Does a woman’s desire to be attractive contain a submissive element?
Is it acceptable to objectify women et al? Or for them to objectify themselves? Would we be more or less ‘human’ if we didn’t objectify people?
If we did change then wouldn’t we still be here, still falling and failing in some ways, and being happy and successful in others. Would we not look back upon the days when we used to objectify others and make them be submissive, in a similar way to how we see racism and sexism in the 1970’s?
…but WE would still be here, being human simply moves on a stage.
Are there areas where it is and is not appropriate?
For example; you take a lady to dinner, during which at some point you caste your eyes down upon her breasts, you then look up at her eyes and it is as if they ‘glow’ a little more than before. If you stared at her breast, that would be leering ~ purely seeing the sexual object for as long as that moment lasts, and would be inappropriate. Why? Because the person is fundamentally a subjective consciousness in a perspective based informational universe. The physical world is that and isn’t a world without subjectivity i.e. A world aside from the subjective perspective based one ~ there is not that world of oneness.
To respect that is surely just to understand what we and the world are, to reject it, is to spend ones time focussing upon illusions presented as here in the form of objectification. It is however a normal function of the intellect, to objectify everything in the world! Naturally a balance is required and that is what being an intelligent gentleman is about.
There are levels to this.
There is constant as in someone treats all women/men as mere objects/property to no one as such.
Either extreme is insulting to egos. We now have older women objectifying young men. Cougars, an extreme and as of now, joked about. They are as bad as their male counterpart.
A full relationship though must or will have objectifying naturally. Mates use each other as well as share and help. Balance is achieved by emotional attachment and upbringing.
I agree, and I want to get to the reasons why it is abusive, even if that sense is a ‘mere emotion’ or whathaveyou.
Why does objectification evoke an emotional response, that of insult? Is it the inferred or actual ignoring of the consciousness/*personhood [*experiential value of consciousness]?
Can you elaborate? what emotions would be felt etc.
Let me ask you a question or two:
Have you ever tried to impress anyone?
Were you accepted, rejected or ignored?
Finally : Do you understand that the seemingly simple act of trying to impress another for whatever reason makes you an object?
Elaborating on abuse or emotions for you will be easier if I know what you understand about interaction.
Yes i try [well I don’t really have to ] to impress somewhat and have experienced the range of relative emotions etc.
Yes, and i know that i and others feel as if to emotionally ‘shrivel up’ [feel rejected, disgusted, ashamed, demeaned etc.], when negative emotions concerning that manifest ‘object’ occur.
Projecting oneself as an object means that the object can then be affected; raised up or put down, but if we don’t do that we get neither perhaps?
People are also attracted or put off by personhood and other such impressions concerning the self. In my experience women get turned on more by the ‘impact’ of the person, who they are how they act and such things, than by the sexual and other visual ‘objects’.
Men are kinda the opposite and get off on the ‘impact’ of the impression of attractiveness and sexual attractiveness of a woman. Naturally both sexes do both, though most fall into similar mathematical groups similar to observed [majoritively].
Can we not reasonably ask if ‘you as a sexual object’ is any different to ‘you as the personhood’? As they are both equally metaphoric ‘objects’, the sexual object is inherently no more demeaning than the non-sexual object.
The causal root of the issue is societal and in the way we treat one another rather than to objectify one another.
I’ve heard this from a lot of lesbians, but not gay men… when I call them a lesbian, they get angry at being put in a category, even though they are only attracted to women and not men. In general men don’t mind being objectified, they are generally subjectified on how big of an asshole they are, which is a positive for women… so men generally take female subjectification with a grain of salt. Women, with their denial system, don’t like to be objectified as people who only pick assholes, so they get very uncomfortable with labels. Actually women, by only picking assholes, basically only makes them objects to men… their own psychology just turns them into people, from the male perspective that don’t have depth of character, but have pretty hair, eyes, breasts and legs etc… It’s a man’s attempt at trying to humanize a gender that dehumanizes the entire other gender.
I don’t think women only pick assholes, in my experience ‘they’ [dualistic approach?] prefer more bardic types, writers, artists, poets, singers etc. Its just that many women like straight-forwards chaps they can depend upon. I do wonder if the latter is due to their own weaknesses and fragility, same as being submissive. …and i worry that that panders to preditory consciousness.
I think both men and women need to be stronger, no?
