tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post117488671505908710..comments2023-10-31T05:03:38.910-07:00Comments on Letters from a broad...: Questioning ObjectificationC. L. Hansonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-85075442837447500792014-06-15T14:19:51.676-07:002014-06-15T14:19:51.676-07:00Really loved this blog, not sure if you are going ...Really loved this blog, not sure if you are going to receive or respond to this response given its been so long, but I thought I would offer my two cents. <br /><br />I was wondering what you actually would see as objectification?<br /><br />For me objectification is something that unless a man states he has no care for the human attached to the body it is incredibly hard to find someone fully objectifying a woman. Even if I were to look a pictures of women's bodies all day in 'lad mags.' I still do not see that as objectification as it does not imply I have no thought for those women's personalities just that I enjoy looking at their bodies. <br />If I then went on to say all these women are good for is their looks/bodies/sex then yes that is objectification, but that happens so rarely compared to how much the word objectification gets used I feel like feminists are really missing the point.<br /><br />I was just wondering how your view on objectification was compared to my own?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03978167575534147253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-38614271461279385842011-02-15T11:10:47.853-08:002011-02-15T11:10:47.853-08:00Hey Lynell!!!
That is very true. Honestly, I thi...Hey Lynell!!!<br /><br />That is very true. Honestly, I think this is an extremely complex issue, and for a long time I've been planning to try to write a post about some of these issues, and clarify a bit about they ways I think objectification really is a relevant and accurate way to look at the portrayal of women. Trouble is, it's tricky... ;)C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-8113717393404973292011-02-15T10:34:05.669-08:002011-02-15T10:34:05.669-08:00I think it’s objectifying when everything, literal...I think it’s objectifying when everything, literally everything that has to do with women is tied to not who she is as a human being, but to her sexuality. It’s as if sexuality is personified as woman. She is never separated from her biology, whereas man is. We see this objectifying in the soft core porn that seems to permeate our society. The football league for women with an emphasis on the lingerie and not the game; the swimsuit issue in Sports Illustrated that has absolutely nothing to do with the sports stories within its pages; the routine firing of women broadcasters once they are no longer young because they are thought to no longer be attractive; the very fact that women are expected to be on display at any given time by wearing the right makeup, clothes, and staying in shape while there are no similar expectations of men. These are all powerful cues in our society that women are objectified and held to a standard that does not apply to men. Now some people will blame biology. Men are visual and that its only natural that porn and an entitlement to be in the constant presence of young, attractive women is an outgrowth of that. I’m not sure. But I know that I am insulted by restaurants where all he waitresses MUST have big boobs and serve people in skin tight outfits, and that women are paraded across a stage in a beauty contests for scholarship money, and that how young and cute I am, and not my actual qualifications, are what count most in getting or obtaining a job. There is something very wrong with this. And there simply is truly NO equivalency for men.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00900557338947068210noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-84180967288462462752010-08-10T08:32:07.413-07:002010-08-10T08:32:07.413-07:00I'm reminded of a conversation my wife and I h...I'm reminded of a conversation my wife and I had after watching <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0207201/" rel="nofollow">What Women Want</a>. She said, "I wonder what the sequel 'What Men Want' would look like." I jokingly replied, "It's already been made a million times - it's called porn."<br /><br />I definitely consider myself a male feminist. I sought our a partner/equal for a spouse and nothing less. I found one and have been happily married for 17 years.<br /><br />At the same time, I am bombarded 24/7 with my sexual thoughts as a male. It's ridiculous. I doubt women really have any idea what goes through our minds ... and nearly all the time.<br /><br />There's so much to say here that it seems impossible to do as a comment, so I won't.<br /><br />I do appreciate the deference to the fact that men cannot control what their thoughts are. I agree completely that the issue is how they act upon it and they're able to differentiate desire, consent, and action.