General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWill men ever start seeing woman as people first, sex objects last?
This topic really bothers me. I'm old now so men don't see me as a sexual person any more. It's a huge relief.
But I see stuff every day. Every day where women are seen as sexual objects first. In every field. In every movie. And ridiculed if they don't live up to this unbelievably obsured standard. Is she pretty? Does she have a "great bod."
Doesn't seem to matter what a woman does - lots of smarts, lots of education, lots of everything. Wonderful person. It doesn't matter. In the end it's always whether she is viewed as "hot."
It is so depressing. Sometimes I wish women would all just say "fuck this shit." And go back to wearing long dresses with long sleeves and high necks.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Or is the vast majority of interactions the sort you describe?
Bryant
vanbean
(990 posts)objects. Especially with the so-called fundamentalists which are really the mainstream of the conned and cons of that sorry group.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)There are some that fit that description, unfortunately, but plenty that don't.
Bryant
Iggo
(47,549 posts)
snooper2
(30,151 posts)
As witnessed here-
I'm deluded and I know it
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)one thing I have always admired about men their body confidence...they all think they are sexy...no matter what.
12 men and 12 women were asked to disrobe and describe what they see in a full length mirror. Each woman had a long laundry list of what she didn't like about her body...even one that would be considered model material...but the men...OMG...every single one said something along the lines "Well I am balding....but I have great biceps so I'm hot" or "Yeah I am getting kind of fat...but other than that...I rock". etc etc etc. Each could only see one flaw...but that didn't seem to make them feel less attractive at all unlike the women...who tore themselves a new one.
I have admired this about men ever since.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)She is 50+, weighs 175, has an unremarkable figure and by most standards overweight. She has a pleasant pretty face. But she is proud of herself, and somehow projects it. Always has men buzzing around. Women half her age and possessed of far "better looks" are often puzzled. I'm not.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)(I am including myself in this category as a former anorexic).
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Most of the female images in media are unrealistic, because insecurity and appearance issues are big big moneymakers. It takes a lot of deprogramming to get away from that.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Some reason, there is a disarming aspect as well. I include myself in the numbers of men who are not threatened by women with power, and should they (as many do) take a liking to men, that power becomes attractive. This is a topic deserving of more exploration.
Make no mistake, though. There are plenty of men who hold themselves "unworthy" because of looks, and some vague lack of power (potency?) as well.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)
demosincebirth
(12,536 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)We are expected by both women specifically and society in general, which means expected in practical terms, to act as sexual aggressors. Our assigned to stalk and bring down the sexual 'Tiger' -- in a manner of speaking -- and this demands confidence. In this, reminding yourself of all the reasons you might fail is counter productive. A man is as aware of his physical flaws as any women, and he can no-doubt list off a hundred more than no observer could ever see, but he either thrusts them aside and goes hunting anyway or he isn't finding a mate.
Further, men have grown to understand that this act is, in itself, attractive. His sexual prey appreciates at least the appearance of confidence and power and wealth. From my practical experience, I believe that these factors are MORE important than physical beauty.
As a man I would rather be fat in the belly and wallet and ego, than trim and timid and poor. The former is getting a mate at WILL, the later -- unless he is genetically gifted with extraordinary beauty -- is sitting at home playing World of Warcraft.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)this is why there are so few male anorexics. Yes there are some...but not nearly as many....Men are not trained to believe they should measure up to such an unattainable goal of "beauty" as men....not even close. We are started out with "fashion" dolls that tell us we are not good enough unless we look like this doll that would not even be able to stand up much less walk.
Why do you think the new backlash against "pink princess" aisle's in Toy Stores is going on?
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)and did treat me like a person, though some have assured me they were secretly thinking about it, etc. But they didn't seem to me that way.
Nothing gets men treating women like people than having a daughter. That seems to work.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)There is no all-encompassing "men" acting in absolute unison. Get real!
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)These OPs are meant to cause food fights.
We use to call them flame bait. Now they pass as general discussion.
You could say the sky is blue and grass is green and get attacked. That's why these people are on this board. They are self centered bullies pretending to be honest educators of the rest of us.
My suggestion is put them on ignore.
You are correct. They don't want to get along. They do it to get a rise our of their targets, to have fun, the potential to get in some digs against men.
The sad part is, many of them are like that in real life and those that have children, which is most of them, teach their children to be the same way they are. The children quite often grow up to disrespect the the other gender. That disrespect, when handled down to their children, gets reinforced when their own relationships/marriages do not work in the long term. In other words it runs in the families and because that is all they know, they think it is normal.
Skip A Rope Henson Cargill Lyrics
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)lessons in C&W music.
Marr
(20,317 posts)+1.
I'd add that they seem to have a serious narcissistic streak, since they seem to delight into turning a board that's frequented by hundreds or thousands into a shit-flinging hangout for six people-- like a table with a few obnoxious loudmouths in an otherwise nice restaurant.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)The nakedness of the trolling is quite breathtaking.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Same tired divide and conquer crap, different day.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)holy hell would break loose. Nothing more than flinging poop.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)it is somewhere back many millions of years ago in the evolution to playing baseball and football 
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Which is not to say that they do so ALL the time; but there's that cultural... and maybe hardwired.... proclivity. No?
Example: who do men KILL ...in the vast majority of cases?
Other men.
No?
hughee99
(16,113 posts)Drew2510
(70 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)And some Xtians, and Quakers, and a bunch of other mythical belief systems...
If your god gave you sexy body parts why you got to cover them up!
I live in a place where there are lots and lots of Mormons and as near as I can tell, they dress just like you or I, except for the underwear that many devout Mormons probably wear.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Modesty and grace in dressing are expected of Mormon women when attending church and related Mormon functions. It is very easy to achieve modesty and still remain fashionable. If you already have a wardrobe, you can probably recombine it and end up with something appropriate. You will be wearing a skirt and a matching shirt, or a dress, with appropriate shoes.
Know what to avoid.
Skirts or dresses that are too short. If the skirt is two inches above the knee then it is too short.
Clothing that is too tight. Clothes don't have to be overly baggy or ill-fitting to be "modest", but they should not cling to your body. It can be fitted but if the cloth has to stretch for you to put your hand under it, it's a bit too tight.
Shirts that are see-through. Pair these with a modest t-shirt or other top underneath if you wish to wear them. Use your best judgment.
Sleeveless shirts. Capped sleeves are okay, just no halter tops, or shirts with straps.
Any shirt that is too low cut in the front or back. Also, it is inappropriate to wear t-shirts with slogans on them, especially to church. Also, don't wear any garments that have lots of skin showing or bra backs or straps.
Drew2510
(70 posts)when attending church or other Morman functions. But not as daily dress, at least not around here.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)They dress to attract them
cinnabonbon
(860 posts)avoid being blamed for being raped. See also: slut shaming, "she was asking for it" and all the lovely things people say about victims of sexual assault. It is almost enough to make a woman think she'll go through hell if she dresses the way she thinks is flattering.
Changes in appearance are not necessarily to attract men, it can also be survival instinct.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)isn't that "blaming the victim"? The women didn't do anything wrong, why should she have to change ANYTHING?
cinnabonbon
(860 posts)that treats victims horribly based on rules such as "what was she wearing?", you internalize that message. Then you fall into the trap of "dressing modestly and being a good girl", because that way you can avoid the "rapist lurking in the bushes" that everyone tells you about. It's a trap, unfortunately.
Because at the same time, no one warns you that most rapes happens in your home, by people you know. So it doesn't matter what you wear, or how many precautions you take. In the end, the only thing that keeps you safe from being raped is a lack of a rapist.
It's a screwed up society, and women do what they can to survive in it. Some will see what other women go through for something as simple as a miniskirt, and then they'll be scared of being the next target.
But you know what? I agree with you. Women shouldn't have to change the way they express themselves. That's why we're being so critical of rape apologists and those who victim blame. If we take enough steps, maybe some day we'll be able to make a society that is better, that doesn't blame survivors for the crimes done to them.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)in order to manipulate others for material gain. (And I say that as a gay man.)
So if a man plays her game, what is the harm in that?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Lovely.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)at anyone who posts a divergent viewpoint?
Far from lovely, it seems like you have a sad life. (which, I guess, is where the 'tragedy' comes in.)
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)they engage in petty, adolescent personal attacks based on their imagination.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)not a thesis dissertation. If all you have are snipes, I'm done with you.
You disagree with me, I get it. Anything else? 
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)And not credible.
Last words is yours.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)"So, in your view, sexual harassment and objectification is women's fault."
is a petty personal insult.
We all realize that you believe hormones and sexual interplay between genders is 'icky', but you don't have to be so insulting towards those who merely relay obvious facts.
Many, many women dress to attract men. That is an indisputable fact. Many other women use their looks and sexuality to exploit and gain from men, another fact. Hormones are at the root of such behaviors. I realize that you find these truths to be 'icky' but we live in reality.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the definition.
