something evolved. But no. Just no.

That would be followed by a long OP explaining the benefit of avoiding the further production of excessively and overtly sexualized images of women.

Then I realized it wasn't a joke. Then I became sad for a bit.

That's the least of what's offensive. Check out the threads about all the horrible women who falsely accuse men of rape. Or a recent fav, that women used a disproportionate burden of health resources because we bear children, evidence of yet another way that men are screwed over. Never mind that those kids are theirs as well.

the posting of attractive men is encouraged, and frequent. Nowhere is it said in either of those threads that the thread is merely attractive women.

What stereotype does that fit into, and exactly what feminist theory predicts jackholes (or, more likely, straight women and gay men) posting pictures of hot men?

I'm not a thick individual.

My statement of the stereotype was more of a joke on my part. It's not a stereotype but an actuality that men produce and consume female sexuality at an alarming pace. And said thread in question fits EXACTLY into that paradigm. A group designed to cater to substantive issues men confront should not be turned into a show and tell wall for the latest Maxim layout.

But, of course, "It's not bad because we also have pictures for gay guys" is really the only possible reply one could expect from such a circumstance.

And demeaning.

That is a foundational issue in intellectual discussion revolving around sexist tendencies. The ultimate male is the almost pathologically sexual who, for instance, can't post on a leftist discussion board without enshrining forever in the forum a thread dedicated to the overt sexualization of an object of one's desires. Whether that is a man or a woman is largely incidental.

It feeds perfectly into the idealized male machismo. That it has branched off into the community of gay men is not a cause for celebration. Quite the opposite, really.

....oh well.

We're going to be sacrificing kittens over there tomorrow, so I've got to hit the sack.

never mind.

I am not sure how you know what we consume at such a pace.

Yes, we like to look at pretty women, often in sexual poses. I don't know why we do, but we do and thousands of years of civilization have managed to deal with it.

Why is this suddenly a problem?

It is a rather recent phenomena, actually. At least, the variant that currently plagues society is no more than a couple hundred years old.

It really is hopeless. They aren't interested in understanding. They want to believe feminists are just prudes. It's easier for them that way. Essentially, they are a lost cause. I consider myself lucky if I can get through a day on this site without seeing women referred to as whores or sluts. Remember the demographic on this site is quite old so they weren't educated to think about gender. They assume everything about their current worldview is entirely natural--genetic--and have no concept of the economic and cultural factors that give rise to ideas of gender, race, and sexuality. The ones I find most disturbing are the female misogynists. I really have no patience whatsoever for them. Others in HOF are more understanding of what makes women that way than I am.

Edit: Just realized I'm not in HOF. Only recently put this group on my list.
I'll duck for incoming.

men are, for some reason going eons back into time, visually stimulated in the mating business more than women. That's just a simple fact. Problems arise with how we deal with it.

Note that men are not the ones in five inch stillettos, Victoria's Secret bras and mascara. Or spending much money on hair care products. Well, most of us aren't. And also note that going back to ancient, and even prehistoric, times the art of the human body was often focused on sexual characteristics. Highly focused. Both sexes.

I'm not qualified to argue what all this means, but I can note that it exists and does have the effect of men noticing good looking women. We also notice the competition between women in this looking good business. Most of us realize that his is not done specifically for our benefit (I am in no way playing "blame the women&quot but we are perfectly happy to take advantage of it as spectators. I might also note that most men don't find the stillettos, too heavy makeup, or excessively revealing clothing to be more attractive than less fashionable clothing. Many find them artificial and offputting. Especially if it makes you walk funny. Fashion photography, btw, is designed to put all these together into a fantasy look, so pushing it isn't as grotesque as it could be in real life.

While I readily admit that some men can be creepy, or outright pigs, dangerous even, I do have a problem with putting all this on men as if there is something going on that is entirely our fault. We did not invent microskirts, and even if a man did invent the bikini, nobody is forcing you to wear them. Wearing such clothing, or lack thereof, does not invite any sort of attack, of course, verbal or otherwise, but I don't understand complaints over our admiring the results of hot clothes, workouts, makeup and a little surgery on top of what you were born with.

Ever give much thought to that? You do you think controls the advertising industry? OMG, this is all soooo basic.

You have exemplified the points in my post perfectly, particularly about believing this is all natural. Yes, scientists have identified the genetic marker that make you attracted to stilettos and surgically altered women. It has absolutely nothing to do with the capitalist marketplace, sexism, and stereotypes that some women feel they must conform to. However did human kind reproduce itself before internet and print porn?

I'm not getting into this with you. As I said, it's obviously a lost cause. If some one else has the patience for it, more power to them.

just forget about that.

And stop trying to tell me women are too stupid to find comfortable shoes until men tell them to.

Last edited Tue Sep 24, 2013, 03:52 AM - Edit history (1)

And yes men do indeed control advertising.

I don't know what to say if you haven't read anything about how identifies are constructed. I'm guessing you've never read post-structuralist theory, much in gender studies, critical race theory, or cultural history. Society generates cultural expectations and ideas that frame how people see the world. Women are rewarded for their appearance.

It's really not unlike any set of cultural assumptions that frame how people in a given historical period see the world: like, for example, the difference in the understanding of knowledge, God, and the natural world pre-and post-Enlightenment. Other examples are how understanding of labor, money, and employer responsibility is culturally bound. Only in the past century or so has money itself come to be seen as a virtue. Capitalism has created a cultural environment in which women's bodies are treated as commodities, along with other objects bought and sold in contemporary society. Our cultural circumstances frame how we understand gender, just as they do race. Pretending it is natural is like imagining race is biological. They are not. They are cultural notions, historically bound.

Always sad and demoralizing to watch someone fly their sexism flag in order to deny that sexism exists.

arguing the same thing last month. Seriously. It even mentioned Victoria's Secret. He was nuked after the first post.

So I miss their "fun and games". When I didn't have it trashed - these whiny threads about "why don't women like meeeeeee when my mutheeeer says I'm very handsome" used to pop up. It struck me as a vacuum of willful ignorance. Guess not much has changed.

Because I believe turn about is fair play.

I also believe the Women's World Group does not get nearly as much traffic as it should. Now I just read a thread in HOF where redqueen got an op hidden because someone alerted for misandry. In reality - sometimes "girls just wanna have fun" and just chit chat about the world. Seems if we do that in the groups related to feminism or in the general boards - its not "nice".


So if women can't be women in Women's World . . .

And the title is 'Totally Hot Celebrity Thread 3.0', not 'bikini babes' or 'only attractive women can be posted'.

I dunno. I think people might be over-thinking the whole thing. My impression was that the whole thing started as a light-hearted thing and took a turn into shit-stirring territory at some point. I'm just not seeing the harm in it. I had a good time posting in the thread and would never have seen the Eddie Vedder Portlandia thing if I hadn't...

Calling out the Men's Group or any other group puts the attention on all members of that group and quite frankly turns the discussion into one about the GROUP rather than the ISSUES. Furthermore, such calling out has lead to spectacular feuds between groups in the past. It got very ugly and resolved nothing.

Therefore, in the interest of keeping the discussion on point please call out specific sexist/misogynist/otherwise offensive posts or threads, not groups.

The thread(s) in question deserve criticism here. Intaglio started a thread on one and it's still active for comments.

Thanks,

Gormy