January 08, 2009

Never, Ever, Trivialize Rape, Unless You're a Feminist With a Deadline and a Need for a "Grabby" Column
— Ace

Solid points:

Entitled “Burn It Down,” the video features images of magazine advertisements, mostly for high-end fashion brands, in which women are depicted in sexualized ways—for instance, there’s a Levis ad in which the outline of a jeans pocket is shown on a woman’s bare buttocks—or, in some instances, shown on the receiving end of stylized sado-masochism. Interposed with these images are notes for a sort of mini-lecture about violence against women.

“Violence and objectification are a normal part of women’s lives,” the viewer is told. “In the US, the media bombards us on a daily basis with images that regulate how we think: about our bodies, our sexuality, our ethnicity, our relationships, and our very existence.”

Wait a minute. Notice how glibly this script puts violence and “objectification” on the same moral plane, as if the models in the fashion ads, in being hired for display as sex symbols, were victimized in the same way as if they had been assaulted. To equate violence with “objectification” serves the propaganda purpose of expanding the universe of victimhood so as to include every pretty girl who’s ever been made uncomfortable by a stranger’s lingering glance.

It's simply not avoidable: If you want to increase the terror of, say, "objectification" by speaking of it as it were rape, you simply cannot avoid trivializing rape by reducing it to the level of "objectification."

I don't find feminists very persuasive when they natter on about decidedly secondary concerns like "objectification" in the first place. But hey, even if I buy this "objectification" is a Bad Thing, can we stop trivializing rape as Just Another Bad Thing, Akin to Objectification?

Superinflating your rhetoric like this grabs attention nicely and cheaply, but it also deflates the solemn horror of rape itself.


Posted by: Ace at 10:42 AM | Comments (152)
Post contains 331 words, total size 2 kb.

1 SAT Question of The Day: Objectification is to Rape as Teh Ghey Rights Movement is to The Original Civil Rights Movement.

Posted by: yomomma at January 08, 2009 10:49 AM (dwWnk)

2 Ace should come clean about that night of hobo hunting that ended with a game of "hide the hobo sausage".

Posted by: John Galt at January 08, 2009 10:50 AM (SDkq3)

3 Just when I thought you were becoming tedious! Good point.

I am a big fan of objectifying women who use their sexuality to sell me things or attract my attention. I am actually a bit shocked to discover that my leering at lingerie ads and sexy chicks in movies and on the street is actually no better than rape. I assume that rape will be decriminalized so these similar crimes will be punished similarly.

Posted by: NJconservative at January 08, 2009 10:51 AM (nwJit)

4

Violence and objectification are a normal part of women’s lives

 

I don't know about "objectification", but violence is most certainly not a normal part of womens lives. Not unless the crime statistics are part of some evil patriarchial plot. Women are significantly less likely than men to be the victims of violent crime.

Posted by: flenser at January 08, 2009 10:57 AM (/2oBi)

5 The thing that always bothered me about the Janet-Jackson-Super-Bowl-fiasco was everyone was so busy condemning the nipple, no one bothered to condemn the violence of the guy ripping her shirt off.  Or maybe they all thought that part was OK, I don't know.  Nipples bad, sexual assault good, seems screwed up to me.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 08, 2009 10:58 AM (fGDhl)

6 If you use words stupidly, you will think stupidly. Result, bad case of stupidity. Case in point, all the ignorant progressives that are sucking up my air.

Posted by: Harry at January 08, 2009 10:59 AM (1PrID)

7 Violence is a part of my daily life when I am subjected to the MSM.

Posted by: C in Az at January 08, 2009 11:00 AM (GiRra)

8

It's all part of the childish nature of modern feminism.  Like toddlers cry as though it's the end of the world when they are told not to color on the walls, feminists scream "Atrocity!" at any and every thing they dislike. 

Not that men can't be and aren't childish, there just aren't college courses that teach it. 

Posted by: Shillelagh at January 08, 2009 11:01 AM (Oz4Bj)

9 Personally, I thought the Janet Jackson thing was blown way out of proportion.

Posted by: Harry at January 08, 2009 11:02 AM (1PrID)

10 Perhaps these "feminists" would like all men to put their eyes out so they won't be able to look at women -- and "objectify" them -- any more. In fact, I'm sure that would make more than one radical feminist light up like a neon sign. It's strange, though -- is it okay for lesbian women to look at other women as sex objects? Or are we supposed to call that "celebrating another woman as a sexual being"?

You know, I'm getting kind of tired of radical feminists turning everything into a sexual encounter. "At the grocery store today I had such a horribly oppressive encounter with a male! While he was bagging the cucumbers I bought the bag boy looked at me -- he must have been objectifying me as a sex object and fantasizing about putting his penis (symbolized by the cucumbers) in me! I called the manager to complain but he just said 'lady, sometimes a cucumber is just a cucumber' and  threw me out of the store! I'm organizing a protest tomorrow!"

Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 08, 2009 11:03 AM (N3OrG)

11 So let me get this straight, the next time I undress that hot chick at the pub in my mind I will also be guilty of shoplifting? OH what a cruel world!!

Posted by: Eric at January 08, 2009 11:04 AM (MFvqO)

12

Women in western advertising are objectified and sexualized?!?!  THE DEVIL YOU SAY. 

It's actually a form of WORSHIP.

Posted by: kevlarchick at January 08, 2009 11:06 AM (TNuqz)

13 Re the Janet Jackson thing: people didn't so much object to her nipple as to the fact that the whole performance was crude and sexualized in a sleazy way, and that it wasn't appropriate for a family event like a football game. The Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders in tiny outfits is one thing, but as far as I know (I don't watch the games) they don't include simulated violent street sex encounters in their performances.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 08, 2009 11:08 AM (N3OrG)

14

You must be joking, the next time I'm cruising internet pRon, I'm a rapist?

This will mean the end of strip clubs.

