RE: More Thoughts on Women, Oppression and Porn
Hey @sean-king, thanks for the response.
I would like to address that it seems as though you feel my article was a personal attack on your beliefs. Note that I was merely giving a female influencing opinion on the differences between empowerment and objectification.
Discussion is important, but I do not appreciate being an assumed misandrist. Consider rephrasing questions like this, as it sounds like you have a different agenda, opposed to a debate.
Perhaps @veralyann thinks it's only males that are "monkeys"?
Here is another point you make even further rationalizes my original argument:
You being aroused by me doesn't "objectify" or "dehumanize" me in any possible way, even if I'm unaware of it or I'm powerless to quell your lust--well, unless I've been conned into thinking that I should feel "objectified" or "dehumanized" as a result. But, what if instead I had been taught that I was empowered by the attention and I knew how to exploit it?
You don't feel objectified by said situation because it doesn't objectify you. That was my whole point of the article-- even the title asks the key question, "Is This Empowerment, Or Objectification?"
Again, thank you for the response. Please take my article in question as constructive criticism for how we interact/treat/talk about women in the future, as that was the idea when creating it.
great discourse
Thanks again. I did not take your response as a personal attack in any way, and I did not intend mine to be one. To the extent it came across that way, my apologies. I sometimes debate like a trial lawyer--with passion and conviction and hopefully logic. I did not mean to insult you personally.
No need for apologies. It was a wonderful discussion that we should see more of!
One last thing I would like to edit and reiterate:
I still don't believe that psychology undermines feminism politically, or socially.
Thank you, again, for the discussion. I look forward to reading your future articles. :)
As I said already correlation is not equal to causality. I know I'm a little late in the discussion so please forgive my tardy response.
I don't understand you final point about objectification. Are you suggesting that your arousal is only objectification if I feel objectified by it? That objectification is not objective but rather is determined solely by the mental state and self-image of the object? I would suggest the opposite. if you are going to accuse someone of objectifying you, then it's their mental state, their intent, that is determinative, not your reaction to it.
Everyone individually decides what feels objectifying. Objectification occurs when a person feels they have been treated more as an object than as a person, and when that is is different for different people.
There is not, by definition, an objective, fixed length list of things that are objectifying. It is up to us, both at the individual and at the social level to try to be more aware of the phenomenon of objectification and actively avoid it.
Reality is not what you feel it is,
you cant extrapolate moral relativism and subjectivity to any issue, it doesnt work that way.
If you learned to empathize with others, like women, then you would be able to understand that your demand for the issue to be black and white is beyond unrealistic.
Reality is not what you feel it is, you cant extrapolate moral relativism
and subjectivity to any issue, it doesnt work that way.
Objectification is defined as the seeing and/or treating a person, usually a woman, as an object.
I think it can be argued that if a person feels victimized or objectified, they could very well be. That obviously isn't the only factor when we ask ourselves, "is this objectifying?" Objectification can be classified by many other telling categories.
My final point was to illustrate how some of your questions are rhetorical. Since your first sentence said you aren't objectified by the hypothetical-- well, then it's probably not objectifying. However, that's not a realistic standpoint of how these situations usually play out.
You make the grave error of thinking that if you or someone feel something
then that something is real.
Your solipsism is getting the best of you and controls you like a demon.
Reposting this because it got hidden by censorship.
You make the big and typical mistake of thinking that if you or someone feel something
then that something is real. Your solipsism is getting the best of you and controls you like a demon. Reposting this because it got hidden by censorship.
You make the grave error of thinking that if you or someone feel something
then that something is real.
Your solipsism is getting the best of you and controls you like a demon.
can you smell the solipsism in vera's replies?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism
reposting this cause it was hidden by censorship.
can you smell the solipsism in vera's replies?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism
No.
In that pose you can probabliy smell something else.
more on thoughts on objectification
I think we see it happening because in web, mostly there are men.
It is obvious there are women also, but now we can see something strange, because in internet , insulting a woman is acceptable by many people.
It is very stupid, but i think that internet is a place where hate is #1 thanks to "anonymous" users.
They think being "anonymous" (actually they are not if someone really wants to track them) gives them right to insult the others.