Also, this:
is a lie. My private beliefs and life experience on men-women relations are completely unknown to you. Anyone who says they "know" what I believe about sex is an ignorant asshat. Failing to subscribe to misogynist myths about women is not a sign that someone hates sex. Refusing to excuse bad behavior as 'hormones' rather than bad behavior is not a sign that someone hates sex.
Women dress for a variety of reasons as do men. But, it is very curious that you somehow find a way to put all the blame on women, or hormones, but never on men for acting like assholes.
Telling.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Nobody has assigned blame except you.
Your issue is not with me, it's with those 'icky' hormones!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)excused.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...and these facts are pointed out, you lash out.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)harassment in the workplace?
Caused by gender inequities, or just inevitable hormonal fun?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Sexual anything is rooted in hormones. Sexual harassment goes both ways.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)have this thing called 'culture' in addition to hormones. You may want to expand your horizons and contemplate whether the phenomenon of 'culture' plays a role beyond that of chemicals.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)because that woo went out at least 50 yrs ago. Objectification is a behavior based on the notion that women are less than human.
There is nothing biological about treating women as less than human. Moreover, it is guaranteed to make a guy strike out. Men that behave grossly toward women in public have no interest in having sex with them, probably because they know they don't stand a chance in hell anyway. Their goal is to harass and intimidate. That some think there is something biological or natural about what is clearly learned, anti-social behavior is absurd. Men who actually have sex with women get to know them, form relationships, and have sex as part of those relationships.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)AND sexual attraction will always be there. It goes both ways, both men and women do it. It will always make people do stupid things. Both men and women make fools of themselves in this realm. We have just learned how to recognize and deal with it better (anti-harassment laws and such), but it will always be there.
As for the OP, it paints too broad a brush.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Last edited Thu Jan 9, 2014, 12:13 AM - Edit history (1)
People choose to do stupid things. Each of us is responsible for our own behavior. To claim otherwise is nothing but a cop out.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)It is tied to the urge to procreate, which is tied to hormones
Estrogen + testosterone = foolishness/stupidity/flirting/babies
Of course the human race would come to an end if the biological urge wasn't there, but the behavior would stop.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)But they are related, according to you.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)You are the one who continues to insist there is something "natural' and "biological" about treating women as less than human. Certainly such behavior is stupid, and most significantly it is something done by exceedingly stupid people.
What I have clearly said is that human sexuality is something that is shared. It is consensual. Harassment and sexual assault are not. No biological factors justify predatory behavior, nor does that behavior have anything to do with human sexuality. It is an effort by the perpetually pathetic to assert power over women they know would never go near them with a 1000 foot pole. Biology doesn't explain why some spend their time ogling and harassing women on the street and watching porn instead of actually having sex with real live human beings. In fact, those are the men least likely to procreate.
Where in your little theory do homosexuals sit? You insist everything is about procreation, yet gay people form loving, sexual relationships with no biological urge to procreate. Old people no longer able to procreate have sex. Most people consider that normal, healthy sexual behavior, whereas objectification, harassment, and assault are not.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)I do not believe that asking a woman out on a date is treating them less than human. I believe it is normal, and it will always be. Same goes for women coming on to men. That is my position. I also believe that it is normal for men and women to dress with the intent of being attractive to the opposite sex THIS is NORMAL behavior, that is all I am saying. There is nothing dirty or icky or bad or weird or wrong with it. It is normal and it will always be normal. Sexual harassment is an entirely different issue.
This statement: "Biology doesn't explain why some spend their time ogling and harassing women on the street and watching porn instead of actually having sex with real live human beings." ...is flat out weird, has nothing to do with anything discussed here, and comes across as if you don't like men period.
I don't have any theories. I just pointed out a few simple basic facts. Homosexuals also have hormones and sex urges, just like heterosexual men AND women. Oh, and I have never insisted that 'everything is about procreation'.
What is "natural" and "biological" are sex hormones, estrogen and testosterone. Estrogen makes women feminine, and testosterone makes men masculine. Pretty basic stuff there.
Hope that cleared it up for ya!
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Drew Richards
(1,558 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I've met the person to whom you did that in real life and they do not deserve it.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)intervention in this discussion that you take zero issue with the nastiness they offered up, which would make this a case of you sticking up for a friend, not judging things objectively or adhering to any kind of principle regarding appropriate behavior.
While I generally respect what you write here, you are not giving me any reason to care what you say in connection with this.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)you became the person who is at fault here.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)means you have no credibility in your self-appointed role as Internet Referee.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I'm not a referee and I'm not impartial.
And you are still wrong.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)besides "leave my friend alone, you big meanie" I feel comfortable letting you have the last word.
Scout
(8,624 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)At Wed Jan 8, 2014, 11:47 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Do you do nothing else with your life than troll DU, sniping
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024298093#post34
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
Over the top incivility. This is the type of unprovoked rudeness that makes DU suck.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Nov 25, 2013, 06:39 AM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: There is no need to be mean to people, especially with everything the Greeks are going through right now.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It seemed like a valid question, are you just on DU because your life sucks?
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: I don't like the edit history, if you have to edit your post you must have something to hide.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I want to see more of these two going at it. This could be a classic sub-thread! Vote to leave it alone we can't have one person banned from the thread.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I like mustard
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)there has to be some kind of conspiracy here...
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)voted to leave it just because he or she wanted to watch the dirt fly. That was pretty damn funny.
Sissyk
(12,665 posts)At Wed Jan 8, 2014, 11:32 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Do you do nothing else with your life than troll DU, sniping
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4298480
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
Rude personal attack.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jan 8, 2014, 11:38 AM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Rude personal attack? But deserved and true.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: A little aggressive, but not enough to purge.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I'm not complaining, or asking for royalties, or anything. Verily, indeed the master teaches that the great work seeks no fame, or credit... it merely does its business, nameless, and hence moves on like the wind in the night.
Still.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Realistic answer: No
Men will never stop judging women based on their evolutionary mental checklist, and looks/youth are pretty much #1 for men. Though I disagree that women are judged on looks alone as there are other qualities that are judged.
Saying "Can't men just stop?" or "When will women get fed up?" is like asking when the sun will stop making summers so dang hot. Every beast in the wild plays the mating game and we're no exception despite our relatively high intelligence, and it's been that way since the first lifeforms.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)Anyways, please stop with these ridiculous anecdotal generalizations.
Seriously though, when will women stop appreciating me for my sense of humor and friendliness and just see me as a sex object. It's so rude!!
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)in the transmission shop any more), males of pair-bonding age haven't magically evolved out of their stupidity, and marketers know how to work that.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Funny, that.
DavidDvorkin
(19,473 posts)The OP that started all of this should have been killed. If it had been an equivalent attack against women, it would have been.
demwing
(16,916 posts)
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)Problem is that most women don't see that there is a real problem here until they are older and look back. And then you think,"How could I have been such a sucker."
I don't think it's a dumb topic at all. I put up DU and I get all these insipid ads with women in basically nothing rolling aound in provocative poses. It's gross. It's like Roger Ailes offering employees $100 a week for sex? Jeezuz! That is so tacky. (If it really happened). Think how those women must have felt. Here they are working at their job, thinking they were hired because they are smart and good at what they do. And then some boss that you think respects you for your work comes up and wants sex. Lord. That would be so upsetting.
Can you tell that pissed me off just a tad?
demwing
(16,916 posts)completely ridiculous.
I admit that it happens to women more than it happens to men. Much more, and from an earlier age on, but it's not surprising, nor is it exclusive to any gender.
Reproduction is essential, sex (fortunately) is fun, and so we tend to look at each other with some degree of sexualization taking place. Not always, but often.
It's natural to some degree, but when it drives decisions and actions that don't fall within the realm of reproduction, then it's superficial and pathetic.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)and it's time to blame men. 
athena
(4,187 posts)A man can be extremely sexy or attractive, but he will still be taken seriously in a business meeting. The same is not true for women.
demwing
(16,916 posts)An overweight guy with bad hair will get taken less seriously than a guy that looks like an Abercrombie and Fitch model, at least initially.
Do women not do similar things? Are women not also prone to seek out business and social relationships with attractive people?
B Calm
(28,762 posts)or how tall I was when I was out on the town. So yes, in my opinion women do it too!
Sissyk
(12,665 posts)Old and happily married with a wonderful sex life. The last thing I think about when seeing those pictures are brains and work ethic.
We can take things too far. There is nothing wrong with finding the opposite, or same, sex attractive. Nothing. People don't work that hard to have brick house, knockout bodies just to look in the mirror.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Typically type seeks type. Guys who shop for clothes at the Big and Tall store don't often find themselves spending down time with the Abercrombie and Fitch crowd.
I'm guessing women make similar distinctions, right?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I admit, I considered it.
Sissyk
(12,665 posts)My phone or ipad doesn't have one of those scanner thingies. really!
