[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-N9daqANcw[/youtube]
Will have to wait till I get to the Internet cafe, but care to give me a heads up on ‘why?’
It explains how the objectification of woman is mainly caused by things that woman do themselves. Obviously, they do it because they are wired to do it.
We simply cannot escape biological imperatives.
It shouldn’t be news to anyone who understands evolutionary psychology.
doesn’t the nurture department have anything to say about this?
If the nurture changed then eventually the nature would do so also.
Apart from that we are not fecking robots, why cant we make intelligent choices about how we perceive people, and how we act.
…and anyway, a good looking woman dressing sexy has the manipulative advantage. At least, if men dressed sexy it wouldn’t confer the same advantage, quite the contrary probably.
Couldn’t hurt for guys to see it as well.
It seems to me the issue would be 'what causes women to do these things?
Women are the prime agents in the physical act of female genital mutilation, but the practice stems from the will and power of men.
Whoa, where did genital mutilation come from? The subject of the video is sexual objectification, primarily geared towards women and feminists of places where female genital mutilation isn’t common/normal…
Where does nature end and nurture begin? Well, wherever that might possibly be it has been discumbobulating philosophers now for centuries.
Perhaps even more intriguing though is the manner in which so many of us seem hellbent on objectifying ourselves.
I was using it as an example of an activity carried out by women, generally, but the roots of the choice to take those actions come from the fears and power of men. IOW in terms of causes, the fact that someone does something does not mean that they are at the root of that action. I understood it wasn’t a topic in the film.
In sharecropper south US, iow in the decades following the civil war, blacks behaved with extreme deference, generally, in relation to whites. They stepped off the sidewalk and let the whites pass like little kings. They looked down. They called the white men and women sir and ma’m, while generally getting called by their first names or ‘boy’, etc.
We could look at their behavior and say they are creating their own degradation, but this would be a shallow look at causes.
We are not monads.
Moreno,
That’s all well and good but female genital mutilation as an action that “come[s] from the fears and power of men” is really in a different category from women in say North America who call men pigs for treating them as sexual objects.
I don’t entirely agree with volchok’s statement either.
I think her main message was that sexual objectification is embedded in our behavior as a consequence of evolution, and that men and women today objectify themselves as often (or nearly as often) as they objectify each other.
Sure, but the point is not - oh, that’s as bad. My point is about causation. That what can seem like the simple choice of one person, is actually a best choice given the societal context, or even a forced or brainwashed choice given that context. I think there can be a lot of naivte about agency, and it is often a self-serving political act to act as if the individual is simply making a choice and that the relevent causation is coming from within that individual.
Further a shift to another culture and or a more extreme example can often highlight something from our own. I am not saying that guys who think women are primarily their bra size are cutting up women’s genitals.
I don’t entirely agree with volchok’s statement either.
I think her main message was that sexual objectification is embedded in our behavior as a consequence of evolution, and that men and women today objectify themselves as often (or nearly as often) as they objectify each other.
[/quote]
There has definitely been a trend in the last few decades where men are being objectified more and more. Ya gotta be buff in the movies in ways men were not in the past, for example.
But still, agency, in films for example, is still more likely to be something the men have. Women have it more than they did, but the more interesting characters and the central ones, still tend to be men. The one’s who wrestle with choices and even may not look so good. Male stars are, yes, generally pretty good looking. But you can be a male star and not be traditionally good looking. This is less likely for women.
But it is getting closer to even.
Also have you noticed the whole gym culture with guys these days? There is A LOT more working out and getting “big” not for sports or for any real functional purpose, but for the built look.
I agree. On the other hand, it’s self-disserving to act as if one is a complete victim to forces beyond his/her control, if you get my drift.
Waxing, plastic surgery on everything from faces to fat to bigger dicks to extra ass. Men are clothes horses in ways they were not. Tanning, jewelery, tattoos, piercings, extentions. Sure, it’s amazing. And sad. I mean, I think more balance is good, but I also think there is an overall trend towards shallowness, towards being one’s surface, and to spending money to be something, rather than doing something or being someone.
Sure, absolutely, though in the context of feminism, women do get on each other’s asses for contributing to their own objectification.
I think it is good to look at any situation from the training angle - how has this person been brainwashed to think this is how they must be - from the power angle - what real negative consequences would occur if this person resisted the training - their own involvement - what swingroom do they have and do they test the boundaries - and what are other people getting out of the training and attendant punishments, and what is their involvement in the system that supports the practice. And then, well, not being a machine about the whole thing. It is also OK to be an object, I mean we are. It’s about freedom and options.
But man the work and money going into this shit is just incredible. An absolutely amazing, very funny documentary on a facet of this in the US black community is Good Hair,
If you follow the link you may think it is a Chris Rock comedy, but it’s a documentary, and the money these black women put into their hair. I mean, it makes me wanna cry. But the thing is very funny.
I’ve seen this gif before, I just can’t remember where or why. But, both times, I’ve asked myself, “Who’s the speaker?” I don’t think I’ve ever seen her identified, which means I can’t judge her credentials.
Is she speaking for me? I don’t think so. I never use make-up and I never looked for a partner who only saw the ‘outside’ of a woman–as a matter of fact, I eschewed those men. A lasting relationship isn’t built on the ephemeral.
Choosing a life-partner isn’t about sex or the ability to create any sort of ‘superior’ off-spring. It’s about finding someone who thinks the way you think. That doesn’t mean s/he thinks what you think. That would be pretty boring, wouldn’t it?
Growth comes from a blending of thought that gives each individual a somewhat different way of looking at the world–neither person is ‘right’ and neither is ‘wrong.’ Together, both may learn to live.
I also wondered why the speaker, a woman, was photographed with a kitchen as the background. 
That IS what I said.
You are absolutely wrong. It is exactly about creating a superior off spring. Don’t you know anything about evolution?
The thing is, you don’t consciously think “how can I create a superior off spring”. But the things we find sexy, the traits we like all those things are indicators drummed into us by evolution. Indicators of health, physical fitness, fertility and so forth.
So, like the girl said in the video, woman wear heels because small feet are correlated with high estrogen levels which of course means fertility.
The fact that they are not consciously aware of this fact doesn’t mean that is not the reason they do it.
She identifies herself in the first sentence of the video. It’s a bit hard to make out but if you watch to the end you will see the name of the poster. She is ‘girlwriteswhat’.
Google her or you can read some of her other stuff here :
owningyourshit.blogspot.ca/
Lizbeth is absolutely right. You’re conflating evolution as some ‘everything’ answer. It is more than true that evolution pre-disposes a great deal of human behavior. It is also true that enculturation plays an equal role, but sentience trumps both -ie- we can think, and we can make choices.
I have no idea where the high estrogen/small feet thing comes from. Care to point to the scientific studies that establish this as fact? If this little nugget had veracity, it should have been in a science journal, not in some glamour magazine.
Your ignorance of evolutionary psychology is glaring but not unexpected.
Here is one more little “nugget” for you:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqTbwMmwGlw[/youtube]
It’s discussed in this (very interesting) book, ‘The Evolutionary Biology of Human Female Sexuality’: