. A man who's concerned about his woman's sexual needs, especially if she looks to greener pastures, will, in all likelihood, keep her on short leash lest he become cuckold or the like; this tendency of men probably spills over into other freedoms a woman can have. — TheMadFool
Accordingly, an attractive woman needs to think she is attractive as a person and not as an object. — Congau
A 'man' who is so insecure and small dicked about his relationship that he thinks of women on leashes and worries about her 'looking for greener pastures' is no man, and should probably fucking hang himself. — StreetlightX
must lower their eyes — 3017amen
If you would like me to start one, I will... .) — 3017amen
don't think we're spectators of the world or that there is some "us" as subjects observing other people or things as objects. The questions I asked relate to some problems I think arise from my confusion regarding your use of the words "objects" and "objectification" (or possibly your misuse of them) and not to some urge to explore other matters. — Ciceronianus the White
:up: Lotta that going around (and on display lately by blue ballers in Blue).A 'man' who is so insecure and small dicked about his relationship that he thinks of women on leashes and worries about her 'looking for greener pastures' is no man, and should probably fucking hang himself. — StreetlightX
A man who's concerned about his woman's sexual needs, especially if she looks to greener pastures, will, in all likelihood, keep her on short leash lest he become cuckold or the like; this tendency of men probably spills over into other freedoms a woman can have. — TheMadFool
Helpful? That depends on what question you're seeking help with. The OP seemed to be questioning the implicit hypocrisy of a 21st century liberated woman, who overtly directs the attention of her male oppressors to her distinguishing female sexual charms --- objectifying them as-if they are attractive shiny objects like jewelry. They draw attention to their lips with artificial color, mimicking the bright red bottoms of sexually receptive chimpanzees. If they have ample bosoms, they may display them with uplift brassieres or decolletage. Or if they have “hot legs” they may showcase them with short skirts or long slits. The OP assumption seemed to be that true political Feminists would dress like Lesbians, forcing the males to deal with them as equals & agents & subjects.I don’t think it’s helpful to distinguish between sexual and political objectification. All that does is permit objectification in sexual relations. Just because a girl changes her aesthetics to direct your effort and attention towards her, it does not follow that she consents to ‘sexual’ objectification - which is valuing a sexual being only as an object to the exclusion of agency. So sexual objectification IS political. — Possibility
Wanting to be looked at or appear attractive does not equal being sexually objectified. The objectification is a separate action, taken by other, in response to the presence of a person. — TheWillowOfDarkness
Again, no-brainer. Otherwise, you may want to study the history of sex, pornography, Eros, etc. etc. In that case, material agency is that which is being valued. And as such, it's being valued through the women's choice. — 3017amen
If she chose to objectify herself (and was fully aware of her agency), how could she be denying herself agency? — 3017amen
Of course, male boorishness is Wrong by modern democratic egalitarian standards. That's why the 16th century notion of a "Gentleman" was invoked by upper-class nobles in order to distinguish their superior morality from the uncouth crudeness of the lower classes. Apparently, it was common among commoners for men to grope, and even rape, women without permission. But the nobility was (in theory) held to a higher moral standard. In public, they deferred to their lady's whims, and postponed sex until after marriage. Nowadays, we typically refer to even lower class women as "Ladies" to indicate that they are worthy of respect.The men would still be wrong to touch, harrasss proposition, leer, etc., the women in question. . . . The objectification is a separate action, taken by other, in response to the presence of a person. — TheWillowOfDarkness
Appearing as an object does not equal objectification. Everything appears as an object. — TheWillowOfDarkness
The woman’s choice is to have value as an object, or to not have value at all. — Possibility
She didn’t choose to objectify herself, and she doesn’t deny herself agency. She chose to have value, which is the only way to even begin to be aware of your own agency. — Possibility
No, it is not. Not in the sense that women are appearing looking beautiful. — TheWillowOfDarkness
, in the sense that beauty pagents are cultural/political organisation which assert a women has a specific social value upon her looks. — TheWillowOfDarkness
Her purpose and intention don't matter. — TheWillowOfDarkness
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.