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)I don't think so.
Oh, I imagine there are lots of men out there who insist they see women as PEOPLE first, but I don't believe them. Not for a second. Unless they're gay. Then, of course, they're not going to view women in a sexual way.
We're dealing with biology here. The urge to mate with nubile females...to propagate and carry on the species... trumps the urge to ask the question, "Hmm...I wonder if she likes Gregorian Chants".
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)I know I do.
And I like Gregorian Chant.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Mr Pipi that if anything ever happened to him, I would take in a roommate who's a gay man.
Absolutely.
Oh, and I like Gregorian Chant, too
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Perhaps not relevant when men first evolved or were culturally swayed to flash on big butts. Modern urban society in which peope still physically mix is still remarkably impersonal. In situations like these men have little BUT sexual appeal to go on with all the traffic going by.
I have attended lectures, watched shows, been on fora, listened to docents, etc. in which women exhibit a whole range of skills, talents and good characteristics. And I've been around intelligent and physically attractive women who were very unappealing. Regardless, the situations are not casual, wholly informal, or all that common.
The overwhelming settings in which I interact with women are almost public and in passing. There is little to hear, and even less opportunity to broach a topic like Is There Life After Post Modernism.
But you still have eyes.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)Yes, there is life after Post Modernism, and to hell with Derrida.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Quite a misandrist statement there.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)and read my post, and nowhere in it did I ever state that biology "made men superficial assholes".
Nor did I even allude to that idea.
Biology is what it is.
If you think men who act in accordance to the way biology made them are "superficial assholes", then that's your deal, not mine. Because I never said, nor suggested it.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)From your post:
We're dealing with biology here. The urge to mate with nubile females...to propagate and carry on the species... trumps the urge to ask the question, "Hmm...I wonder if she likes Gregorian Chants".
1. Statutory rape is assholish behavior. Fantasizing about fucking 14 year old girls is creepy, not hormonal.
2. Straight men are fully capable of interacting with women in the workplace, and in the classroom, by thinking of them as human beings, not fuck toys.
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)[quote]
1. Statutory rape is assholish behavior. Fantasizing about fucking 14 year old girls is creepy, not hormonal. [/quote]
You got THAT out of him using the word "nubile"?!
[quote]nubile (ˈnjuːbaɪl)
(of a girl or woman) adj
1. ready or suitable for marriage by virtue of age or maturity
2. sexually attractive
[C17: from Latin nūbilis, from nūbere to marry][/quote]
Reading WAAAAAAAAAAY too much into the use of that word--just because Nabokov used it to describe a 14-year-old doesn't mean that's the definition or how it's being used HERE. Jeezum crackers.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)its primary meaning as used in the past quarter century has been reserved for girls and young women
note that he said "nubile females" not "nubile women"
choice of term that includes girls
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...and it makes certain of them assholes. It also does same for women.
...and life goes on...
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...they happen not to be superficial. They don't go to the gym to look good, nor do they dress in any fashionably attractive way.
Personally, I sometimes catch myself puffing out my chest a little bit when my wife enters the room, and I work out at the gym regularly AND enjoy it when women take notice, so I guess I belong in some subset of the superficial category.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)I just gave a couple relevant examples. If I were to give every possible example, It would probably take me a year. I can't do that because I have to work and eat and sleep and stuff.
Shandris
(3,447 posts)...the answer to your question is so obvious as to make me wonder why you would ask it.
YES.
It is the very essence of superficial. If you (generic) weren't superficial, then you would not care one whit about how others will interpret your appearance or the manner of dress. The only important question, however, is how much superficialness is too much, since most people are somewhat superficial (and anyone social is, by definition -- social settings don't give one shit about whether or not you've read Descartes or have pondered the rise of transhumanism, they care if you conform to the social environment and have something interesting and useful to offer).
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)to make themselves feel good--wear a certain tie because it makes them feel confident, etc.
Women don't get all glammed up at their own weddings because they're looking for mates.
Shandris
(3,447 posts)I think some amount of superficiality is healthy, good, expected, and intended. I would find someone who is -completely- unsuperficial to be very creepy and, well, downright anti-social. I would also point out I never spoke of doing it to look for mates, only to fit into societal interplay/norms/expectations. I will most certainly get glammed up at -my- wedding without looking for a mate; everyone else will be too, so I'd like to fit in somewhat!
That's why I was a bit curious about the nature of the question -- it seems (to me) like such an obvious thing, but I suppose there probably is a fine line between what I call 'little superficiality' and others call 'no superficiality'. To me, Ted Kaczynski would be someone with 'no superficiality', and I'm quite certain none of us want to emulate him.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)elevating hotness over character and intelligence in assessing another human being's worth would be.
my take anyways
quaker bill
(8,224 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Drew Richards
(1,558 posts) haele
(12,647 posts)I think it's really a cultural issue that is exacerbated by personal motivations.
Men and Women who have a strong affinity towards visual stimulation will see both others and themselves as sex objects far more quickly and easily than men and women who do not have that affinity.
How they act upon that stimulation is based on both their cultural upbringing and their personal maturity.
People who see themselves as the center of the universe rather than acknowledging the existence of other people who might have their own motivations and desires will never see other men or women as more than animated objects to be exploited for their own pleasure or gain.
Haele
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)It objectifies women and now girls.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Good men do it quite frequently. First reaction, before any other thought:
Hot? Or not?
It's dead men who don't do it..
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Judging every woman by "hot or not" is maybe something teenage boys do. Not mature men.
The decent ones aren't the ones with a problem.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)all you have to go on is the superficial. You can't see thoughts in someone else's brain. You can see the face, the eyes, the legs, the hair, etc.
You can become attracted to someone once you get to know them after not being physically attracted to them initially. You can no longer be attracted to someone after getting to know them. But the superficial has to be first. Even if it's just for a moment. You don't know a stranger as a person. We can't escape that. Not as long as we're limited physical beings.
When we're all uploaded to a collective supercomputer which will have no need for male or female, things will change. Until then, people judge a strange book by the cover.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)It's a mix of both.
The first thing you see when you meet someone is their physical body. If you're initially attracted to them, you'll treat them differently. That can change in many ways later on, or not, but we can't escape the superficial at the start. It's all there is to go on until the other person allows you to talk with them.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)As someone who's married and lacking the motivation to seek out other sexual partners, I don't treat people differently based on their 'fuckability.'
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Or did you already know the person that is your spouse before you met them?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)made it pretty uncomplicated for me. instant chemistry
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)
fishwax
(29,149 posts)
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Stop trying to shirk your responsibility, bud.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)not boobs and vaginas
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)"It is so depressing. Sometimes I wish women would all just say "fuck this shit." And go back to wearing long dresses with long sleeves and high necks."
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)But, honestly, if you go to work wearing a skirt that is 5 inches long, or have your boobs hanging out, you really can't expect people not to notice your legs or your boobs. But I don't think most women dress like that at work anyway.
I guess what I'm thinking is that men still controll almost every aspect of the business world. Women are never going to have a chance to do what they can do, to be what they can be, as long as they are just seen as someone with a good ass.
athena
(4,187 posts)Please see my other post on this thread for where I stand on the clothing issue. (To summarize my other post, the problem isn't with the way women dress; it's with men's insistence to see women as objects. Focusing on women's clothing blames the victim.)
But I disagree that there is nothing a woman can do. I personally know women who got fed up with the sexism in the corporate world and started their own businesses. You may not be able to break through the glass ceiling working for someone else, but you can gain a huge amount of independence working for yourself, on your own terms. So focus on gaining skill or expertise in an area where there is a need for skilled people. Then go and start your own business. Society can slow you down to a certain extent, but it can't stop you completely. (If it could, we would still be living in the 1950s.)
hughee99
(16,113 posts)
libodem
(19,288 posts)Habit. Hee hee get it?
You don't hear about too many sisters being raped? They down play any features that declare their female-ness. Just sayin'.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...and wish to impose their disdain for such upon all women.
Scout
(8,624 posts)and wish to impose their disdain for such upon all men.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...they aren't posting OPs to that effect on DU on a daily basis.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)It takes time to know someone and admire them for the person they are.
Xyzse
(8,217 posts)I am sorry to say this, but that is probably true.
Thing is, even women look at other women and the physical is very important and in some ways more critical(ok, maybe not critical but more in detail as to judgment).
They look at skin, bust, clothes, teeth, hair, and many other cues.
As a guy, I notice skin, voice, shape/fitness and so forth. I also take in the smells.
The only way that people would probably not think of the physical first, is if they meet first online, or just read about them without a picture. Otherwise, a person automatically makes a mental checklist on the physical characteristics of a person.
There is a reason for this. The human body tends to react physically before the mind even registers and points out the reasons for them. The feedback from the body shapes the thought process. So, even if we don't want to, sometimes the thoughts come unbidden, before it is slammed shut, hopefully never to see the light of day.