Where's my island!?

Posted by: Eric at January 08, 2009 11:12 AM (MFvqO)

15 Just enjoy

Posted by: "Tex" Antoine at January 08, 2009 11:13 AM (DHNp4)

16
Notice it's always the ugly chicks who talk like that?

They never matured past that awkward junior high school group of uglies talking about how much they hate that all the boys go for the pretty cheerleader girls.

Hey ugly,  it's nature.  Remember all that Darwin shit?  You ain't the fittest.

Posted by: Dang at January 08, 2009 11:13 AM (Y5LIx)

17 Actually Tony Romo and Terrel Owens have a little "violent street sex encounters" bit they do after touchdowns.

Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:13 AM (7DB+a)

18 Funny how with all the blow-up about JJ at the superbowl everyone forgot the intentional desecration and dishonor shown to the american flag by kid rock during that same half-time show.

Posted by: Eric at January 08, 2009 11:15 AM (MFvqO)

19 Ladies, If you don't want us staring at your boobies, don't wear shirts with words that go across said boobies.

Posted by: yomomma at January 08, 2009 11:16 AM (dwWnk)

20 So is it a myth that a lot of girls liked to be spanked or have their hair pulled during sex?

Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 11:16 AM (m2CN7)

21 Oh they want us staring at teh boobies alright.  It's the asexual harpys that nobody looks at who are pissed about it.

Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:19 AM (7DB+a)

22

Funny how with all the blow-up about JJ at the superbowl everyone forgot the intentional desecration and dishonor shown to the american flag by kid rock during that same half-time show.

I don't it was done intentional as Kid Rock is a huge supporter of the troops and a joe the plumber conservative (except for the millions of dollars).

Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 11:19 AM (m2CN7)

23 So if I look at my hand, in a way I am raping it?

Hmmm....  that is some serious BS.

Someone needs to be spanked and have their hair pulled.

K

Posted by: Kestrel♠ at January 08, 2009 11:20 AM (10kar)

24 Never, ever trivialize hand rape.

Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:22 AM (7DB+a)

25
I was repulsed by the transvestites and hookers attending one of the earlier performers.  I changed channels, thus missing la boobie.  Hopefully the attention JJ roused, cleaned up the other stuff...at least for the super bowl...for a while.
 

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 11:23 AM (LVT6e)

26
Just because every generation says the world is going to hell in a hand basket, doesn't change the fact that, sooner or later, one generation will be right.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 11:26 AM (LVT6e)

27 Hedley Lamar:  "Qualifications?"

Bandit:  "Rape, arson, murder, and rape."

Hedley Lamar:  "You said 'rape' twice."

Bandit:  "I like rape."

Posted by: The Other Shoe at January 08, 2009 11:26 AM (Pus2I)

28 The rediculousness of this version of feminism is that those in this group offer themselves up through behavior then screech, "He's staring at my tits! Evil rapist! Just because I'm showing them off for the world to see doesn't mean you can look and enjoy!" What the hell else do they expect? Objectify yourself and you'll be objectified. The evils of rape are very real and not tied to ojectfication.

Posted by: Shannon at January 08, 2009 11:27 AM (v4qA1)

29

I did see this tape, and thought it was worth seeing.  The left hates war, rape and gratuitous violence, unless it is in fashion ads. They do seem to have an uncanny knack for the oppression of women up close and personal in a way that is bad, very bad.

Rape is a soul stealing event for a woman, and some of the images in this tape do capture this effectively.

Posted by: ford at January 08, 2009 11:35 AM (Ki7fm)

30 Excuse me, but since when did the US have a lock on this supposed "sex objectification" of women?

The worst violators are the EU and Far East! Not that it matters, but the "in the US" meme is just another part of the glib horseshit this naive person is spewing out.

Posted by: Steamboat McGoo at January 08, 2009 11:37 AM (58OxE)

31 Is it objectification if I overdress them in my mind?

Posted by: Dave in Texas at January 08, 2009 11:37 AM (VEBC3)

32

Hey guys...The exploitation of women is bad. Even if the woman participates, it is bad. So I have to disagree with you. I see you make fun of people who disagree with you but I don't care!

 

I see it...why can't you?

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 11:41 AM (i5b09)

33 Good point DinT..... Helen Thomas would be better attired in a burkha.

Posted by: aubrey at January 08, 2009 11:43 AM (wsxco)

34

@30

No shit.  English papers have "page three girls" or something like that.  It's just some TnA in the newspaper.  Just 'cuz.

"Here in America" my ass....

Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:43 AM (7DB+a)

35 I have never seen a single one of the ads in that video.  Not.A.Single.One.

Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 11:45 AM (wOGfT)

36 If a woman is a willing participant in so called exploitation , is it really exploitation ?

Posted by: aubrey at January 08, 2009 11:45 AM (wsxco)

37 Or an atheist who is pissed off at the mother of your child and are too selfish to consider the feelings of your child.

Posted by: A Plover In Every Pot! at January 08, 2009 11:45 AM (R9nd6)

38 Um ... this line of thinking would be a little more persuasive if other, very attractive women weren't themselves participating in and being well-paid for these ads. 

Apparently they don't feel too terrorized (or even objectified) by all of this.




Posted by: Thinking things over at January 08, 2009 11:47 AM (8/DeP)

39 Interesting.  I was just about to comment in the last thread about being laid off and being thisclose to applying to Hooters (it's actually called Twin Peaks or something here in Austin).  Does being objectified pay the bills?  I don't give a shit as long as you tip well.  Objectify away.  It's either this or I can wait for one of Barry's new government jobs.

Posted by: catatx at January 08, 2009 11:47 AM (nHEKo)

40 This is now officially the catatx thread.

Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:49 AM (7DB+a)

41 Does being objectified pay the bills?  I don't give a shit as long as you tip well.

Photos help.

Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 11:50 AM (wOGfT)

42 Well, I'm serious.  They claim that there's no sidework, and I figure if I have to go back to waiting tables then I can at least avoid rolling silverware.

Posted by: catatx at January 08, 2009 11:51 AM (nHEKo)

43 I've said this before but......When I hear the word "feminist" two words come to mind.....Wolf Pussy. Second....Every woman I've ever known, after she has a kid bitches that her tits aren't perky and shapely anymore and wants a boob job. Why is that? So people can look at her tits maybe? My penis is perky and shapely but I don't wear tight pants to show it off.

Posted by: Jubal Anderson Early at January 08, 2009 11:53 AM (krKUp)

44 Bwahahaha!

This foolishness only applies to Western Civilization.

/this is why we cover our females
//we rape them anyway

Posted by: Mohammed Allah Ackbar at January 08, 2009 11:53 AM (3Bqev)

45 These are the same people who brag "I am a SEXUAL BEING.  I sleep with 20 guys a year.  I am GRRL, hear me roar!" and immediately follow up with a "I hate being view as a sex object."


Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 11:54 AM (906oR)

46 Every woman I've ever known, after she has a kid bitches that her tits aren't perky and shapely anymore and wants a boob job.

When Mrs CUS and I were at her doctor's for the consultation for her boob job, we were asking a variety of questions when looking at the before and after pics they provided.  It seems quite a few women ask the doctor for boobs 'that are as big as they were when I was pregnant'.

Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 11:57 AM (wOGfT)

47 I'd stop objectifying women, but they possess all the titties. Find me another vendor and I'll objectify them. I used to be a misogynist, but I quit cause bitches don't like that.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 08, 2009 12:00 PM (KRoWh)

48

My penis is perky and shapely but I don't wear tight pants to show it off.

And for that your nation is forever in your debt.

Posted by: flenser at January 08, 2009 12:00 PM (/2oBi)

49
Harumph!  Harumph!

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:03 PM (LVT6e)

50 I'm the mother of 5 girls and believe I see how advertising sways them and ALL their friends...are you gonna tell me our young aren't influenced by it? Do you keep a copy of playboy on your coffee table at all times? Hope your daughters make a fortune that way? Your daughter wishes when she grows up she will be biggest porn queen in the world?

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:05 PM (i5b09)

51

CUS, I have seen exactly one of those adds and I saw it because somebody was upset by the add campaign.

That said, the adds are disturbing and the sexual content of adds has increase.

Re the Janet Boob Event- I select what my kids may watch. I am increasingly pissed off that my pre-teen sons can't just watch football with me.

Posted by: kidney at January 08, 2009 12:06 PM (paaP3)

52 One thing that always puzzled me was the classic (1 in 3 women will be raped/sexually assaulted)  From hence do they derive that number?

Doing some basic mental math:

America has a population of ~300 million.

Lets say 50% are female, so ~150 million women.

 "1 out of 3" would imply ~50 million women.

Now, lets figure that all these [rapes/sexual assualts] are being committed by men, who make up the other 150 million of the population.

Lets assume also that the assaulter-rapist's average number of victims is somewhere between 1 and 2, (this makes it so that serial rapists are outliers and are heavily hunted).

That means that, if the math in my head is correct, there are something in the neighborhood of ~35 million rapists-assaulter in the nation.  That would mean that 11.6% of the entire US population are sex criminals.

So, a bit more than one out of every 10 people you will meet today, is a sex criminal.

And these people aren't the biggest donors to the NRA on the planet????

Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 12:08 PM (906oR)

53 #48.....it's real and it's spectacular

Posted by: Jubal Anderson Early at January 08, 2009 12:09 PM (krKUp)

54 50-tinkerthinker.
If you're looking for a fight, someone else can help you.  If you are serious, can you explain yourself a little better.  I don't think you've got an accurate idea of all the people on this thread.  Oh, and you'd better be who & what you say you are, mom.
Hog.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:10 PM (LVT6e)

55 Techie, the feminist numbers are regularly debunked. Remember the "Super Bowl Sunday is the biggest day for domestic violence" meme- They made it up.

Posted by: kidney at January 08, 2009 12:10 PM (paaP3)

56 I also notice that these ads generally run in high-end fashion magazines. 

Does The Patriarchy really read VOGUE, GLAMOUR, and BAZAAR?

Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 12:11 PM (906oR)

57 Violence and objectification are a normal part of women’s lives


Burkhas for everyone.

That will solve the feminist problem.

Posted by: A. Weasel at January 08, 2009 12:12 PM (bqcfE)

58 And thirdly,(I need to start thinking in longer posts), if pop culture has taught me anything, it's that the fashion industry is run by despotic ice queens and non-threatening gay men, with the odd fish-out-of-water "plain" personal assistant.

Is Hollywood lying to me?  They wouldn't do that, would they?


Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 12:13 PM (906oR)

59 Techie don't forget to subtract the 2% or 5% of gay men ,depending who you ask , from your 150 million. 

Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 12:13 PM (m2CN7)

60 I guess none of the women around you told you a single thing. Rape is real it is not an act of love making it is a horrible act of violence. I suggest you visit a help group.

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:14 PM (i5b09)

61 60-
Well, I tried.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:16 PM (LVT6e)

62

get a grip lady

Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 12:17 PM (7DB+a)

63

Hey tinkerthinker.

Boo!

Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 12:18 PM (m2CN7)

64 So why can't women be smarter and not buy products advertised by these companies?  If the ads don't sell, they'll try something else, yes?

Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 12:20 PM (wOGfT)

65 I don't think tinker gets this whole irony thing.  Or interactive dialog, for that matter.

Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at January 08, 2009 12:22 PM (ltwze)

66 While I don't agree with what all the poster said, like it is all Obama's fault and stuff, I agree the advertising and media using young girls in a sexual and demeaning manner and is so ingrained in our society it's as if raping and humiliating women have no meaning any more. Being a whore is glorified.

