gay people still exists. There are still people who will insult them. Just like the comment that women throw at male posters, it probably happens more than you expect.

I know it exists. But it's socially unacceptable. I don't think anyone is under the illusion that it will EVER go away. Some people will always hate minorities. And not just older people. But the fact that it's hugely frowned upon is a massive victory. You don't seem to value anything that isn't part of some great plan that has 100% success. Gay people didn't have a master plan, and it's not a 100% success, it never will be, but it's still a MASSIVE change. I don't see why women can't use the same methods.

Me? No. Just as I could never use the c*nt word. Or a dozen other insults which I think are horrible... but then i see no value in insulting other people verbally. My ignoring them is far more effective.

It seems you realise that the n word is far more loaded than cracker. That the f word for gay people is far more loaded than breeder for straight people. In a similar manner objectifying women is seen as worse than objectifying men. Whether you agree or not, many people view the history of women as them being not taken seriously as anything other than either pretty things to look at or wives/mother's. It's not surprising that these people think something that continues that trend is a bad thing.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

And I didn't suggest that it wasn't wrong. I didn't try to excuse it. I said to ignore it and move on with their lives, and to stop caring so much about external opinons... because as far as I can see, it's part of human nature, and unlikely to disappear.

I guess that's where we differ. When I see a group of people experiencing discrimination I don't think they should ignore it and get on with their lives. i think that it should be called out and something should be done about it. And I don't think the onus is on them to get over it as opposed to the people who are discriminating.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

At the end of the day there is nothing wrong with valuing looks, people should be free to value whatever they want. There is however something wrong with persecuting and harassing people.

What about non persecution and harassment of gay people. For example, what if you value being straight? Do you think it would be good, bad , or neutral if a group of straight people sat around saying things like "gay people are grand, but I'd rather hang out with a straight person". This isn't harassment. It's not persecution.

Koala Sunshine

Now we are getting to the core of the issue.

Not being taken seriously by other people is the problem. Ultimately you can not force people to take others seriously. Each individual however can carry themselves in a certain way and react to the world in a certain way which brings more respect.

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

What about non persecution and harassment of gay people. For example, what if you value being straight? Do you think it would be good, bad , or neutral if a group of straight people sat around saying things like "gay people are grand, but I'd rather hang out with a straight person". This isn't harassment. It's not persecution.

Each individual is entitled to choose who to hang around with for whatever reason they want. To think otherwise is authoritarian.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

Each individual is entitled to choose who to hang around with for whatever reason they want. To think otherwise is authoritarian.

Of course they can choose. I'm talking about speech. Do you think it's good for society if people talk this way. An example would be "Im not racist but...." Where the person says something which is not persecution or harassing but is usually crass and stereotyping. Obviously they can think what they want, and they can say what they want, but do you think its a good thing that they do say it?

Koala Sunshine

LLMMLL wrote: »

Of course they can choose. I'm talking about speech. Do you think it's good for society if people talk this way. An example would be "Im not racist but...." Where the person says something which is not persecution or harassing but is usually crass and stereotyping. Obviously they can think what they want, and they can say what they want, but do you think its a good thing that they do say it?

I think it's better that they say it than not saying it. Beliefs and opinions can't be challenged if they are kept quiet.

LLMMLL

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

I think it's better that they say it than not saying it. Beliefs and opinions can't be challenged if they are kept quiet.

Then it should be fine to criticise people discussing ratings of women.