So, if you're asking about initial physical meeting, no, I don't think so.
It is the thoughts, actions and views after the first few minutes and in the long run, that is important.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)People perceive each other under a galaxy of circumstances, so you can't say exactly when they will think what. When it comes to media, that ain't real. People notice beautiful people of both sexes. Advertisers use it as a way to get attention. Kill your television, you'll feel better.
The idealization of the human form is not new, and it will never end.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
Mr Dixon
(1,185 posts)Signs point to know and that’s is unfortunate, the Cavemen mentality has continued for centuries but I image that it is better than 60 years ago which is not saying much.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)Both define female sexuality primarily as it exists in relation to the male gaze.
Either as an ornament put on display for public consumption, or hidden away from public view.
Neither is especially empowering for women.
athena
(4,187 posts)It bothers me, too.
Ages ago, when I was a grad student in a male-dominated field, I felt this way and always wore conservative clothing (not too tight and form-revealing, no low-cut necks, etc.). I thought I would be taken seriously that way. The result, unfortunately, was that I became a non-person. I wasn't a man, and I wasn't a woman, either. I began to resent that my male colleagues felt free to look sexy (in short sleeves that revealed their muscular arms, tight T-shirts that revealed their form, etc.) and were still taken seriously. So I stopped wearing clothes to hide myself. If someone can't take me seriously as a person, that's his problem. There is nothing I can do to change it.
My point is that wearing conservative clothes is not the answer. We need to change society so that more men see women as people first. And it's only men who can do this. If a man sees another man talk about a woman as a sex object, he should say something. But based on some of the responses to your OP (responses from people who are now on my ignore list, as I am not interested in the opinions of people who are so insensitive as to scold someone who merely stated how she feels about something), I am not hopeful that this will happen any time soon. Men benefit from this system, so they feel no incentive to change it.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...but many women ENJOY attention from men, looking sexy and they dress to accentuate their looks rather than hiding them.
Welcome to the wonderful world of sexuality and hormones! Enjoy your stay!
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Is not to be considered human beings.
You could actually try reading and understanding the OP. The OP didn't say there was anything wrong with physical attraction or sexuality. She said it bothered her that "men" (I would say some men) don't see women as human beings but rather as objects, not as people. It's really not that difficult of a concept to understand for anyone with any awareness of human rights, but the point isn't what women really think because that would require actually caring.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...and understanding my post, which lays out a few simple facts.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)You have no facts. You have no basis to know what women think, and you don't address the OP at all. It is really that difficult for you to distinguish between sexuality, which is SHARED, and objectification and dehumanization of women?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)"many women ENJOY attention from men, looking sexy and they dress to accentuate their looks rather than hiding them."
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)and that has NO relationship to what the OP said. She didn't say women didn't want to look nice. She is writing about men who treat women as objects rather than people. You have twice repeated that same point. Does that mean you support the MRA view that the fact women wear make up and try to look nice justifies objectification and refusing to treat women as actual human beings whose concerns matter?
Is it possible to find a woman attractive and treat her as a human being, just as it's possible to treat a woman as a human being when one doesn't find her attractive. All it requires is remembering the "human" part.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)simple, indisputable facts.
You don't like these facts, so you attempt to smear me.
"the only logical conclusion I can make is that you support the MRA view that the fact women wear make up and try to look nice justifies harassment and objectification."
Well, aren't you special?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Polonium hydride (PoH2) is a volatile liquid at room temperature prone to dissociation.[19] The two oxides PoO2 and PoO3 are the products of oxidation of polonium.
That has as much relevance to the OP as your point. That you think your point is relevant to the OP reveals a great deal.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Has nothing to do with sexual interplay between men and women, and hormones and junk! It is only about your agenda!
How could we all have missed that!
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)It's not my OP. I am continually astounded by the inability of some to distinguish shared sexuality from hostile or predatory behavior. I remain continually grateful for the distance of the internet.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Your ongoing attempts at derailing factual discussion and controlling what folks think/say in OPs on this subject speaks to your agenda.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Is that some men know they will never have any actual contact with these women so they see their own sexuality as limited to ogling and harassing women in public. Whereas we women know that kind of behavior doesn't result in sexual activity, at least not consensual sex. Men who are interested in actually meeting women know that sort of behavior is not only inappropriate, it doesn't get them any closer to actually meeting or having sex with a woman.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...someones life revolves around it, male AND female. Welcome to the wacky world of sexual interplay.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Striking out?
Despite your charges that I am derailing the discussion, you are determined to pretend this OP is about shared sexuality, when she clear states her concern is objectification. You consistently show an inability to distinguish sexuality and attraction that is shared from objectification and harassment. One is consensual; the other is not. If an interaction isn't consensual, it's not sex.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Making fools of themselves.
I point out a few relevant facts, you obviously don't like those facts, so you lash out at me.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)I'll give you this: you're relentlessly obtuse about your own objectification of women (and men, apparently?).
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)If men behaving inappropriately toward women is a result of biology, does that mean they can't help committing sexual assault? What about sexually motivated killing?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)it might even be persuasive if this were 1914.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)unfortunately I've known a few.
My mother was one of those women. Being able to say she had a husband was extremely important to her. That was a common attitude then. But that was 70 years ago.
I think we've made some progress since then. Not nearly enough.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Sweeping generalizations suck.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)I saw the stuff in the news about Roger Ailes offering female employees $100 a week to have sex with him. And my reaction was that it is never going to change for women. You go to school, you get to be really, really good at stuff, you do a great job and take great pride in what you do. And men just want to know if you are a good lay - hey, how about sex for $100 a week?
As long as there is that mindset out there in the business world women will never, ever get a fair shake.
I wasn't commenting anyones personal sexual life - that's their own personal shit. I could care less.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)by claiming "biology." Their "hormones" supposedly force them to be dirt bags. It's a cop out, an appeal to woo to justify oppression of women.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)how men think. I used to think I did, sorta.
It bothers me how many young women really don't have a clue about how dangerous predatory sociopaths can be. These are not normal men at all. They feel nothing for the women they seduce. And they are really, really dangerous. So, dress how you want but be smart about it. Don't go places alone. Don't leave your drinks alone. Never leave with someone you just met in a bar.
Just aside. That's why I wish young women would be more careful in how they dress. Not because I think there is anything "wrong" with it.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It doesn't necessarily mean they did it for men. They could be doing it for themselves, to show off, what have you. It does not mean they want sexual advances. And not from every man that sees them.
I don't think women actually enjoy that kind of obvious attention. They'd rather be spoken to first. Just because a woman dresses up and looks nice does not mean she wants advances right off the bat.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...as competition with other women, to see who is the hottest.
At least that's what I have been told by many of women over the decades.
Oh, and men coming on to women and asking them for dates and stuff is normal. Some don't like it, sometimes it is inappropriate, but it's still normal.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And I suppose if the woman does the choosing, and asks a man out, that's "throwing herself at him" and not proper, right?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)That is normal.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)why do some members of this forum feel the need to respond with condescension when asserting their pov?
Women enjoying attention from men, and vice versa, is a different issue from the pernicious objectification of women, wherein our intellects, our achievements, and our SELVES are secondary--or worse--to our 'looks.' And, with regards to online experiences of a similar manifestation of sexism: many of my posts are construed to be written by a man, especially when I've been brashly assertive (nee aggressive, when my responders realize I am a woman).
There are many good resources that can help you understand patriarchy, and the damages this arbitrary socio-cultural construct causes for both men and women. Perhaps you might read some of these resources? I suggest that you at least consider avoiding a defensive posture when attempting to refute sexist behaviors.
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)how other people view me.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)think of them, and start wearing and doing what they want.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the creepy guy getting a little too close on the commuter train, and the guys saying "give us a smile, baby" on the street.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)and start doing exactly as they please. You made it about individuals.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)some borg-like collective.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Sorry, no I'm ok, it's nothing, I always laugh like that for no reason... 
The OP asked a question. I answered. With no small amount of snark, either. For some reason you seem to think my suggestion is a bad one, and prefer to tout fear. Carry on, do.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)is far different.
Just like women aren't supposed to care about what random creeps do on the Internet or say on the street, etc. But, filters can only do so much.
At some point, the onus has to be on men.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I'll repeat- women should tell the opinion of the world to go to hell and do, act, be and dress exactly as they please. The rest of the world will adapt.
Gabby Giffords is going skydiving after a gunshot to the head. Zero fucks are being given by her. Now that's a role model, IMO. 
Your mileage may, of course, vary.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)and has been followed by guys in delivery trucks doing the slow drive behind her while offering comments on her anatomy
and has been subject to 'subway grinding'
oh yeah and raped in college.
I do not think 'just give zero fuck about strange men' will be convincing for her. about as convincing as 'it's just biology' to explain such behavior
she dresses as she feels appropriate.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)one rape
one molestation
two partner beatings
several encounters with That Guy on public transport
more cars following, stares, catcalls etc than I can possibly count
I dress exactly as I please, and live exactly as I please.