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:23 PM (i5b09)

67 So what then should we make of Tara Levicy, SANE nurse in training and a fine product of a proud Women's Studies program -  the very girl able to regularly manipulate her testimony in order to help Mike Nifong?  The same one who has never done an examination that didn't conclude rape. For blazing new methods to find rape where none exists, the feminists have no doubt a series of awards.

While at the same time the women of the Duke Lacrosse team were butchered in the press for the temerity of supporting their male team members.  As the objective "finders of fact" in the MSM rained down their derision, and then balked, very little was ever done to awknowledge their heroism and sanity in the face of the withering dust storm of the politically correct.

Only one of the very few voices of reason were they, and remembered for it at times like this they should be.






Posted by: Robert at January 08, 2009 12:23 PM (VotgB)

68 66-
I agree.  So why does me being on this site make me a rapist? 

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:25 PM (LVT6e)

69 I don't think it is funny

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:26 PM (i5b09)

70 63- Hoo

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:28 PM (i5b09)

71 54- are you a hog?

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:29 PM (i5b09)

72

58 + 59 = a whole new synthesis.

It's TEN percent of all males who are supposed, by the movement, to be homosexual. I hesitate to estimate the number of planners of fashion ad campaigns who belong to the same segment, but it must be high.

Ergo, a supermajority of male 'rapists' of females must be homosexuals. QED. It's painful to watch our dominant subcultures tear each other apart.

-----new subject-----

Tinkerthinker, you are still not getting it. Read the post again, carefully. Move your lips, if necessary. This is an anti-rape commentary you are reading. 

Posted by: comatus at January 08, 2009 12:29 PM (IsW34)

73
I don't speak for anyone but myself, & no one speaks for me, but there are a lot of directions that the discussion is going.  Some things are funny, in a sad way.  Humor is how you deal with them.  Also, women claiming victim hood while contributing to the problem would be funny if it weren't so irritating.  Guys hate that crap.  I really don't think anyone here is a rapist, unless you can post on this site from prison.  If you have a problem with the media and bizness objectifying women, take it to them, make them pay where it hurts.  Become involved.  My wife has.  Snapping at a bunch of morons with time on their hands won't help.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:31 PM (LVT6e)

74
71-and no, I'm THE Hog.


Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:33 PM (LVT6e)

75 So in tinker's mind...

participation = exploitation = bad?
Porn queen = rape victim?


Posted by: Fritz at January 08, 2009 12:33 PM (3Bqev)

76 Hey, I feel bad for Olivia Munn, but I suppose she's getting paid well enough for some of the self-abasing things she does.

Do I approve, thinkerthinker?   Not at all.   That's not the point.

The point is that it is NOT NOT NOT rape.   Not close.  Not even in the ballpark.  And calling objectifying women rape isn't just wrong, it's actively harmful for exactly the reasons Ace gives.

It isn't any different than the idiotic idea that taking a break from what you're doing and having sex with your spouse is rape, because you had to decide to try to get in the mood.

It trivializes real rape.


Posted by: Synova at January 08, 2009 12:36 PM (NxP4A)

77 72--Ummm are you sure, some people don't come on here all the time,,,you all sound like you are making fun of rape and that exploiting women in ads is OK with you all,,,ummm....

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:38 PM (i5b09)

78 You know who are the happiest women of all? Ugly fat chicks. UFC's have no men leering at them, nobody offering them 5 grand for an afternoon being photographed with no pants on for a fashion mag. That's why pretty girls eat so much and don't buy makeup, they want to join their UFC sisters in that blissful state.

This is just another example of my unified theory of everything: Everyone is full of shit.

Posted by: Amos at January 08, 2009 12:39 PM (zu8+4)

79
For one thing, women need to stop exploiting themselves in ads.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:40 PM (LVT6e)

80 They're making fun of moronic (and that's an insult to morons) feminists.

And I'd bet any one one of them, if ever put in the situation, would castrate a rapist on the spot.

Posted by: Synova at January 08, 2009 12:40 PM (NxP4A)

81

I have never seen a single one of the ads in that video.  Not.A.Single.One.

Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 04:45 PM (wOGfT)

Nor have I.

Methinks they are from the glossy pages of high end fashion magazines.

Lefty publications, y'know.

Posted by: Tinian at January 08, 2009 12:42 PM (Ohodx)

82 I fee like I'm being raped by the insensitivity in these comments.

Right now.  As we speak.  STOP RAPING ME!1!  You're trivializing rape!

Posted by: Kensington at January 08, 2009 12:43 PM (fhJCy)

83
And I'd bet any one one of them, if ever put in the situation, would castrate a rapist on the spot.

I'm sure that's true. 
Something that may be giving you a hard time here, is this:  Morons detest hypocrisy.  You should take that into account and reread the post.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:45 PM (LVT6e)

84

The left won the culture war and now those assholes complain about culture rot.

How.Fucking.Orwellian.

Posted by: Tinian at January 08, 2009 12:47 PM (Ohodx)

85
That tender moment was brought to you by:  Kensington, proud manufacturer of sharp choppy things and shiny kablooeys, proudly American made by Kensington.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:49 PM (LVT6e)

86

And I'd bet any one of them, if ever put in the situation, would castrate a rapist on the spot.

Don't be silly.  Rapists should be shot dead, not castrated. 

Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at January 08, 2009 12:49 PM (ltwze)

87 "That tender moment was brought to you by:  Kensington, proud manufacturer of sharp choppy things and shiny kablooeys, proudly American made by Kensington."

When does it end?

Posted by: Kensington at January 08, 2009 12:50 PM (fhJCy)

88 "Violence (is) normal part of women's lives." That's true - my wife hits me all the time. Ouww!!! But seriously: these sort of idiotic feminist pronouncements remind me of the scene in "Airplane," with the feminist talking while her sign language interpreter stroked an invisible cock...

