Jump to content
IGNORED

Jennifer Lawrence is charming

lumpenprol

By lumpenprol
in General Banter

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 418
  • Created
  • Last Reply
murve33 Grand Master

murve33

Posted
Posted

how much does sexuality influence judgment on an implicit scale? if i view you as a sexual object, will that influence the interaction i have with you, no matter how much i actually believe in social equality? this is my question. if objectification is really harmless, that'd be awesome. if not, how do we try to remove objectification from the social equation? is there such a thing as objectification or is there more duality to the perception of a person? (i.e., you can view them as both an intellectual counterpart and something to be enjoyed sexually.)

 

i think the issue is a lot deeper than many people care to admit. much easier to insult the misogynist pigs and the feminist shitheads than actually think about how sexualization affects how we treat others.

Well put. I've met a lot of men who would refer to themselves as "one of the good guys", and they genuinely do think of women as equals (more or less). But, once they'd meet a woman they'd want to pursue a relationship with, it'd always come down to "I'd fuck that". They'd "Fall in love" with her for a while and drunkenly rant about their tits and what they'd do to them in bed (similar to this thread). They'd hardly know these women, they would just continually run into them at class or parties, think they're attractive, and then wouldn't be able to stop thinking of them.

The problem with this is that after this moment, they'd be incapable of being able to pursue a healthy relationship with this person. The only thing they knew about these women were that their mannerisms tickled their fancy, and that they were fuckable. The goal for them at this point wasn't to get to know her better, but just to get with her.

 

If you have ever had sex, or had a sexual fantasy about a specific person, then you have objectified them. It is a logical requirement of sex that the other person becomes a physical sexual object.

Perhaps if you're simply using them solely for your own sexual pleasure, but if there's a mutual goal of making sex feel mind-blowingly awesome for one-another, I would argue that that's not objectification. I would hope that if someone is having sex with someone that they are still regarding the other as a sentient human being with personality and feelings, and not just a fuck doll.

 

And yea, sexual fantasies, with some exceptions, are objectification in my opinion. I may trade in my credibility in exchange for sounding like a fucking weirdo with these following statements, but I've always tended to fantasize/wank to attractive girls who I didn't particularly like. Whenever I've had a crush on someone I wouldn't wank to thoughts of them (though I lucid dreamed about fucking my current girlfriend a few months before we started dating). I felt that this would cloud my thoughts with images of constantly banging them, much like what I described in the my first paragraph, and I wouldn't be able to look at them as a human being with feelings (which would definitely kill any chances I'd have with them). I also felt it was sort of disrespectful. I have fantasized/wanked to thoughts of my current girlfriend tons of times, but I love and know her intimately, and she obviously is cool with that.

 

In regards to what goDel said; If a guy is ogling a lady and she doesn't care, no, that's not hurting anyone. But if the guy wants to get with the girl and all he sees is the embodiment of sex in her, that's not exactly beneficial for either party.

 

I take back what I said about the female members of this forum being hyper-sensitive. This thread is obviously bothering a lot of the male members as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
murve33 Grand Master

murve33

Posted
Posted

Everything I said is in line with this definition:

 

"This term is also used to describe the treatment of a human being as a thing, disregarding his/her personality or sentience. Philosopher Martha Nussbaum[1] has argued that something is objectified if any of the following factors are present:
-Instrumentality – if the thing is treated as a tool for one's own purposes;
-Denial of autonomy, Inertness – if the thing is treated as if lacking in agency or self-determination;
-Ownership – if the thing is treated as if owned by another;
-Fungibility – if the thing is treated as if interchangeable;
-Violability – if the thing is treated as if permissible to damage or destroy;
-denial of subjectivity – if the thing is treated as if there is no need to show concern for the 'object's' feelings and experiences."

 

Edit: Read my paragraph directly below your quote again. I would argue that you are not treating someone as an object if you care about how they feel as well, and like I said, "not just a fuck doll".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vamos scorcho Grand Master

vamos scorcho

Posted
Posted

I've decided to become a hardcore feminist. I realized it just now on reddit looking at all these posts about Emma Watson. Now, mind you, I do like Emma Watson. I think she's cool, charming, smart. And objectively attractive.

 

I should also mention that I have a soft spot for hardcore pornography and part of me is interested in the concept of double tag team hardcore sexual liberation type thinking. This side must not be discarded too quickly.

 

 

Still, I'm really just tired of women sexualizing themselves to the point of no return. It's such a common thing. And I am tired of the women I know who are, in my opinion, blindfolded to their own situation. I am becoming a feminist for the good of other men like myself who are well, tired of this shit. I am tired of it. I can barely articulate it though. Why can't people just be people? Our view of sexuality seems a bit... off. Why do we have to objectify someone like Emma Watson? She seems a perfectly normal person, like anyone else. And when you turn them into an object that strips them of those positive human qualities. I understand the argument that it's biological, yada yada. Obviously! But we must keep in mind that there are many things that are biological that we don't fucking celebrate without a second thought. That argument is fucking idiotic!

 

Actually I'm also just tired of vapid women who have become so brainwashed by male culture that you can barely even relate to them. For the good of other men like myself, I want women to liberate themselves so I actually can have a conversation with them. There is nothing more disgusting than a woman who has a good brain but decides against using it because its easier for her to just use her body and take advantage of biology + finance, or whatever. Traitor to her gender! I've seen this many times. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoodie Grand Master

Hoodie

Posted
Posted

I've decided to become a hardcore feminist. I realized it just now on reddit looking at all these posts about Emma Watson. Now, mind you, I do like Emma Watson. I think she's cool, charming, smart. And objectively attractive.

