And those things *are* all objectification, which no one here is against or thinks is funny. Those aren't you choice, and as you mentioned they are imposed upon you despite the fact that you have just as much right to be respected as anyone else.
A pornstar's bouncing bum is *not* objectification, because it is voluntary- in fact said pornstar wouldn't make any money if men weren't willing to treat her like an object. It's a tricky grey area, but adding consensual behavior to the concept of objectification makes it a useless one- the problem is when it bleeds over into how we treat other people with whom we are not engage in a social contract where objectification is part of the deal.
I don't want to get into a porn debate with you. I really don't. I could argue how terrible it is for the female population for years. but please know that I don't find your argument a respectable argument, because the fact that she's getting paid to be objectified, is almost worse. We all know the porn industry is trashy, but men are still humongous consumers.
Sexual acts performed on women such as deliberately ejaculating on a woman's face for a male's visual and sexual pleasure isn't considered objectification because the woman is getting paid for it?
Post by HecticDialectic on Apr 27, 2011 13:51:53 GMT -5
Would the same consensual act between two partners where the woman was not being paid be considered objectification? What if the girl was really into it?
This is the slippery area I'm talking about- it's when the effects of things like pornography bleed over into things that directly effect your life that it becomes problematic. There are however people that are fully capable of discriminating between the two categories of behaviors.
Post by TurkeyPinkness on Apr 27, 2011 13:53:43 GMT -5
Agreed that I do not find that to be a valid argument and I also am not going to open this can of worms. Suffice it to say that not only do I think that porn is objectifying, that avatar had no context and how was I even supposed to make that connection? I will add that I don't think it is ever funny, regardless of the circumstances.
So, costume thread, I will be dressed up as the lady who is having a great time and partying and yelling "SASQUATCH!!!" really loud and also thinks we can all have a great time without being jerks. In the immortal words of Ray Smuckles, "No one should be a cock to a stranger, ever!"
Post by interstateeight on Apr 27, 2011 14:09:58 GMT -5
I'm just gonna pop in to say two quick things:
1.) Louis CK has a bit about trying to reclaim the word "*****" or some stupid shit. Comedians say lots of things and are not the arbiters of taste on this board.
2.) I know you're stoked because you just finished your sophomore philosophy class or something, but you need to stop talking like that. It is impossible to read your posts because whenever someone says "juxtaposition" seriously, my eyes roll so far back in my head that I can only stare at my brain, which is actually a pretty impressive defense mechanism. I have a personal rule against modifying posters' content, but since we generally accept that when someone personally attacks another poster, I'll give serious thought to modifying the rule to include brutal attacks on not sounding like a pompous douchebag.
(Note: Clearly I just set myself up here, so if you're going to take a swing, make sure you don't fuck it up. I may just delete any attempts by posters who are not HG, stamper, FD, or the other mods.)
Post by HecticDialectic on Apr 27, 2011 14:13:45 GMT -5
I'm at work writing a manuscript for submission, sorry if academic babble leaks over into the way I type I here. That being said, I don't think that using smaller words is necessarily a good way to make an argument better.
And I wasn't planning on taking a swing at any one in any sense, my only even quasi rude comment regarding anyone specific was a stick-in-rectum remark. I leave the ad hominems to others.
And I'm a Psychology Master's student; not a philosophy undergrad, although I'm 2 courses short of my BA in Phil as well.
Hopefully nobody is offended by people trying to dress sexy.
Seriously? It is like you do not understand why we are having this discussion in the first place. If you want to talk about your costumes, then just talk about your costumes.
It was a test to see if you are looking for things to get offended by. I don't see how you could possibly find it sexist. I agree with your viewpoints wholeheartedly, but I was trying to lighten up a conversation that has, in my opinion, gotten a bit too heavy.
Post by HecticDialectic on Apr 27, 2011 14:25:29 GMT -5
Don't worry schoolbus, my comment that I hoped people didn't find a man changing into a car sexist was for the exact same porpoise- I think when people are so on the edge of their seat in wanting to find offense it kinda breezes past them.
Post by TurkeyPinkness on Apr 27, 2011 14:30:57 GMT -5
Is it a test or an attempt at levity? Did I pass or fail? Is this going to affect my GPA?
I won't compromise myself because something is too "heavy" and I don't pick Dr. Garbanzohts. On the usual I am a ray of fucking sunshine. We are all adults here and should be able to talk as such. I know you are new and that is rad but I can assure you that we are not always running around getting offended by things. This is a friendly community who loves Sasquatch and is open minded enough to have these kinds of arguments in a civil manner. I have said before that this is the only internet board I will participate in because it isn't just a bunch of assholes yelling at each other.