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 12:51 PM (iafWn)

89

So show me a picture of a hot chick that is also a feminist.

 

Go on...

 

I am sure you can find one...

 

You mean you can't?

 

Really?

 

Maybe all that garbage about objectification is just jealousy from ugly chicks who are pissed because we aren't objectifying them.  Maybe that is the basis of the whole feminist movement

 

Yep...I am pretty sure that is it...

Posted by: Tex at January 08, 2009 12:51 PM (73eJg)

90
Just tryin to lighten the mood Kens, sheesh.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:52 PM (LVT6e)

91
Anyone here got a problem with shiny kablooeys?  I like shiny kablooeys...ooh, and sharp choppy things.  And stompy boots by Alex the Chick.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:55 PM (LVT6e)

92 "It seems quite a few women ask the doctor for boobs 'that are as big as they were when I was pregnant."

Well, that's logical - you wouldn't buy a car without a test drive first.

Posted by: Holdfast at January 08, 2009 12:59 PM (Gzb30)

93 "Don't be silly.  Rapists should be shot dead, not castrated."

Well, there's justice in castrating a rapist, but I'm not touching his dick.

Posted by: Kensington at January 08, 2009 01:03 PM (fhJCy)

94 When I hear first grade girls talking about image problems (going on a diet, too fat, etc.) I agree there is a problem. But it has nothing to do with objectification. Guys are objectified too (ever see Teen Beat or whatever the tweeners swoon over now?), but I don't hear my 5 year old boy worrying about his pecs lacking definition. There are a whole host of other issues that driving that bus for young girls. And to reinforce the point made earlier, the point of the post is trivializing rape.

Posted by: kennah at January 08, 2009 01:05 PM (SDc54)

95 "So show me a picture of a hot chick that is also a feminist."

I knew a hot feminist in college, but most moderately normal women let go of the lunatic aspects once they get out of there.  The ones who hang onto it forever, though, getting angrier and angrier...yikes.

Posted by: Kensington at January 08, 2009 01:06 PM (fhJCy)

96 While I'll concede that a few of the images shown were pretty repulsive, the most repulsive of them, as many have noted, are targeted for high-end fashion magazines.  If the exploitation and oversexualization of women were, in fact, a consequence of "The Patriarchy", women's fashion, an industry heavily represented by women and gay men, would be the last place one would expect to find said exploitation.  The more logical place to find such exploitation would be in a male-dominated industry like financial services:  "Oooh!  Baby!  Your asset allocation just turns me on!!!

Posted by: Bill Dalasio at January 08, 2009 01:13 PM (5j3FI)

97

I guess none of the women around you told you a single thing. Rape is real it is not an act of love making it is a horrible act of violence. I suggest you visit a help group.

I prefer to think of it as "tough love".

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 08, 2009 01:17 PM (rf03a)

98

Ironic that the creations of the female dominated high-end fashon industry is seen as objectifing women. 

If you want to talk about beer commericals that objectify women then fine.  Then again no beer ad I have ever seen is a violent as some of the imagery used to sell perfume and shoes.

 

Posted by: California Red at January 08, 2009 01:19 PM (7uWb8)

99

Seriously though, I agree that such sexually provacative material does lead to violence and sexual exploitation.  I've* seen the results myself.

*Namely, my dick saw the results since it was the one being violently beaten and exploited.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 08, 2009 01:24 PM (rf03a)

100 50 I'm the mother of 5 girls and believe I see how advertising sways them and ALL their friends...are you gonna tell me our young aren't influenced by it?   Straight men don't read or produce Vogue.  Straight women don't read Playboy.  Go gripe at the bitter harridans and queers that produce fashion magazines.  And keep them off YOUR coffee table.     Do you keep a copy of playboy on your coffee table at all times?   No, it used to be on top of the toilet tank next to the Reader's Digest.  Then I got married   Hope your daughters make a fortune that way? Your daughter wishes when she grows up she will be biggest porn queen in the world?   Well, since the oldest of my three daughters is only 5 years old, they haven't had a Career Day at school, yet.  So I don't think those options are on their radar screens just yet, but who knows?  Personally, it is my wish that they will grow up to be humorless internet scolds, but that's just me.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 08, 2009 01:25 PM (bu0Ek)

101
Shit, I'm too bored to fight.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 01:26 PM (LVT6e)

102 97: Assault with a Friendly Weapon?

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 01:46 PM (iafWn)

103 95: Better yet, show me a picture of a hot chick that is buck naked, preferably touching herself...

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 01:49 PM (iafWn)

104

#67

RIGHT ON ROBERT!!!

Kemp

Posted by: kempermanx at January 08, 2009 01:58 PM (2+9Yx)

105

I've heard it -- enough of it anyway. This stuff is not violent. Depictions of violence are not themselves violent. People aren't actually getting killed in order to film Law & Order every week.

And as far as pornography leading to violence? No sale. There's been no study published in any reputable journal that shows a link between porn and rape. The closest results are different answers to questions about rape. How long should a rapist's prison sentence be? The test group (the guys exposed to porn) suggested shorter terms than did the control group. The real findings with this study are (a) a difference in attitude, not behavior, and (b) even the guys who watched porn think that rapists should go to prison for a long time.

Posted by: FireHorse at January 08, 2009 02:01 PM (5KNeJ)

106

I see how advertising sways them and ALL their friends...are you gonna tell me our young aren't influenced by it?

That's the point.

Posted by: FireHorse at January 08, 2009 02:02 PM (5KNeJ)

107

I don't have time for this thread, I gotta go jack-off.

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at January 08, 2009 02:23 PM (Nwbo8)

108

I'm of the chick persuasion, and think that these type of ads do a disservice. 

Instead of whining, why not focus on empowerment (e.g. a woman with a strategically-placed .38 would be nice).  This ad serves no purpose and I don't think it resonates with most women ... we're way beyond that now.  And most young women I know would probably laugh at it (I may have to do a survey).