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04381009460160043176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-31134924947717566382010-02-01T21:58:30.969-08:002010-02-01T21:58:30.969-08:00Oh my goodness. First let me say I was griped on r...Oh my goodness. First let me say I was griped on reading a womens point of view so I kept reading. I don't look at porn but did for several hours the other day and I can only believe that there are a lot of women who agree to be filmed for $1400. I think you are saying they don't get anything out of it except the $1400 cash. The oral thing, um, I don't know what to think.<br />I enjoy what you have read and I think you have spent a lot of time conversing at Princeton.<br />You remind me of some of the Jane Austen movies where you are so wordy for me. Did you have turn in papers that required 20 pages when you could have said the same thing on one page.<br />I hope I don't offend you and don't think I will because you seem very level headed.<br />You have given me some great insight as to the feelings of women and I don't think I will ever understand them even though they try to help me. But that said I love them and respect them and I am married to a sweet heart who after 43 years I love more each day. I might ad it is not about physical sex though.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04962220086728517646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-51812113069919672602010-02-01T21:56:27.238-08:002010-02-01T21:56:27.238-08:00Oh my goodness. First let me say I was griped on r...Oh my goodness. First let me say I was griped on reading a womens point of view so I kept reading. I don't look at porn but did for several hours the other day and I can only believe that there are a lot of women who agree to be filmed for $1400. I think you are saying they don't get anything out of it except the $1400 cash. The oral thing, um, I don't know what to think.<br />I enjoy what you have read and I think you have spent a lot of time conversing at Princeton.<br />You remind me of some of the Jane Austen movies where you are so wordy for me. Did you have turn in papers that required 20 pages when you could have said the same thing on one page.<br />I hope I don't offend you and don't think I will because you seem very level headed.<br />You have given me some great insight as to the feelings of women and I don't think I will ever understand them even though they try to help me. But that said I love them and respect them and I am married to a sweet heart who after 43 years I love more each day. I might ad it is not about physical sex though.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04962220086728517646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-24630956806751910502009-12-20T05:35:22.538-08:002009-12-20T05:35:22.538-08:00agree with your point of view. Very good post.agree with your point of view. Very good post.debate popularhttp://www.debatepopular.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-87865108527113087872008-10-01T13:09:00.000-07:002008-10-01T13:09:00.000-07:00Let me see...a broad should be a broad inboth figu...Let me see...a broad should be a broad in<BR/>both figure(big boobs,great hips,legs and bottom),and behaviour,that is,doffing <BR/>he VERY full top <BR/>for the boys in the band and crowd,<BR/>downing a few with the girls,and drop-<BR/>ping gals in fights!!!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-29969979761349580162008-05-13T11:01:00.000-07:002008-05-13T11:01:00.000-07:00Hey Sam-I-Am!!!That's a good point -- it's very tr...Hey Sam-I-Am!!!<BR/><BR/>That's a good point -- it's very tricky to tell which women want attention and which don't. I don't think there's a simple formula, you basically just have to be very good at reading people's responses. And unfortunately, most people <I>think</I> they're good at reading people's reactions, but <I>aren't</I>. So your best bet is not to make assumptions about it.<BR/><BR/>I went into a little more detail about this point in the follow-up article:<BR/><BR/>To clarify my Questioning Objectification post, I'd like to emphasize that I think it is very bad for sexuality to be imposed upon women in an <I>inappropriate</I> context. My point is that it is far easier to tackle inappropriate sexual treatment if you're holding in your other hand a clear model of what constitutes <I>appropriate</I> sexual expression.<BR/><BR/>Men can understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate behavior. Just because it's okay for a given man to fondle his wife or girlfriend in the privacy of their bedroom, he will not immediately assume that means it's okay for him to fondle strangers on the bus. The fact that it's okay to stare at an image on a screen won't make a man automatically assume that it's okay to stare at a colleague's chest at work or to make unwanted comments about the bodies of platonic friends.