January 08, 2009
— 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 waysfor instance, theres a Levis ad in which the outline of a jeans pocket is shown on a womans bare buttocksor, 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 womens 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 whos ever been made uncomfortable by a strangers 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.
Posted by: yomomma at January 08, 2009 10:49 AM (dwWnk)
Posted by: John Galt at January 08, 2009 10:50 AM (SDkq3)
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)
Violence and objectification are a normal part of womens 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)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 08, 2009 10:58 AM (fGDhl)
Posted by: Harry at January 08, 2009 10:59 AM (1PrID)
Posted by: C in Az at January 08, 2009 11:00 AM (GiRra)
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)
Posted by: Harry at January 08, 2009 11:02 AM (1PrID)
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)
Posted by: Eric at January 08, 2009 11:04 AM (MFvqO)
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)
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 08, 2009 11:08 AM (N3OrG)
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)
Posted by: "Tex" Antoine at January 08, 2009 11:13 AM (DHNp4)
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)
Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:13 AM (7DB+a)
Posted by: Eric at January 08, 2009 11:15 AM (MFvqO)
Posted by: yomomma at January 08, 2009 11:16 AM (dwWnk)
Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 11:16 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:19 AM (7DB+a)
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)
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)
Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:22 AM (7DB+a)
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)
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)
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)
Posted by: Shannon at January 08, 2009 11:27 AM (v4qA1)
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)
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)
Posted by: Dave in Texas at January 08, 2009 11:37 AM (VEBC3)
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)
Posted by: aubrey at January 08, 2009 11:43 AM (wsxco)
@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)
Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 11:45 AM (wOGfT)
Posted by: aubrey at January 08, 2009 11:45 AM (wsxco)
Posted by: A Plover In Every Pot! at January 08, 2009 11:45 AM (R9nd6)
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)
Posted by: catatx at January 08, 2009 11:47 AM (nHEKo)
Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 11:49 AM (7DB+a)
Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 11:50 AM (wOGfT)
Posted by: catatx at January 08, 2009 11:51 AM (nHEKo)
Posted by: Jubal Anderson Early at January 08, 2009 11:53 AM (krKUp)
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)
Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 11:54 AM (906oR)
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)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 08, 2009 12:00 PM (KRoWh)
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)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:03 PM (LVT6e)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:05 PM (i5b09)
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)
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)
Posted by: Jubal Anderson Early at January 08, 2009 12:09 PM (krKUp)
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)
Posted by: kidney at January 08, 2009 12:10 PM (paaP3)
Does The Patriarchy really read VOGUE, GLAMOUR, and BAZAAR?
Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 12:11 PM (906oR)
Burkhas for everyone.
That will solve the feminist problem.
Posted by: A. Weasel at January 08, 2009 12:12 PM (bqcfE)
Is Hollywood lying to me? They wouldn't do that, would they?
Posted by: Techie at January 08, 2009 12:13 PM (906oR)
Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 12:13 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:14 PM (i5b09)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:16 PM (LVT6e)
get a grip lady
Posted by: Eleven at January 08, 2009 12:17 PM (7DB+a)
Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 12:18 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: CUS at January 08, 2009 12:20 PM (wOGfT)
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at January 08, 2009 12:22 PM (ltwze)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:23 PM (i5b09)
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)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:25 PM (LVT6e)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:26 PM (i5b09)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:28 PM (i5b09)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:29 PM (i5b09)
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)
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)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:33 PM (LVT6e)
Posted by: Fritz at January 08, 2009 12:33 PM (3Bqev)
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)
Posted by: tinkerthinker at January 08, 2009 12:38 PM (i5b09)
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)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:40 PM (LVT6e)
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)
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)
Right now. As we speak. STOP RAPING ME!1! You're trivializing rape!
Posted by: Kensington at January 08, 2009 12:43 PM (fhJCy)
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)
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)
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)
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)
When does it end?
Posted by: Kensington at January 08, 2009 12:50 PM (fhJCy)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 12:51 PM (iafWn)
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)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 12:52 PM (LVT6e)
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)
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)
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)
Posted by: kennah at January 08, 2009 01:05 PM (SDc54)
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)
Posted by: Bill Dalasio at January 08, 2009 01:13 PM (5j3FI)
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)
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)
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)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 08, 2009 01:25 PM (bu0Ek)
Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 01:26 PM (LVT6e)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 01:46 PM (iafWn)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 01:49 PM (iafWn)
Posted by: kempermanx at January 08, 2009 01:58 PM (2+9Yx)
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)
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)
I don't have time for this thread, I gotta go jack-off.
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at January 08, 2009 02:23 PM (Nwbo8)
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)
Posted by: Warden at January 08, 2009 02:47 PM (QoR4a)
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)
Posted by: AngelEm at January 08, 2009 02:52 PM (tbIup)
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)
Posted by: AngelEm at January 08, 2009 03:04 PM (tbIup)
Posted by: Warden at January 08, 2009 03:10 PM (QoR4a)
Now we know Michele. Heaven help her daughters.
Posted by: sickinmass at January 08, 2009 03:15 PM (/i4dU)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 03:21 PM (iafWn)
...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)
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)
Posted by: Terry at January 08, 2009 03:49 PM (GAQ/Q)
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)
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)
Posted by: Terry at January 08, 2009 03:57 PM (GAQ/Q)
Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 03:58 PM (OifLN)
Posted by: sickinmass at January 08, 2009 04:05 PM (/i4dU)
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)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 04:20 PM (iafWn)
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)
Posted by: AngelEm at January 08, 2009 04:37 PM (tbIup)
Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 04:45 PM (OifLN)
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)
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)
#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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 05:57 PM (iafWn)
Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 06:09 PM (OifLN)
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)
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)
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)
Posted by: Scotian at January 08, 2009 10:29 PM (oblkU)
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)
Posted by: Chas at January 09, 2009 03:38 AM (1XTjz)
Posted by: sjh at January 09, 2009 05:05 AM (GErKE)
Posted by: stace at January 09, 2009 05:44 AM (JO0c/)
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)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 09, 2009 11:54 AM (iafWn)
Posted by: lynn at January 10, 2009 09:23 AM (USh3F)
Posted by: Ancelin at June 01, 2009 01:55 AM (NNxYx)
Posted by: Panphila at June 23, 2009 06:26 AM (rm4Lu)
Posted by: Maura at June 27, 2009 04:14 PM (rm4Lu)
Powered by Minx 1.1.2-pink.