This is the old Gloria Steinham-type feminism.  Just like Jesse Jackson-style civil rights activism, it had its day and served its purpose for the times.

Those times are gone.

Besides, what's a little sado-masochism between friends?

Posted by: Home of Joe Biden at January 08, 2009 02:27 PM (RtQiY)

109 Feminists sure do bitch a lot.

Posted by: Warden at January 08, 2009 02:47 PM (QoR4a)

110 I prefer to think of it as "tough love".

Silly, it's called 'surprise sex'.

Because when it's a surprise, she doesn't have time to say 'No'.

Posted by: uʍop ǝpısdn at January 08, 2009 02:51 PM (7ZEfP)

111 Hmm. I watched their little video and I hadn't seen the vast majority of those ads. As far as the diamond ad, where the guy proposes and hands his girl a ring and her legs uncross... that could be "buying" something, or it could be a signal that she was a good girl waiting for marriage (or a promise of one). Anything can be spun. (Do I have to turn in my chick card if I found a couple of those ads kinda hot?)

Posted by: AngelEm at January 08, 2009 02:52 PM (tbIup)

112

I'm of the chick persuasion, and think . . .

Wait a minute! The way you think is regulated by the media, by PATRIARCHY. It said so in the video.

Seriously, that's the most insidious thing in the video -- the statement that anything can regulate what people (in this case, women) think.

It's as though they're saying, "You can't think for yourself, and the people who've been controlling your thoughts are out to do you harm. So you just let us do your thinking for you, Dearie, and everything will be all right." There's too much of that already (kudos to the references to Gloria Steinham and Jesse Jackson) and too many people going along.

Posted by: FireHorse at January 08, 2009 02:55 PM (5KNeJ)

113 I need one of these very smart feminists to tell me how this: http://abes-celebrities.com/travis_fimmel_3.jpg is objectifying, demeaning and/or promoting violence towards women.

Posted by: AngelEm at January 08, 2009 03:04 PM (tbIup)

114 I'm tired of women ogling my tight man-buns whenever I slip on my Jordache jeans and go for a stroll in the park.

Posted by: Warden at January 08, 2009 03:10 PM (QoR4a)

115 We witness the rage of the politically self-marginalized. Some lottery.
Now we know Michele. Heaven help her daughters.

Posted by: sickinmass at January 08, 2009 03:15 PM (/i4dU)

116 107 I don't have time for this thread, I gotta go jack-off. Come again!

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 03:21 PM (iafWn)

117 Don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet...

...but one of the main points of feminism until the mid-nineties was the anti-objectification of women; sexual harassment lawsuits abounded and there was general uproar from feminist voices whenever a woman was objectified in an ad or film/TV show.

Then, rather than call Bill Clinton's predatory behavior for what it was, Gloria Steinem shined the spotlight on Monica and called her "sexually self-willed", giving Slick Willy a pass because, well, he was a leftist like her, so it was OK.

When that happened, the can of worms was open for good, and the only potent argument coming from feminists now is equal treatment in the work place.

The objectification of women in any media form has gone unchecked.

Posted by: g at January 08, 2009 03:38 PM (FAYNo)

118 52- Is 1/3 an 'assaulted at some point in their lifetime number"?  The numbers for child molestation are staggering and I have tried to run the numbers in my head as you have, wondering how many sickos are out there walking around.  Then I read a study that indicated these abusers have many, many victims each, like 10-50.

55- I can't tell if you are serious

I get the point of calling out the person for equating rape with objectification, but the sarcasm concerning objectification is kinda sh*tty.  I believe ads, tv, etc today are far more sexualized & violent. I did not look at these ads but many are usually some sort of sexualized violence- in my book a bad thing. 

I agree with the people who pointed out these are lefty mediums.  Why does Hollywood preach to us about war and then glorify violence?  Why does Hollywood talk a good "pro-woman" talk and then exploit women, etc etc.  We saw the most sexist behaviour from "progressive" Obama supporters (of both sexes).         

(& the name of a hot feminist- Sarah Palin! Member of feminists for life) 

Posted by: lynn at January 08, 2009 03:48 PM (USh3F)

119 >>her legs uncross... shit.. now i gotta watch the video...

Posted by: Terry at January 08, 2009 03:49 PM (GAQ/Q)

120 Then, rather than call Bill Clinton's predatory behavior for what it was, Gloria Steinem shined the spotlight on Monica and called her "sexually self-willed", giving Slick Willy a pass because, well, he was a leftist like her, so it was OK.

Yup. After raving like loons because of what Clarence Thomas didn't do, the proud and righteous feminists looked at what Bill Clinton actually did, and said, meh, he gets a free pass. And thus in the late 90s did radical feminism beclown itself.  This is why it really isn't taken seriously, except maybe in academia.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 08, 2009 03:53 PM (XUV9W)

121

that was bad

I can see where Tink is coming from (don't nobody pun here).  Young girls are getting sexualized or turned into sexual objects in the media at an increasingly younger age.

But Tink, it was the freaking outer edge of  the feminist movement that got that shit going.  Celebrate your womanhood, any woman can, yadayadayada.  And then the bitches did it to us again with the whole "take back the night" candle vigils and sensitivity classes for males, and the damn "no means no, not maybe" campaigns that conned young women/girls into this false sense of reality, while it encouraged them to behave and dress in more and more provacative manners, and lessened the true nature of how we view rape (because to define a word is to have an idea of the thing, and when we started definining it by wolf whistles being rape, and morning after remorse as being raped, then we forgot what rape really was). 

In the meantime young men and boys haven't been let off the hook.  They get overly sexualized stuff thrown their way, but are accused of being rapists and pigs and wolves, oftentimes for just doing what heterosexual males do (and women have gotten more blatant at looking at men sexually, and acting on their impulses -- but men are supposed to keep it all on lockdown because the very same thing they do is bad?).