Carry on.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)if a female wants to dress to impress guys then she should have at it, if for herself same, if a guy wants to dress hiwever he wants then the same. this idea that people dont dress or want to look attractive to others for the purpose of attracting sexual partners is nuts.
B2G
(9,766 posts)It's not reality, and it's not the way most people interact in real life.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Men with wealth, or power, or fame, or men who are simply tall, or some combination thereof.
My post is just as big a sweeping generalization as yours, so I assume you get the point.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)see woman as people first, sex objects last? It also depends.
I understand your point as there are too many expectations put on people but I fear this deteriorating into another "us against them" thread in the DU gender wars.
I wish PEOPLE would see OTHER PEOPLE as PEOPLE first. I
athena
(4,187 posts)and immediately men attack her, either accusing her of over-generalizing, or carelessly dismissing her remarks. There is not a single man who has posted an understanding response, indicating interest in and respect for the OP's view. Indeed, this thread perfectly demonstrates what an unfriendly place DU is for women.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)Exactly right. The only things that appear to be missing are a recipe and some dick jokes.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Orrex
(63,203 posts)Unless it's about someone's personal health/life tragedy or a picture of a dog/cat, a wave of similar responses is almost guaranteed.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)Kaleva
(36,294 posts)athena
(4,187 posts)or "Nasty Remarks". That way, we'll know not to post here, hoping for thoughtful comments.
Kaleva
(36,294 posts)While it would be great if GD would be like you suggested in your earlier post, I've been a member since early 2008 and I've never seen it that way. It's more like "Poster beware" and from the comments made by old timers, I gather GD has always been a place where having a thick skin and a very positive opinion of oneself is highly recommended.
athena
(4,187 posts)I've been here since 2004, although I don't always visit every day; sometimes I stay away for months. Anyway, I always think of GD as the place to post things of general interest. I'll try to think of it as "General Lynching" from now on. 
redgreenandblue
(2,088 posts)... how about refraining from posting over-generalizing things?
athena
(4,187 posts)In her view, all men view women as sex objects first. The society we live in is so male-dominated that most of us women feel that we are not seen as human beings valued for aspects of ourselves other than our sexuality. The fact that one man out of a hundred may see us as a human being first, and a sexual being second, does not help very much. Chances are that one of your co-workers may see you as a human being, but if six others, as well as your boss, see you as a second-class citizen, you are still in a hostile, unfriendly, depressing environment.
So the knee-jerk attacks about how the OP is generalizing miss the point. Many men take such discussions so personally, and are so easily offended, that they miss the entire point being made. A post by a woman stating that she feels objectified is not an attack on you. It would be much more productive to consider to point seriously than to take it personally.
redgreenandblue
(2,088 posts)Even in the case that one has a legitimate grievance concerning a member or multiple members of a certain group.
Even if there are statistics that show that a certain problem exists in a significant manner within
a certain group X, assuming that a person belonging to this group is affected by this problem or
even assuming that a person should necessarily care about this problem or have an opinion on it
by virtue of belonging to the group, is usually considered to be bigotry.
A concrete example: I once dated a woman from Russia. I was subsequently informed by "concerned"
people that she is probably a gold-digger and wants my citizenship, based on stereotypes that
these people believed in. I rebutted this. As it later turned out, she was in fact a gold-digger and after
my citizenship. Does this mean the stereotype is true, or should be peddled. Shit no. Do I have the right
to go around and complain about "gold digging Russian women". Hell no. That would be bigotry.
People peddled the same stereotype about the sister of the woman I was dating, and it is deeply unfair in that case
because she happens to be one of the sweetest and honest people ever (no, I am not dating her...).
Likewise, people correctly recognize statements such as "black people should reject gangster rap culture" as
bigoted. How are "men should reject rape culture" or "men care only about sex" different?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)It's also quite a bit heteronormative - I don't think many gay men view women as sex objects first.
Well, declaring that all men do it means it is a personal attack - I fit into her gender stereotype.
Doesn't mean she does not have a point. Just means overgeneralizing isn't a good way to discuss that point.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Last edited Wed Jan 8, 2014, 02:57 PM - Edit history (1)
and sought to justify treating women as objects rather than human beings. If you try to look nice, that must mean you like being ogled and harassed. If you don't want to be harassed, wear a burka, as someone said here not too long ago.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)It's part of the OP. Take it up with the OP.
Response to athena (Reply #56)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)Du just isn't a friendly place anymore, from either side.
Scout
(8,624 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)It's an overgeneralization on a topic (what men think) about which the OP is wholly ignorant .
I have one datapoint from which to extrapolate, but that is still 100% more datapoints than the OP has.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)I kind of wondered how many of these reponses were from men. Who probably don't see this as an important topic at all.
It is to me.
It has been my observation that most women who join the workforce aren't really aware of just how political everything is out there in the corporate world. They have never learned the dynamics of the game that is being played.
Women still expect a fair playing field. And it's not fair at all. It's not enough to have the education and the skills. You also have to know the rules of the game.
Dressing to be sexy is OK if you are on the make out there in the dating game. But it's not OK in the workplace. Women who buy into that are just being manipulated.
athena
(4,187 posts)The only part I don't completely agree with is that it's not OK for women to dress sexy in the workplace. Please see my other post in this thread about that. I think that focusing on the way women dress blames the victim.
Let me clarify. I agree with you that if one is a young woman aiming to climb the corporate ladder, it's not in her best interest to wear ultra-low-cut blouses, tight miniskirts and stiletto heels. I agree completely with that, since such clothing will almost certainly ensure that she doesn't get taken seriously. But I don't think that wearing more conservative clothing will get her taken seriously, either. Dressing conservatively, having good ideas, doing good work, being professional -- those don't necessarily get you ahead if you're a woman, especially if you refuse to play the rest of the game of corporate politics.
It all seems pretty bleak, but please don't give into that kind of resignation and depression. I still think that as strong women, we can do things to make things better for everyone else.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)As far as I'm concerned people can dress however they want. It is absolutely none of my business. But, just realistically, one has to expect there will be consequences. Flip side is that men should be able to dress however they want, too. I really don't want to look at a bunch of guys in Speedos, either.
And there are a whole lot of women who just plain buy into the current corporate atmosphere. And that's their right, too.
I just wish that those same women could fast forward about 30 years and then look back on the choices that they made. Look back at the long term effect on themselves, their lives, and the lives of all other women. Being too naive, and buying into the current atmosphere hook line and sinker, letting yourself be manipulated by the corporation can have disastrous conseqences when start to get older (like over 35 for goodness sake) and you find yourself to be over the hill. And expendable.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Or do you think your statement applies just as much to the men of DU as the men in the general population?
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Men are visualy driven it is in our DNA. Maybe in thousands of years we will breed it out but not in your or my lifetime. It is a survival instinct to women as potential mates.
athena
(4,187 posts)Being visually driven is no reason to not treat women as people first, sexual beings second. Men are able to put aside sexual thoughts long enough to focus on other things. I don't see men claiming that their DNA makes them so obsessed with sex that they are incapable of governing, for example. Why is it that when it comes to treating women like human beings, they suddenly become controlled by their DNA?
Egnever
(21,506 posts)it is reality. You can beat your head against a wall trying to deny it all you want but that wont change reality.
And no one said it excluded anyone from treating women as people.
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)This man does. I know many others who also do. So, which men do you mean?
intaglio
(8,170 posts)but some will always stay blind to their prejudice.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)The closest I come to seeing this in day to day life is the way a friend in the IT department is treated. She's easily the sharpest member of the team, and she seldom makes mistakes, but when she does it's "Well, girls aren't as tech-savvy as guys." They don't treat this skilled woman explicitly as a sex object, but they do frame her as a "girl" who isn't "tech-savvy."
Although I don't encounter the explicit "women as sex objects" especially often, I know that it does happen all the time. In my personal experience, the worst offenders are obvious asshole easily identified as such, but I"m confident that it's a spectrum phenomenon demonstrated by a wide range of men.
Best wishes.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Until we biologically engineer people to not want sex, my guess is that sex will always be first. That's the initial attraction. Getting to know them as the person that they are can only happen after you start talking to someone you're attracted to. Or not attracted to for that matter.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Being young, sexy and attractive offers so many rewards I cannot see the desire to be appealing dissipating anytime soon.. Young and exceptionally attractive gay men are probably frequently viewed as sex objects too. The fact is almost everybody of either sex and any orientation want to be appealing. There are just too many rewards.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)seen this on a regular basis.
Also, I have seven women in my life on a regular basis (family and friends) and all of them act towards men the same way men act towards women in the area of attraction/sexism.
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)Hmm, sounds just as ridiculous.
Maybe your question would be better posed to a woman like Kim Kardashian, quick to share her ass selfies with the world. Or Courtney what's-her-name, the teen bride, with her freakishly huge implants. Or Miley, rubbing one out on stage. Many women seem to like being viewed as sex objects first... and they consider themselves "feminists."