<BR/><BR/>Much of our culture gives young guys the following message: "The morality police don't want you looking at sexy women at all," with the accompanying flip-side message "but, hey, it's a guy thing..."<BR/><BR/>Feminists who view sexuality in terms of objectification are promoting <I>exactly the same message</I>. Behaviors that should be denounced as harassment are held up as some sort of proof that sexuality is fundamentally about men using women, as if harassment were an inseparable component of male sexuality. <A HREF="http://lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2007/03/at-risk-of-beating-dead-horse.html" REL="nofollow">read the rest -></A>C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-8113272528103190092008-05-13T05:51:00.000-07:002008-05-13T05:51:00.000-07:00Hey Chanson,I think this post from feministing is ...Hey Chanson,<BR/><BR/>I think <A HREF="http://feministing.com/archives/009078.html" REL="nofollow">this post</A> from feministing is a good example of feminist outrage over objectification that not all feminists would agree on.<BR/><BR/>I might posit that part of what's enjoyable about wearing a pretty dress is the attention (not necessarily sexual) from men. And there's nothing wrong with that, neither on my part for enjoying it nor on the part of the men who are paying attention. <BR/><BR/>And how are men to know which women like the attention and which hate it? Poor guys, all they can do is be respectful and try to be discreet.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps a post on the different types of male attention would be helpful.AnnMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08504450005600933157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-10106241161784097262008-03-11T07:33:00.000-07:002008-03-11T07:33:00.000-07:00p.s. to all:I notice I've gotten some new incoming...<B>p.s. to all:</B><BR/><BR/>I notice I've gotten some new incoming links on this article. Please see also my follow-up article <A HREF="http://lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2008/02/come-on-baby-wont-you-show-some-class.html" REL="nofollow">Come on baby, won't you show some class?</A>C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-40506299019340841282007-10-09T05:12:00.000-07:002007-10-09T05:12:00.000-07:00Hey Christopher!!!That's a good way of looking at ...Hey Christopher!!!<BR/><BR/>That's a good way of looking at it.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-56422888669925166472007-10-08T09:48:00.000-07:002007-10-08T09:48:00.000-07:00You see, I agree with Gramstad. If girls were bro...You see, I agree with Gramstad. If girls were brought-up to be subjects, rather than objects, and were allowed to develop the same self-confidence and respect for their bodies as boys, then, once adult, they might be more inclined to enjoy appropriate and unthreatening objectification, much as us heterosexual males do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-42557714738276498632007-10-04T06:49:00.000-07:002007-10-04T06:49:00.000-07:00Hey Christopher!!!That's a good way of looking at ...Hey Christopher!!!<BR/><BR/>That's a good way of looking at it: each person naturally takes the role of subject and object to some degree in an erotic experience but gendered expectations and conditioning can attach a bad taste to one role or the other.<BR/><BR/>I think we can learn some things about this by observing gay people since their erotic interactions aren't colored by the tradition of one partner being the expected master and the other the expected servant. In a sense they have more psychological freedom to explore the enjoyment of playing either subject or object without the political implications uncomfortably sitting there in the room with them.<BR/><BR/>Also, about (straight?) men enjoying the role of sex object, one of my blog friends wrote a great post about that here: <A HREF="http://mormonerotica.blogspot.com/2007/02/taking-stage-to-strip-or-not-to-strip.html" REL="nofollow">taking the stage</A>.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-62790694934384412622007-10-04T04:29:00.000-07:002007-10-04T04:29:00.000-07:00Here's another comment on the subject from Thomas ...Here's another comment on the subject from Thomas Gramstad of "Amazons International"<BR/><BR/>From: Thomas Gramstad <BR/>Subject: Objectification and gender roles<BR/><BR/>There seems to be a statistically significant difference in<BR/>the perception of objectification between women and men.<BR/>When women talk about objectification, what they usually<BR/>refer to seems to be unwanted sexual attention, and a<BR/>belittling of themselves expressed by some man through his<BR/>focusing on some physical or bodily aspect of the woman,<BR/>which is perceived by the woman as a neglect or lack of<BR/>interest and respect for her character, personality,<BR/>achievements and individual uniqueness.