And through everything the rules, customs, and mores of civil and polite society got pitched -- along with any idea of what really is wrong and right.  Now, we get to deal with the issue of kids who got raised in that society, and what we can do as parents to help them manage this mess.

Women and men got kinda hoodwinked and shafted on that one I'm afraid.

And I have 5 kids too, and am middle aged and the whole freaking lot, so I do understand where you're coming from (no surgery though; fuck it; I guess I had some fun back in the day -- accepting the wrinkles, grey hair, gravity and the mom boobs, they are well earned).

 

 

Posted by: unknown jane at January 08, 2009 03:56 PM (wyaGP)

122 @111 (Do I have to turn in my chick card if I found a couple of those ads kinda hot?) ohYeah! some of those were crazy hot!!

Posted by: Terry at January 08, 2009 03:57 PM (GAQ/Q)

123 Game. Set. Match.  lynn

Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 03:58 PM (OifLN)

124 unknown jane,
Awesome comment.

Posted by: sickinmass at January 08, 2009 04:05 PM (/i4dU)

125

Young girls are getting sexualized or turned into sexual objects in the media at an increasingly younger age.

 

You know, their moms have a fair amount to answer for there. It irks me to see four and five year old girls tarted up like they're in their late teens. Heels, mini-skirts, big hair, the works. But it's the moms dressing them that way. (No father would ever dress his daughter like that, even when she was a teenager.)

Posted by: flenser at January 08, 2009 04:15 PM (g92Es)

126 125: Yeah, I've noticed that too - Moms taking their daughters to school dances dressed up like grown woman, with the hair done, high heels, etc. - and I'm talking middle school, for Pete's Sake! Next to them, the boys still look like little children, and half of them seem intimidated. The other half can't wait to feel them up out on the dance floor, and Mom thinks it's CUTE. And you're right - now we have the preteens dressed up like little prostitots, and their Moms think it's SO darling... and no doubt wonder why they get knocked up by age 13.

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 04:20 PM (iafWn)

127 23 So if I look at my hand, in a way I am raping it?

Hmmm....  that is some serious BS.

Someone needs to be spanked and have their hair pulled.

K


Ummm....  It's not the "looking" part that makes that rape.

Posted by: Powdered Milk Man at January 08, 2009 04:30 PM (TuD9Y)

128 125-- That drives me absolutely nuts. I took my oldest girl dress shopping for her eighth-grade banquet a while back and the things other girls were trying on and buying were .... well, I just couldn't believe their parents let them out of the house like that. My girl went old-school glamour while these others went with the "horny teen" look, and they seemed like complete trash next to the few girls who went with something classier and more appropriate. These fourteen-year-olds were wearing things I wouldn't have been caught dead in at 20, and their folks seemed to think it was just fine.

Posted by: AngelEm at January 08, 2009 04:37 PM (tbIup)

129 So I just followed the link to watch the video, so I could have some idea what the original topic was, and noted on that site that The Confluence has been drawing attention to the video.  Kind of wipes out their support of Palin.  Not sure how I feel about continuing to vote for them.


Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 04:45 PM (OifLN)

130

I absofuckinglutely guarantee you that the fathers on not on board with their daughters dressing that way. It's the moms who think its cute and its the moms dressing them.

Posted by: flenser at January 08, 2009 04:48 PM (BSOAT)

131

Lynn, I was serious. There are no studies that point to Super Bowl Sunday being Super beat your wife day. The ultraconservative Washington Post debunked this soon after FAIR made the claim.

Posted by: kidney at January 08, 2009 05:19 PM (paaP3)

132

#20  Not a myth.....for some women.

IMO the ads were not really SM. Much more about bondage. I know the finished product looks pretty, but all those fancy knots take a long time. Boring, boring, boring. Much like the feminists who denounce such things.

 

 

Posted by: Domme at January 08, 2009 05:20 PM (3xHU0)

133

121 thank you for your comment. I am not a feminist from the 60's, I just missed that era. But I agree with your comment-- 

And through everything the rules, customs, and mores of civil and polite society got pitched -- along with any idea of what really is wrong and right.  Now, we get to deal with the issue of kids who got raised in that society, and what we can do as parents to help them manage this mess.

 

Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 05:33 PM (i5b09)

134 methos, thanks. (was that for blaming liberals or for naming Palin as a hot feminist?)

130- Disagree slightly, I have known a few friends' fathers who liked to "show off" their daughters and thought the attention from guys was cool. (although this is like at 16+ yrs)- but still I thought it was creepy.  Maybe thats cause when I was 16 my dad was trying to barricade the house.  

As for blaming the moms- ok maybe a few, but (and I am niave here, the MSM still manages to disappoint me, so I still have too high of expectations). But girls want to look like their friends and their role models on TV.  I know many moms feel overwhelmed, like they are fighting an uphill battle.  Especially the moms who block programs in their homes, but the kids watch it in friends' homes.  So in a perfect world, the moms and dads would be monitoring the kids clothes, making appropriate decisions, and they would get a helping hand with a culture that reinforces positive values.  (off topic- but applies to boys wearing the undies/baggy pants thing as well).   

Posted by: lynn at January 08, 2009 05:34 PM (USh3F)

135

There are dads who get into the act of allowing their girls to dress that way -- believe me (I have a 19 yo. and a 17 yo. daughters from my first marriage).  Their step sister was encouraged not only by mom but by dad and step dad to dress ala Brittany S. (back when she wasn't certifiable), because then this girl would be "cool".  She was also given the go ahead to have boyfriends by 5th grade too.  It was ridiculous and rather gross and sick.

Fortunately I'm sole custodial parent with opposing views to parenthood and then I managed to marry a sensible man (even if he is Army) who behaved like a true dad should.  So the hoochy look never happened here, and neither did the hooch behavior, and above all else, the kids in this house get taught to behave themselves and don't let others misbehave towards them.