Many men I've worked with absolutely love Natalie Portman -- smart and educated contribute to her "hotness." Many dig Sigourney Weaver as well - smart, educated, talented. Contrary to what you say, the whole package DOES matter. At least in my experience...
FatBuddy
(376 posts)if you guys just did a blanket "all men are evil, all women are victims" post every time you wanted to stir shit.
maybe then the horse can just be dead and you won't have to keep beating it.
RC
(25,592 posts)That about covers it. And that, in a nut shell, IS the reason posts such as the OP stirs up such emotion and outrage. That is what they are designed to do!
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)It is what attracts a man to a woman and was/is necessary for procreation.
Now, does every man see all women as sex objects? Not even close!
There are a some that think that every woman should be begging for their sexual favor while there are just as many that respect women for who they are.
It all comes down to education, how we learn to treat others. As for me, I will respect you for who you are and your accomplishments, but I will also hold the door for you because I was raised to treat you with respect.
Will I look at a woman who is dressed provocatively and have sexual thoughts? Probably. But I can also work along side that same woman and control any urge I had until I can make a judgment about who you are just as I would any male.
The old adage "Sex Sells" is and always will be true, we just need to not get uptight about it unless it is causing oppression. Then we deal with the cases of oppression as they are discovered.
I would like to add that I see a lot of women who are just as bad at treating women as sex objects.
athena
(4,187 posts)That doesn't mean women see men as second-class citizens. I've had male colleagues I considered sexually attractive, but I was able to value their expertise in their field. I didn't dismiss their views at meetings just because I considered them sexually attractive. The problem is that women often feel we're seen only as sex objects. In other words, we're only as valuable insofar as we are sexually attractive. If we're not sexually attractive, we're nothing. If we are sexually attractive, we're sexual objects and nothing else. I agree with you that it's not just men who treat us this way; it's all of society. However, I believe that men could do a lot to make things better for women. If a man, who sees women as people, sees one of his male co-worker dismiss a female co-worker's expertise, he can speak out to defend the woman. In my professional experience, this never happens, unfortunately.
Finally, this has nothing to do with who opens doors for whom. I can distinguish between a man who is chivalrous but sees me as a human being and a man who sees me as a second-class citizen. In fact, the latter don't usually open doors for women these days, in my experience.
Xyzse
(8,217 posts)I mean, valuing any body as a person first should be a given. If that was the OP's hope, then even if highly unlikely, I can hope that it will happen.
However, when I made my first post here, it was with the thought that the initial reaction to a person can not be fully regulated and physical attractiveness is the first thing a person would think about.
When we first meet a person, much of it, our bodies tend to react before our mind does and it is what colors our thoughts.
It doesn't mean that it becomes the primary method of viewing a person, it just means it is the initial reaction.
The way the OP was worded, was confusing, and made me think of the study about the body reacting before the mind:
http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/brain-scans-can-reveal-your-decisions-7-seconds-before-you-decide
It then colors the thoughts and emotions that goes through a person before having the impressions fully formed.
As for the others, I'll just concur with what you have said.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)If a man, who sees women as people, sees one of his male co-worker dismiss a female co-worker's expertise, he can speak out to defend the woman.
Can't the woman defend her own expertise?
Response to The2ndWheel (Reply #149)
athena This message was self-deleted by its author.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Response to The2ndWheel (Reply #173)
athena This message was self-deleted by its author.
athena
(4,187 posts)I don't feel comfortable discussing this any further. If you're really so naive as to think that misogyny doesn't hold women back in the corporate world, it's probably best not to disillusion you. Enjoy your time in the wonderful egalitarian world, where women are fairly valued for their expertise and suffer no adverse consequences for being assertive.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)I think she is more than capable of defending that expertise herself against a male co-worker who dismisses it.
RC
(25,592 posts)Really, why? Why can't both say something?
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Both can say something if they want. Or not. Free country and all.
But if a man steps in to defend a woman over not having her expertise respected, nobody should then get upset that she might need to be saved by a man in that situation, even though she's earned her expertise through her own hard work and sacrifice.
RC
(25,592 posts)A woman steps in to defend a man's expertise? That does happen. I've been in that situation. My boss, a woman, stepping in, against a female co-worker ragging on me because she did things differently. What ever, it is still an personal work problem that needed to be resolved.
We are all people first. The gender wars here, quite often overlook that fact in favor of belittling, bullying and putdowns.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)A boss is a boss. They have to right their ship.
Co-worker to co-worker? That's a different dynamic. My own rule on that has become, if you ask me for my help, I'll help you as best I can. I won't interject myself into anyone's personal work problem though. In other words, I mind my own business. Someone doesn't respect someone else's expertise? If you're on the same work level as I am, what am I supposed to do about that?
"Hey, Jack. Seriously, just respect Jill's expertise." Just because I'm a man doesn't mean another man is going to respect what I say.
Response to The2ndWheel (Reply #288)
athena This message was self-deleted by its author.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)partner anyway. Be who you are, and if someone is attracted to you, then you have a possible keeper.
Better to live alone while learning to be happy than be miserable living with, and putting up, with some shallow dirtbag, and never having the time or space to learn how to be happy by yourself. You can't depend on anyone else to make you happy. At least if you're single, your options are open, and you have a better chance of hooking up with someone of good character, and integrity, who you can be happy with together.
If you buy a lame horse, it can't take you anywhere you want to go.
Seems to me most everyone wants that one great love of their life, but few find it. I was fortunate to have that at one time. But people change, and fires go out. I said to my sister, "You know, I haven't ever been able to even come close to being able to having a love and a soul mate like "Maggie".
And she said to me, "At least you had that. Most people never get it. I never did."
Just my 2¢, earned the hard way.
Beringia
(4,316 posts)Many women I know, including my sisters, size up other women, and compare themselves to them, "who is the prettiest", and rate them on their features, nose, face, legs.
Response to leftyladyfrommo (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)These are worthy considerations (even dumping out my #108), yet no engagement.
I don't think discussion was the intent.
TheSarcastinator
(854 posts)it gets 'em every time. Good work, shit stirrer!
DLnyc
(2,479 posts)rather than a diverse collection of individuals?
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...rather than a monolithic bloc of objectification?
This man thinks such open-mindedness already exists, and doesn't appreciate the broad-brushing.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)So men are just a roving bloc of objectification-ism?
cinnabonbon
(860 posts)I think this OP is a good example for men on how certain thing feels: It's not nice when you're being reduced to nothing but your gender and then criticized for it. Women already know this. Hell, that's what the OP is about.
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)I always say, "Just looking for my missing rib dear."
Dash87
(3,220 posts)All humans have 12 ribs, but this myth has been passed around forever. On the other hand, it's possible to have an extra rib through a gene disorder. I think it's possible for men to have an extra rib too.
Another thing: People have been wrong forever about the "rib" thing in the Bible - Adam gives Eve his rib (well, God rips it out of him, I guess), but it's never mentioned how many ribs he had before the rib was given. This is an assumption most readers of the story incorrectly make.
The story is, imo, highly cryptic and not meant to be taken literally. There is also the fact that translations have butchered its meaning over time. It could even be a metaphor for sex.
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)cups, plates, pots, rolling-pins, butcher knives and pans, anytime!
I think humans will be humans mostly.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Whiskeytide
(4,461 posts)a person
a friend
a mom
a confidant
a lover
a financial whiz
a person who usually kicks my ass in an argument
a comedian
a smart ass
a sounding board
a voice of reason
(and too many more to list)
and, sometimes, a sex object.
But she is my wife. I know her, and I have a history with her that tells me she is all of these things, some more than others at certain times and under varying circumstances, depending on the context and possible influences of many other factors.
That history is the key.
As far as other women - women I don't already know - are concerned (which is what you're talking about in your OP), I think it is exactly the same model. I have little or no history with them other than what I see or observe, and thus that limited history necessarily informs - or at least greatly influences - my thought process.
If I hear a woman singing, I might think she's a good singer.
If I observe a woman making a closing argument, I might think she's a good lawyer.
If I see a woman laughing, I might think she's happy.
If I see a woman diving over spectators at a football game to deliver a hay maker and scissor kicks to an opposing fan, I may think she's a drunken embarrassment to my Alma Mater.
For all of the above examples, those are likely to be my "first" thoughts - because of the "history" I have at hand.
And, for all of the above examples, I could substitute "man" for "woman" (actually "person" for woman) and it wouldn't change a thing about the thought process. Still no difference. Perfectly interchangeable.
But here's where it gets dicey (and where I'm sure I'm going to get in trouble) .... if I see a woman in some kind of sexual context, I'm probably going to form a sexual thought about her, and its probably going to be my first thought. That is the limited history I have.