<BR/><BR/>How do men (often) perceive objectification? What strikes me<BR/>as a typical example is a Danish sexologist whose name<BR/>escapes me, but who in an essay that I read many years ago<BR/>made a lasting impression when he wrote that he couldn't at<BR/>all understand why women complained about being viewed as sex<BR/>objects -- he considered being viewed as a sex object to be a<BR/>great experience and honor that he unfortunately far too<BR/>seldom experienced and cherished on those occasions he could!<BR/><BR/>This is a gender role issue. While boys are taught to be<BR/>active, aggressive, to lead, take initiatives and all the<BR/>rest, girls are taught to be passive, submissive, quiet and<BR/>so on. In short, boys are trained to be subjects and girls<BR/>are trained to be objects.<BR/><BR/>When young women develop their character and personality,<BR/>they soon rub against the edges of the cultural-personal<BR/>cage, of which the 'object expectations' are an important<BR/>constituent. Is this why women often have bad feelings<BR/>toward anything that has a flavor of objectification?<BR/><BR/>When young men develop their character and personality, they<BR/>are expected to treat everything as instruments or objects to<BR/>be commanded, and women are so often presented to them as<BR/>objects too, in the media, beauty myths etc. Is this why<BR/>many men seem to have difficulties in recognizing and<BR/>respecting signals about unwanted sexual attention and in<BR/>finding other modes of attention and communication?<BR/><BR/>Moreover, is this part of the reason why men, when they find<BR/>themselves in the role as sex objects, experience that as<BR/>something unexpectedly and surprisingly positive and<BR/>relaxing, self-building, an honor etc., a release from their<BR/>own cultural-personal cage of always being expected to be the<BR/>active subject, the leader and doer?<BR/><BR/>What I'm getting at here are two points:<BR/><BR/>(1) Objectification, in and by itself, is not a bad thing.<BR/>On the contrary, it has the potential to make one feel<BR/>visible in the world and attractive and appreciated. Whether<BR/>it is recognized or not, I think that some measure of sexual<BR/>pleasure does arise in objectifying your lover -- lusty<BR/>objectification is an integral part of the best sex and of<BR/>the most loving sex. And of attraction, and of flirting, and<BR/>of much non-verbal communication and... Everyone has a need<BR/>to be, or will benefit from being able to experience oneself<BR/>as, both subject and object, being able to choose shifting<BR/>from one to the other.<BR/><BR/>(2) The arbitrary gender roles completely warp the role and<BR/>nature of objectification. Instead of being a source of<BR/>personal pleasure, enjoyment and recharge (as it would be in<BR/>a balanced society), it has become some kind of political/<BR/>cultural power issue: Half the population is being<BR/>constrained in their careers and personal development by<BR/>being over-objectified, and the other half is being similarly<BR/>(or more precisely, complementary) constrained by being<BR/>under-objectified. In other words, most women will react and<BR/>revolt against the degree to which they are objectified in<BR/>the current culture and with good reason; and most men will<BR/>react to the experience of being a sex object with a feeling<BR/>of satisfaction, lust and hunger. And this adds up to a<BR/>serious communication problem (don't they all, all the gender<BR/>role issues?).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-76193306766063675472007-09-25T13:48:00.000-07:002007-09-25T13:48:00.000-07:00Thanks.Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-19190435890638373532007-09-25T05:03:00.000-07:002007-09-25T05:03:00.000-07:00Absolutely!I was very happy to get that nice link ...Absolutely!<BR/><BR/>I was very happy to get that nice link from the Athletic Woman blog since some people see this post as threatening to feminism, and in particular as a conservative complaint from the little woman who just wants a man. But in reality my position is a completely feminist one: feminism should encourage women to be true to their own preferences and desires, even if one's fantasies don't line up conveniently with purist political ideals. It's like with the gay movement: you shouldn't have to force your sexual responses to conform to what other people think you should like (as long as it's all consenting adults, of course).