Being a dumbass, or even just a misguided fuckstick, is not gender specific.

 

Posted by: unknown jane at January 08, 2009 05:37 PM (wyaGP)

136

Feminism has been dead ever since the feminist establishment decided it would rather hold on to Bill Clinton's pant leg than stand behind everything it had been saying about sexual harrassment for two decades.  

If feminists don't learn some new tricks (I'd suggest getting pissed off on behalf of the millions of women in the world who actually have something to bitch about), they're going to go the way of the wobblies.    

Posted by: Infidoll at January 08, 2009 05:43 PM (ojIgY)

137 What kills me that American "feminists" are spending their time yapping about girl watching (good luck stopping it, gals!), while just today some woman in New Guinea was burned to death for being a "witch"! They don't talk about the plight of women under Taliban control, they don't question why grown women in Saudi Arabia can't go outside the home without the escort of at least an 8 year old boy. No, the Great Women's Issue of Our Time is old fashioned girl watching! For people that brag about how they "have a passport," what a bunch of parochial, clueless yokels liberal "feminists" are!

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 05:57 PM (iafWn)

138 134 lynn, I meant the Palin=hot feminist.

Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 06:09 PM (OifLN)

139

Being a dumbass, or even just a misguided fuckstick, is not gender specific.

No doubt about it, although I think the different sexes usually manage to be misguided dumbass fucksticks in different ways.

Posted by: flenser at January 08, 2009 06:54 PM (xuEfu)

140

So in a perfect world, the moms and dads would be monitoring the kids clothes, making appropriate decisions, and they would get a helping hand with a culture that reinforces positive values.

With our kids, we learned to pick our battles.  So we said no to cleavage and short, tight skirts, but let them dye their hair purple and go nuts with the eye liner and jewelry and dress "a little bit goth".  It seemed to work.

Posted by: katya at January 08, 2009 07:12 PM (oRJZj)

141

I get the point of calling out the person for equating rape with objectification, but the sarcasm concerning objectification is kinda sh*tty. 

Uh, Lynn, you've been reading Ace for how long? I mean he's sarcastic about everything. We all remember that fateful September afternoon when Ace first said, "The World Trade Center just got blown up by Islamic terrorist hijackers and fluffy bunnies, but mostly . . ."

Posted by: Nordbuster at January 08, 2009 08:07 PM (hHjcH)

142 Similarly, whenever someone for example reading a book about the KKK at a college gets in trouble for it because it offended someone, the whole notion of racism and prejudice is trivialized.

Posted by: Scotian at January 08, 2009 10:29 PM (oblkU)

143

Especially when said book was a gloating tome about the beating the klan took at the hands of college kids.

Posted by: kidney at January 09, 2009 02:26 AM (paaP3)

144 Markie Marxist sez:  "Our Marxist/feminists are supposed to hold sex hostage to communism.  It's kind of, 'No justice, no piece'."

Posted by: Chas at January 09, 2009 03:38 AM (1XTjz)

145 That author must be one ugly hag.

Posted by: sjh at January 09, 2009 05:05 AM (GErKE)

146 RE: high-end fashion mags. They're gross. I only used to read them at the beauty shop, but I quit doing even that when I saw a Vogue layout full of anorexic skanks made up to look like14-year-old heroin addicts. Nasty.

Posted by: stace at January 09, 2009 05:44 AM (JO0c/)

147

the sarcasm concerning objectification is kinda sh*tty

 

Yeah, my heart bleeds for you.

BTW, we haven't had any good cheerleader pics here lately.

Posted by: flenser at January 09, 2009 07:39 AM (/xD2X)

148 Exactly! Bring on the Eye Candy!! "Objectification" is pure bullshit. Just bullshit. Bullshit. Since when is girl watching evil? Liberals are the great prudes of our time - exactly what they always accuse Christians of being.

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 09, 2009 11:54 AM (iafWn)

149 141 Nordbuster- Need to clarify, i was referring to some of the comments, not the original post.  No problem there.   But some comments turned to "defend any objectification at any cost."  Rather than use the sarc to appear creepy, why not direct it at the ones being creepy?  the video is by liberals condemning ads made mostly by liberals, but acting like it's someone else's fault.   

Posted by: lynn at January 10, 2009 09:23 AM (USh3F)

150 Hey. Calamities are of two kinds: misfortunes to ourselves, and good fortune to others. Help me! I find sites on the topic: Anti asthma. I found only this - side effects of methylprednisolone. An extra shot of anti oxidents probably couldn hurt. So take a anti allergic medicine as soon as you feel that there will be an attack and it will be aborted. Thanks for the help , Ancelin from Northern.

Posted by: Ancelin at June 01, 2009 01:55 AM (NNxYx)

151 Good morning. My friend is one. who take me for what I am. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Topamax and lactose intolerance. I found only this - topamax making me have headaches. Information relating to the skin includes skin diseases and conditions, cosmetic surgery, terbinafine acts by interfering with the ability of. An imprint is any marking on the pill such as an engraved logo, numbers and or terbinafine mg sandoz. Thank you very much :-). Panphila from Malaysia.

Posted by: Panphila at June 23, 2009 06:26 AM (rm4Lu)

152 Good afternoon. Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Side effects prograf. I found only this - Prograf nephrotic syndrome. Brooklyn, new york; maimonides hospital medical center; amphotericin tacrolimus prograf; muscle relaxers; steroids prednisone and others. d, aceon overnight delivery, adding that prograf it still other sites will find dozens of others. Thanks for the help :rolleyes:, Maura from Cyprus.

Posted by: Maura at June 27, 2009 04:14 PM (rm4Lu)

Hide Comments | Add Comment






145kb generated in 0.1912 seconds; 50 queries returned 283 records.
Powered by Minx 1.1.2-pink.