Revealing clothing, clothing that exposes or emphasizes parts of a person's body that 52 years of American culture has told me are supposed to be sexually relevant, is often enough to prompt that first "sex object" thought - but ONLY with respect to a woman. That response is NOT gender neutral. If I see a man in revealing clothes, I will likely have a first thought about his physical appearance (he's in shape, he's not in shape, I bet he's a runner, ... etc), but it is not going to be a sexually charged thought. With a woman in that context, it often is.
I don't think I can do much to control that. I can control my response, I can control my actions, I can control my words. But, unfortunately, I can't do a lot to control the thoughts that flash across my mind. Part of it is surely instinctive (that's why its not gender neutral), and part of it is surely cultural - as to the latter, we could outlaw all clothes, religious zealotry, boner pills and hamburger commercials, and this would probably all go away in a couple of generations. Otherwise, I think its here to stay for a while. Especially as long as that first thought matters so much (first impressions and all the psychiatry behind that), and thus keeps feeding the stereotypes and expectations of our sexual culture.
Its kind of sad. But I'm very different at 52 than I was at 22. And DU has certainly revealed to me that I am still very much a neanderthal in many many ways, and it continues to change and enlighten my perspective on the relationship between the genders even more every single day. So maybe there's a glimmer of hope for future generations - if we survive as a species long enough.
Note: Wearing revealing clothing does not make a woman responsible for the thoughts of some man. Or a man in revealing clothes responsible for the thoughts of some woman. Please don't assume I am saying that. She or he can wear what she or he wants. What another person thinks is their own problem.
Note: I'm not advocating or stating with approval that wearing revealing clothing is or should be classified as a "sexual context". It shouldn't be. But it often times is. And that's just a fact.
Note: Props to G. Carlin on the outlawing religion analogy.
Note: I'm as disgusted as everyone else over the Sugar bowl incident, but I really don't want to discuss it except to say we're not all like that. However, Roll Tide anyway. (I am required to say that anytime there is an actual or implied reference to Bama).
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)I would just like to say that we have enormous respect for the Tide. We also realize that the Sooner fan who was attacked had talked some serious smack before the incident.
Whiskeytide
(4,461 posts)... and the Sooner fans are truly some of the best in the world - very gracious winners. (Although I will confess that it would be just fine with me if I don't have to hear "Boomer Sooner" for a while)
We also met a bunch of Sooners in 2003 in Tuscaloosa, and I really can't say enough nice things about your fans and program. That's why the "Bama Belle Beatdown" incident is so embarrassing. I have heard the OU fan was not exactly an innocent victim, and I did read some of his tweets ... but still, there's no real excuse for it except "I was plastered and my team was getting its ass handed to it, so I decided to fight somebody". What's really sad is that you would be surprised at just how acceptable that excuse would be among a lot of SEC fans.
Hope to see you guys again in a future bowl soon. Roll Tide.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)boys as people. Often they are just an ornament to them and they don't see that they too can be hurt when used and then tossed aside in favor of a boyfriend they like better. Either way it sucks that we just can't look at members of the opposite sex as fellow human beings first.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)gives a painfully accurate picture of where most people's priorities are on this issue.
Check out this article for a glimpse of the future and a nice big dose of hope
http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/cockblocked-by-redistribution
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)almost demands that the generalization be countered with the reality that not all men behave the same way.
If the OP would have started the conversation with "Far too many men..." I think you would have had a more constructive debate thread. What we have instead is a thread specifically designed to cause a flame war.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)I find it amazing that all SOME people want to talk about is the way leftladyfrommo used the word "men" as if she really thinks ALL men are like this. There are some very obtuse PEOPLE on DU, it seems.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)at times. Who are the biggest idols in this society. Not Michelle Obama. No. Not Hillary Clinton. Nah. It's Miley Cyrus, Beyonce, and Rihanna. All these women are overly sexed and over-exposed primarily for their overly-sexed images.
While I celebrate my sexuality as a woman and fully appreciate my beauty and do believe that I am fit and alluring to men, I'm also incredibly smart, very well educated (Ph.d. in political science and public policy), and independent. Because I am often told I'm beautiful and people seem to focus on that only, I've often felt that I've had to prove that I'm really smart and that there's more to me than my physical appearance. (And I'm a pretty conservative dresser, too.)
So, I don't know how things change.
Part of me just believes that it's part of human nature for men to be visual and sexual and that's that. They will like women; they will be desirous of women because that's their nature. And it's human nature.
For women, I think many of us feed into that nature by upping the ante on our sexuality, then turn around and complain when we're only viewed as sex objects. And for women like me who are more modest about that kind of thing, it makes it harder to be taken seriously.
On the other hand, I feel that women ought to be free to be themselves and no one has the right to determine what the right amount of "sexuality" should be tolerated or demonstrated. (Not sure if I'm making sense here.)
Women should continue to embrace and celebrate their sexuality. Enjoy sex. Embrace it. At the same time, recognize that there is more to themselves than just that and carry ourselves as such.
Not sure I adequately or clearly addressed the OP's question, but I tried. 
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Clinton are not as great as idols as Miley Cyrus. Maybe to some sub-demographics who get their news from MTV, but beyond that no.
For that matter, I find it absurd to compare a strong, accomplished woman like Beyonce to Cyrus, who is a joke.
BobUp
(347 posts)
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)I'm guessing you don't actually know Mrs. Obama. Especially the real Mrs. Obama, not just the photo shopped wife of the President version they put out there for the world to see. You should find a picture of her brain and her thoughts or something.
she has more than an attractive exterior, she is a beautiful wife, a loving mother, and a fantastic first lady. What more could a man ask for? Barack is a very lucky man.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Because I am often told I'm beautiful and people seem to focus on that only, I've often felt that I've had to prove that I'm really smart and that there's more to me than my physical appearance.
If you're told you're ugly, or not noticed because you're not all that attractive, and it's a focal point of other people, you feel like you have to prove that you're more than your physical appearance.
It keeps coming back to people don't and can't know other people as the people that they are until after they meet them. So the first thing that people see is the exterior, because we can't read minds.
Some people get sick of being told how attractive they are. Some people wish every day that someone would say something even remotely close to that. It's a crazy world, and none of us signed up for it.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Even then, it might not be first on the list.
Getting to know someone is always the toughest part. It's easy to see physical beauty. It's right there. It's just so clearly obvious. Personality, smarts, etc, aren't visible. That takes effort to know. A cost which either party might not be willing to pay for whatever reason.
If you're up on a stage giving a speech at some conference, people can gather that you're educated and know what you're talking about without ever having talked to or seen you before. At the same time, they'll also see what you look like, and probably make some judgments, even if they're just mental notes.
Then there's the anonymity of the internet. We're all sitting here, just discussing ideas. Unless told(or you know them in real life), nobody knows who anyone else is, how old they are, male or female, whatever. Anyone can be anyone. It's our most abstract way of communicating to date. But it's also not real. How many problems has the internet solved because it exists as a means of communicating ideas? Few, if any.
chungking34
(51 posts)There are improvements being made, but at a very slow pace.
MissMillie
(38,553 posts)I won't estimate the percentage--won't venture a guess.
There are men who will never stop. They will even teach their sons that women are sexual objects.
There are also women who will present themselves as sexual objects and teach their daughters to do the same.
We all have different currencies. I'm not sure there is any way around it.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)
polly7
(20,582 posts)I was out helping unloading tons of coal today - nobody looked at me as anything but a helper. I worked bar last night and nobody there looked at me like anything but a friend and bartender. I took a transfer to the city yesterday, nobody looked at me as anything than another ambulance worker. When I want to get fancied up and noticed, I do. Otherwise, I honestly don't see that what you're saying is so prevalent. Maybe it's my attitude and I'm just not expecting it or watching for it.
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)Kidding, of course. It's too bad people here resort to abnormal behavior instead of living in reality.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Who knows.
If it were really a question that the OP wanted an answer to, she might.
crim son
(27,464 posts)I just read every post in this thread and am shaking my head at the (understandable) lack of objectivity contained therein. Why not ask men this question?
Seriously?
Logical
(22,457 posts)Response to leftyladyfrommo (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Just look at this thread. Granted that most of it is caused by the usual minority, but there are so many things to overcome in order for it to happen. Just starting with every major religion, almost everyone has sexism/male dominance ingrained from birth. Our economy sells it and therefore enforces it, and our social lives are frequently ruled by it.
The guy up-thread that said that, since some women use it to their advantage, there's no harm in it, probably isn't that bad a person, but just can't quite get there, even as a member of a commonly ostracized class.
And as hard as I try, Ms. Thug frequently has to bring it to my attention (of course, my unlikely background puts me at a disadvantage here, but that's another story). So I really don't know how to improve it except one person at a time.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)our Society...or our economy:
but I would guess that sexual objectification of women has been going on a whole lot longer than our Society has been in existence, and a whole lot longer than TV/billboards/magazines as well.