<BR/><BR/>In the case of the authors of Athletic Woman, I imagine that being interested in building up one's own (female) body can often have a sexual component which some might call "objectification" merely because it involves appreciating a woman's physical body (possibly in a sexual way). I feel like feminism should be open to allowing women to enjoy turning people on with their bodies -- if that's what they want -- and not automatically assume there's some sort of exploitation whenever there's a man looking at a woman (without regard for the woman's own feelings about what she's doing).C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-63663006095336364412007-09-25T04:46:00.000-07:002007-09-25T04:46:00.000-07:00Thanks for acknowledging my response. Has it prov...Thanks for acknowledging my response. Has it provoked any thoughts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-29476807043209846762007-09-24T01:28:00.000-07:002007-09-24T01:28:00.000-07:00Thanks Christopher!!!Thanks Christopher!!!C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-40717447429134383042007-09-23T10:11:00.000-07:002007-09-23T10:11:00.000-07:00May I, as a feminist-supporting heterosexual male,...May I, as a feminist-supporting heterosexual male, interject?<BR/>I am so glad that you have expressed this idea - I know I'm very late arriving at this blog entry; I found it via the Athletic Women's Blog.<BR/>Late last year, I discovered that I was deeply attracted to physically strong, athletic women. I made this discovery because I had, in an interlude in my University studies, used the internet to educate myself in areas of minimal personal knoweledge, in this case, the concept of physical feminism. After becoming depressed and angered at the fact that many women feel vulnerable when out and about, I stumbled across physically strong women and found myself being attracted towards them. The problem was that, whilst I knew that part of the attraction was to the fact that these women had both the courage and determination to break away from misogynistic ideas of what a woman should be like, (i.e. smaller and weaker than men and therefore physically dependent on them) part of my attraction was sexual - I found a muscular female body attractive. For a good while, this concerned me greatly, as I had read of 'objectification' and was dismayed by the thought that I was as bad as the misogynists whose values and ideas I rejected.<BR/>Eventually, I decided that I had to resolve the situation. On joining a site for enthusiasts of female athleticism and muscularity, (many of whom are female) I developed my own definition of objectification which seems comfortingly similar to your and other commenters' definitions: that to be an objectifier meant that the man thought of the woman only in sexual terms, and placed little, if no value in her personality, talents, intellect and other attributes. This definition has enabled me to enjoy the althletic female form without causing me to mentally flagellate myself for what are, as you say, normal and evolutionarily-logical feelings and thoughts.<BR/>Yours,<BR/>Chris Bell.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-32559022260054450832007-08-29T06:41:00.000-07:002007-08-29T06:41:00.000-07:00Wow! Thanks for the add! much obliged:-) ~em jWow! Thanks for the add! much obliged:-) ~em jemy carinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06534194215374299088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-14917611713898149792007-08-28T22:29:00.000-07:002007-08-28T22:29:00.000-07:00Hey Em J!!!That's cool -- I'll add you to Outer Bl...Hey Em J!!!<BR/><BR/>That's cool -- I'll add you to Outer Blogness then. :DC. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-28418092292116886522007-08-28T14:36:00.000-07:002007-08-28T14:36:00.000-07:00hi C.L Hanson!Thank you for your comments on my bl...hi C.L Hanson!<BR/>Thank you for your comments on my blog! (I don't ride the bus to save the environment) It was very encouraging as I am very new to this blogging phenomena and it is definitely something for which I have yet to find my voice.<BR/>P.S. I, too, am an x-mormon. My 'brainwashing experience' (as I like to call it) is remarkably similar to your stories. It is always refreshing to be reminded that I was not crazy, thinking that they were. Thanks for what you do!!!emy carinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06534194215374299088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-18729082171551482662007-08-23T08:04:00.000-07:002007-08-23T08:04:00.000-07:00Thanks Hm-Uk!!! I hope to meet you someday too!!!...Thanks Hm-Uk!!! I hope to meet you someday too!!! :DC. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-18270732052069261642007-08-23T05:27:00.000-07:002007-08-23T05:27:00.000-07:00Good god, this is so well written. I hear what yo...Good god, this is so well written. I hear what you have to say and agree to the point that I am going to comment on it five and a half months after your original post, just so that I can be on-record how brilliant a post I think this is!<BR/><BR/>I hope, hope, hope that someday I will get to meet your good self. Until that time I will read your musings, your thoughts and your opinions. Cheers, Chans!!hm-ukhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15123301692688850355noreply@blogger.com