Women choose conspicuous consumption aggression, so men who contradict themselves. You can’t use a pick-up line like, 'Did you know sexual stratification causes all the war and suicide in the world?" Women just walk away, but it’s actually the ONLY pick-up line that prevents these things. Women always go for the assholes, men who marry, men who are sexually possessive… etc… But let’s not get into that here too much. The issue is objectification, and women want to be objectified, and even if they don’t want to be, they become nothing more than objects to men because of their diminished capacity as psychopaths.
The issue is objectification, and women want to be objectified, and even if they don’t want to be, they become nothing more than objects to men because of their diminished capacity as psychopaths.
This is indeed the issue, men who have power over women become abusive in vary degrees. That’s why Arabs think more of their camels than their wives lol.
The intelligent way to act is thus respectfully and to not employ psychopathic consciousness [such philosophies] in both men and women!?
Some men and women would say fantasy enactment between consenting adults is ok, but surely role-playing is enforcing neural pathways? Equally, at any given time, the group of people ‘playing the psychopath game’ may begin as equal ~ one person submits to certain things, likes certain things etc, but as partners change then inevitably the once equal parties and values become incongruous.
“The causal root of the issue is societal and in the way we treat one another rather than to objectify one another”
Change treat to react. Reaction is a causal, not the only root though. Treating is not the only root.
I do have issue with people declaring a gender does this or that. Its a bit impossible to actually know. Look at how people get this “information” , TV, Media, casual conversation, vague studies designed to sell. To actually get a full picture, well over half the gender must be studied and followed. We are a bit more socially diverse then other animals . Women are this way men are that way. Bull. You buy into propaganda if you fall into this.
Unless the younger generations are finally falling for the molds. Possible, interesting thought and study.
Oh come on, who are we kidding here… we know men kill people more than women do for a fact. We also know men commit suicide more than women do, for a fact. We know women are raped more than men are raped by women, for a fact. We also know that like most species on this earth, women sexually stratify… that’s another fact. We also know that this like most species on this earth, goes towards conspicuous consumption aggression, that’s another fact.
So we know these facts.
But we know more facts than that… we know that if a man tells a woman that sexual stratification causes all the war and suicide in the world, that there’s no way he can get sex from her, every woman on earth. We also know that if women use this as a pick-up line it works extremely well. So we know that women are sexual psychopaths. Another fact.
The problem with women is they don’t like to be subjectified, because it gets really ugly really quick. We know men go through more trauma from sexual neglect than women do from rape because of the suicide rates. That’s another fact.
In fact we know that abuse through neglect is worse than positive forms of abuse and torture. That’s another fact. We can even put someone in sensory deprivation and cause more damage in a little amount of time, than you can with positive torture. We know these facts.
We know from this that women are committing genocide because of sexual psychopathy (all those male suicides)… another fact.
And to keep with the OP. Men tend to objectify women because they can’t psychologically handle subjectifying them… The male tendency to objectify women is to keep them sane, to humanize a gender of psychopaths, by giving them some human characteristics. When men subjectify women, they realize that women cause all the war and suicide in the world… and this is hard to take psychologically, that women are sub-human… so they focus on body parts to try to keep some semblance of sanity… women are literally robots, you can say the one sentence that prevents all the war and suicide in the world, and they just walk away from you. Men know this subliminally. The problem with men, is that they’re so pussy whipped, they don’t give a shit… so they won’t say this, to fit in socially and get sex.
Ahh… is this some type of Pascal’s wager. Be offended by the right thing and you win forever. Can you contradict that? It’s the same as the free speech argument James.
I don’t think we are men or women, i think consciousnesses are the same. The body isn’t though, except for worms etc. Imho we cant ignore traits based in our sex, but if they will dominate us if we don’t understand them ~ which isn’t to dismiss them. To me such traits are as changeable as putting a dress or trousers on, the problem is perhaps where we let the world dress us up instead of taking control.
I find this type of thinking contradictory… that we are both the same in consciousness, yet our bodies are different. I’m used to communicating with spirits and the spirit world, and they are about as different as you can get…
The facts are that if you tell any woman on planet earth, “sexual stratification causes most the suicide and all the war” they will walk away from you, or if they don’t, definitely not have sex with you, even though it’s the only sentence on the whole face of the earth that prevents war and suicide ack!!! If women use this line on men, it actually works really well. Those are SOUL differences.
] to impress somewhat and have experienced the range of relative emotions etc.