So far back, in fact, that it would be sort of naive for anyone to say that it's anything other than basic biology.
Because the OP isn't asking whether men will ever see women as people at all...it's asking whether men will ever be able to see women as people first...before seeing them as sexual beings (or objects, if you will).
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)primary physical sexual characteristics with objectification?
Whether it is this or something else, it doesn't matter because your statement is just wrong. Sexual objectification is nurture, not nature.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)
KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)I'm too sexy for my shirt.
Warpy
(111,245 posts)Some men are just so limited they will only see us as pieces of meat or breeding stock. Or devices to get their house clean and food onto the table. They will tell you they love women. What they love is only the use of women.
Don't worry, though. Once you pass 50, you're utterly invisible. It's amazing, all the leering, harassment and disgusting noises go away overnight. Nobody criticizes your body or your face.
It's very restful.
I'm afraid that until and unless these limited men take responsibility for the shit they put us through, from constant harassment to rape, it's just not going to change for women under 50. It's their problem. We're just their targets and we're sick of it.
FedUpWithIt All
(4,442 posts)Some behavior is repellant. REPELLENT. It is really not a very brilliant idea to REPEL something you want to attract.
But what do i know, i'm just a woman.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
Rex
(65,616 posts)As long as 'sex sells' there will be men that look at women as objects first and people second.
FedUpWithIt All
(4,442 posts)Do men view women as objects because the media tells them to or is the media portraying women as objects because the media feels that is what men will relate to?
When MEN start demanding that women in the media are treated with respect, perhaps the portrayals will change.
Forgive me but i will not be holding my breath.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)
quaker bill
(8,224 posts)The notion that men did not see women as "sex objects" when they wore "long dresses with long sleeves and high necks" has no basis in fact.
I see professionals as professionals and do not typically pay notice to gender. This has resulted in occasional confusion where women have misread this as my interest in forming a relationship. Some women do find being treated equally, and listened to as a professional with an equally valued opinion, quite attractive, apparently. It is typically not a problem to get past, as I usually start talking about my wife and kids, problem solved.
People are people. They have a sexual aspect and a more intellectual aspect. These two things do not truly separate where you have all one and none of the other. It is our nature. It is Puritan to believe that one is good and the other evil, and also to believe that one can be purged and the other remain. The question is a matter of degrees. No person should be judged for professional competence on their physical attractiveness. This does not mean that they cease being attractive.
politicman
(710 posts)As much as many on here try to deny it, physical looks are the major aspect of any relationship that is not platonic.
Women try to act like they are not superficial, but the truth is that a women upon seeing a man makes a quick decision of whether he fits in the friends zone or the lover zone. Basically whether the guy is hot or not.
For guys, we have less strict standards, as in we find most women hot, or at least hot enough to have a physical relationship with them.
As long as there are women/men couples in the world, then there will always be men that sexualize women and vice versa.
Imagine if the op got her wish and no man ever looked at a women in a sexual way, the world would be a boring place and civilization would dwindle down as men wouldn't be able to get it up if they were not visually stimulated.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)This is a joke video, but there is a point in there if you are open to looking at the issue from both sides.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)More will, if we evolve socially in the right direction.
I'd like to see men see us as EQUALS first; equal in intellectual ability, in self-determination, in economic worth...with equal rights. And yes, some already do.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)You are not only insulting an entire gender, you are insulting the millions of successful women in America that have succeeded because they are smart and competent.
Go pound sand!
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)I just read the excerpt from the book about Roger Ailes that said he offered women employees $100 a week for sex.
And my reaction was: Will this never, ever change? Women go out and get educated and work really hard, and try to get respect and this is what always happens. Some total jerk like this guy always comes up and wants to know if you want to fuck.
It is just so discouraging. Every woman I know has run into exactly this kind of guy. It's certainly not "every guy." But there is always at least one.
As long as women in the workplace are judged first on their sexiness and second on everything else women will never get a fair shake in the workplace.
brooklynite
(94,503 posts)...or, "will conservatives ever..."
You said "will men ever...", implying that ALL men: old, young, liberal, conservative, rich, poor, approach see women the same way.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)Even men I really like will stop and go "wow?" That is one hot babe. And she probably is and I don't really have a problem with people's personal lives. Women have a lot of control over their personal lives. If you don't want to be treated like a peice of meat then don't go places where women are treated that way. It's just in the work place where women are at such a huge disadvantage.
35 years ago I worked for a man that was an extemely powerful Republican here in KC. He was a good personal friend of Ronald Reagan. He was probably in his early 40's then. And married to an extremely wealthy wife from another powerful family here.
He would just pick out women and propose having an affair with them. If they declined then their job would just sort of disappear and they would be looking for another job.
I get pretty depressed when it looks like nothing has really changed over the years. It's still the good ole boys club out there. People in power are just better at hiding what they are doing.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)overnight, I remembered a little social experiment I saw on TV some time back which would beg the question, "Will women ever stop seeing men as studly trophies first, and people last?"
So, the basics of the experiment...
A nice, fairly attractive man goes into a bar (no, it's not a joke). Outside the bar his used car is parked on the curb. He's dressed modestly in jeans and shirt, sneakers, with a normal-guy haircut. Everyday Joe, albeit neat and clean. Then he tries chatting up the ladies, some of whom don't respond, and others who turn him down with one of those fake smiles. He strikes out totally.
He leaves the bar, comes back a bit later with a rather expensive car, dressed to kill in a suit, expensive shoes, expensive haircut, and sporting a Rolex. Again he tries chatting up the ladies, and they are all over him like flies on shit.
Same guy. Different package.
I guess one would be tempted to call these women shallow assholes, but biology says otherwise. They are only following the instinctual drive to find the best provider for themselves and any potential children they might have. Self protection isn't an asshole trait, and neither is men seeing women as sexual beings/objects first, people second.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Blindly following instinct with no thought as to the societal harm done by doing so is ignorant at best.
There are all kinds of instincts we don't follow, because we have higher functioning brains and we are able to reason. We can understand why behaviors influenced by instinct are irrational and harmful. When people choose not to do so, they deserve insult IMO.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)ladywnch
(2,672 posts)RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts) athena
(4,187 posts)I'm certain that the OP, indeed, was referring to society as a whole, and not claiming that every single man out there views every single woman as a sex object. Don't you ever have a bad day when everything seems bleak? On such days, do you appreciate people rolling their eyes at you?
It's just as easy to reassure the OP that some men genuinely do see women as human beings first as to attack her for making an inaccurate generalization. But the former requires empathy, which is in short supply on DU.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)This topic really bothers me. I'm black now so white people just see me as black. It's not a huge relief.
I see stuff every day. Every day where black people are seen by skin color first. In every field. In every movie. And ridiculed if they don't live up to this unbelievably obsured standard. Are they articulate? Do they have a job?
Doesn't seem to matter what a black person does - lots of smarts, lots of education, lots of everything. Wonderful person. It doesn't matter. In the end it's always whether they are viewed as "black."
It is so depressing. Sometimes I wish black people would all just say "fuck this shit."
So, when white people can stop judging by skin, men will stop judging by sex.
athena
(4,187 posts)I'm not sure that racism and sexism will end at the same time. I think sexism is much more deeply entrenched. Many people these days can accept that skin color is superficial and that we are all the same underneath our skin. Extremely few people, on the other hand, truly think the differences between men and women are superficial. So I think sexism will be around much longer than racism, although I suspect neither will be gone within our lifetime. Very few people, for example, would not make generalizations about women's supposed maternal instinct, and believe that women's ability to bear children makes them more suited for certain tasks and less suited for other tasks.
Having said that, let me also say that I think racism is currently doing much more harm than sexism. Women are being held back, but not as badly as black people are held back. So, personally, while I'm a white feminist, I'm currently more active in my attempts to fight racism than sexism.
In my view, fighting for race equality goes hand in hand with fighting for gender equality. Both racism and sexism are ugly and abhorrent. I think black people and women need to join forces in this battle.
loose wheel
(112 posts)People scope out potential sexual partners. Why would this ever be a surprise or a source of lamentation? Seriously.
sir pball
(4,741 posts)Girl or boy, if I gotta bail your ass out during a busy service you're utterly useless to me.
And since that's going to whoosh right over a LOT of heads - I'm talking about line cooks in a professional kitchen. It is an utterly egalitarian situation, I don't really care about gender let alone attractiveness. Literally all that matters is your skills; one of the top three cooks I've ever worked with is a woman and, ahem, not the finest physical specimen - but holy hell she can work miracles on the line. And is as salty, hardboiled a sailor as any of us (she's totally take Bourdain in a fight). To this day she's high on the list of people with whom I like to go out for a drink.
And I'm probably STILL going to catch flak for this.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)Since I can't.
sir pball
(4,741 posts)Like I said - I'm totally serious, but totally egalitarian.
I'm always immensely amused when people work with my finacée - she's five foot-two and can cook circles around most anybody.