 

I should also mention that I have a soft spot for hardcore pornography and part of me is interested in the concept of double tag team hardcore sexual liberation type thinking. This side must not be discarded too quickly.

 

 

Still, I'm really just tired of women sexualizing themselves to the point of no return. It's such a common thing. And I am tired of the women I know who are, in my opinion, blindfolded to their own situation. I am becoming a feminist for the good of other men like myself who are well, tired of this shit. I am tired of it. I can barely articulate it though. Why can't people just be people? Our view of sexuality seems a bit... off. Why do we have to objectify someone like Emma Watson? She seems a perfectly normal person, like anyone else. And when you turn them into an object that strips them of those positive human qualities. I understand the argument that it's biological, yada yada. Obviously! But we must keep in mind that there are many things that are biological that we don't fucking celebrate without a second thought. That argument is fucking idiotic!

 

Actually I'm also just tired of vapid women who have become so brainwashed by male culture that you can barely even relate to them. For the good of other men like myself, I want women to liberate themselves so I actually can have a conversation with them. There is nothing more disgusting than a woman who has a good brain but decides against using it because its easier for her to just use her body and take advantage of biology + finance, or whatever. Traitor to her gender! I've seen this many times. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

who gives a fuck what you're disgusted by? if they're happy using their bodies to get by, who are you to tell them to stop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vamos scorcho Grand Master

vamos scorcho

Posted
Posted

I've been wanting to ask you 'who gives a fuck what you're disgusted by?' for pages now, thanks for opening that question up!

 

 

yeah^

 

 

 

 

I HATE WOMEN!!!!!!!!!!

 

For the first time the other day I felt what a woman probably feels like walking down the street. I felt like some dude was staring at my ass. Sometimes when I'm walking down the street I'll border on getting a hard on in the street while walking behind a particular woman.

 

I'm anti-rape.

 

Now, finally:

 

What matters most is that Islam knows how to handle the horniness of men. Either you're in or you're out, you know. No middle ground. Instant-boner. Followed by proto-boner. And filibuster. Boner-filibuster. Which one of these positions can be upheld by a trout-dropper?

Not I, not I.

 

Only the final stance where the Hood gets pulled out of the way is the only way. Men and woman, only brain.

 

Only brain say I. Solver. Woman can do with her body what she wants. You're damn right about that.

 

Communication = uninteresting. You fan your way through a linguistic turpentine of self-immolation. So what?

 

What matters here is that a linguistic diatristic filibuster can be shit shat white hot speed with the immolation:

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. I am disgusted by women being sexualized

2. Sophistry

3. I find sexual objectification to steal away the "goodness" of a person's heart

4. I find sexual objectification to cut off the possibility for deeper interaction

5. I find that women can use their body how they want, but I find it unfortunate when a person cannot use logic correctly

 

 

Hoodie:

A. (Men) Don't objectify women

B. (Men) Don't believe that women should not objectify themselves

C. ??? (contradiction)

 

Me:

A. I will not objectify women

B. I want that women will not play into male objectification

 

as it is feminism is a complete failure whenever it contradicts itself like this

you can't have it both ways. Any rational male (edit: or female) will say this.

 

I'm all for feminism but not that kind.

 

 

edit: I'm all for raising awareness and opening thought. Not illogic

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vamos scorcho Grand Master

vamos scorcho

Posted
Posted

you're a feminist who wants women to behave in a way that pleases you

 

You can say what you want but you don't understand the point I'm making. I want feminism not to fall back on weak arguments and contradictory statements. The only way to really change is to move forward with logic and rationality. NOT emotion, which many feminists lose themselves in in arguments over rape, misogyny, etc. The same goes for all discussions between groups, races, etc. Logic is important. I don't see how that can be disputed. I'll repeat my argument 1 more time, and make it clear that I'm only following the logic of the initial feminist argument:

 

1. Men should not objectify women, this is misogynist

2. Women should objectify themselves as much as they want

 

So, if "women" as a collective want men to stop objectifying them... then why wouldn't they want to stop playing into it, with the clear evidence that it causes increased objectification? Two possibilities:

 

1. Because they want it both ways

2. Because they think there is a such thing as universal "woman" who they speak for, who in fact has no fucking idea about feminism, doesn't care about feminism, and never will care about feminism.

 

Another angle (mine):

Women are oppressed and dominated by a male driven society that causes them to be brainwashed into self objectification. If the male society stops playing into this, and encourages it to stop, there is a greater chance it stops. EDIT: The main way to do this is through increased awareness, open mindedness, cutting through illusory and bastardized "rationality," using true logic/rationality (if there is any)... and similarly, remembering that both genders have responsibility. A feminist needs to live by her principals, just as much as when black people destroy their public housing, this isn't because they're "primitive," but because they are poor, and it would be a mistake, always, to say they have no responsibility. You have to remember the responsibility of the oppressed or your theory is useless.

 

Of course, I'm only really responding to the main force of the argument I saw in this thread. IT's much more complicated than this, with much context, yada yada, and in the end objectification goes both ways. I don't ever think objectification is a positive development. I think it breeds ignorance, the same kind of ignorance that is destroying our planet.

 

Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.