Page 3 -Smut Or A British Institution?

Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by Mangosteen, Jan 20, 2015.

  1. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Ah, see I don't do that. If I read things that disagree with me I might have to admit I'm wrong.

    No I don't, and I gave the example ages ago now that I look at it the same way as the incorrect assertion games cause violence. If seeing and playing a violent game doesn't cause violence, why would a seductive image of a woman make you be a sexist pig?

    If that's all you saw then yes, it would. Which is why I get Zaad's point now about the opposition to page 3 in the Sun specifically because its playing into a wider scheme of things. But in the sense than an image by itself does it? No. This is largely my fault for reading a ton of stuff from people who opposed page 3 and the t-shirt based off opposing female nudity and any expression of female sexuality and bringing that baggage here because I know better than to bother arguing with people on facebook.

    Ok yes you'd have to talk to her about things, that's not what I meant. If she brought it up obviously you'd have to give her an answer. What I meant was that if you've generally brought her up to believe in her own autonomy, and to believe women and men are equal and we're all individuals then that's not going to go out of the window because she saw him in his shirt. Her sense of self-respect and self-worth is not going to change because of it.
     
  2. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    You're being a bit absolutist about how kids are brought up IMHO. It's not that black and white. Parents don't have that much say or power.
    Aside from the impact of their own innate qualities, parents have only a partial say in how their kids grow up.
    Which is exactly why the wider society and prevailing thoughts and attitudes in that society are so important to get right.
    I've always said that from 0-5 parents have the most say. 5-10 the child's friends have an input too. 10-15 it's now mostly the child friends that have input and parents can go swivel. You just have to hope as a parent you did a good enough job in the years you did have some input.

    To use quite a stupid example...my daughter's never been taught to be afraid of spiders. We went out of our way not to engender that. But nonetheless, from somewhere that has developed. Probably from some nursery worker or one of her friends (or maybe even innate although she wasn't always like that).
     
  3. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Or the fact that spiders are godless creatures from the blackest depths of hell reserved for wasps and hornets?
     
  4. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    Well we can agree on that thing at least. :)
     
  5. Wildlings

    Wildlings Baguette Jouster

    But it's not about one man in a shirt. We keep being told that woman = sexual object every day from media, adverts etc, it's not an isolated case as much as the general context we live in.
     
  6. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    I've got a pet spider, I call her Bitey.

    [​IMG]

    Also some hornet like dudes. I mean they're ants, but they still count right?

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2015
  7. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    Kill it with fire.
     
  8. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    I do agree that societal attitudes are important though, but I don't think of things like media as being to blame. The things we're talking about I see as expressions of the feeling in society, not the root cause. With some exceptions.

    Like, stick with the idea of topless women harming the perceptions of women. Not page 3, but topless women in general. They're popular because Western society has a thing for breasts, we don't have a thing for breasts because of topless women. So I don't feel like the solution is to ban topless women, but to change the thought so its not as big a deal. Banning it would be sweeping it under the rug and hoping you never find it again. It wouldn't actually change any perceptions, simply try to stop people accessing them as often. But if the dialogue was changed ever so slightly, they become something different.

    I'm rambling here and failing to make a point. To give a simple example, take model shows. A section of society sees them as objectifying and a product of the fact we view women as something to be attractive. Quite probably true. But instead of going with demands to ban them which doesn't change the view at all, just sweeps it under the rug, you instead shift the focus and make it something positive about female individuality. Like, instead of it being about men finding the women sexually attractive, its about the women enjoying expressing their sexuality and attractiveness.

    edit: Which I hasten add, seems to true from the comments I've read from women who have done them.

    I don't know if that makes any sense at all?
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2015
  9. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    You know what sucks about ants Philosoraptor? I actually find them fascinating creatures. But looking at them terrifies me and means I can never open a page about them :p
     
  10. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    They're really, really, REALLY cool creatures. Easily the most successful life form on Earth. I guess the fascination outweighs the terror for me, but then, I've always loved the movie Aliens. I'm hibernating my colony right now, but I hope that they get a few more workers going. Only got the one queen and six workers right now :[

    It's kind of fun keeping them as pets, like playing a real life RTS game.
     
  11. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    Yeah it does. But in true MAP fashion I prefer things be tackled from multiple angles.
    Minimise the crappy stuff (or put it in its proper context) AND promote the more positive things.
    You'll get more work done that way.
     
  12. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    It's not about blame for me. It's just recognising input.
    If you lift weights and your muscles grow what causes the growth? The weights? The rest period? Your nutrition? Or do they all work together?
     
  13. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    Back on topic, I think that this is a self perpetuating cycle. Depictions of women as sex objects and only sex objects leads to people depicting women as sex objects and only sex objects. I don't think things like 'blame' are useful in circumstances like this, because I don't necessarily think that anyone involved in these depictions is wringing their hands and thinking "Moo ahahaha! Now I will oppress all women!"

    I think this is a fine strategy in general, but it doesn't mean that you can ignore the as yet problematic depictions of women in media.

    I think there's a danger there in trying to simply say "No honey, it's empowering when you take your clothes off and have multiple men have sex with you!" I'm exaggerating the example and raising the stakes, but my point is that where does the burden of change come from? In the example you've cited, you could say that the women are becoming independent, or that women are still being objectified and held up for male viewing, they are simply told that they should enjoy it at this point. I think a good book that kind of talked about this kind of backlash and reframing of media depictions of women was Female Chauvinist Pigs, if you're ever interested in reading about it.
     
  14. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Is that possible with things like female sexualisation though? How do you remove all the stuff we have now and at the same time present it positively? My example with topless women you can do now. I could pick any picture of a topless women and you could view it either way I described with the only difference being your own interpretation.

    Wouldn't they grow just with the weight? :p

    I get what you're saying mate and I agree. But the fact its a sum of its parts makes me hesitant when one of the parts is attacked as I rarely see it as the part's fault per se. The only fault the part has is in being part of whole.
     
  15. Wildlings

    Wildlings Baguette Jouster

    Surely there must be some context for it though? Heck they use naked women to advertise any kind of things, I don't see how that could be "expressing their sexuality and attractiveness".
    Also why should sexual poses be the only way to express confidence in one's own body? One could take naked pictures without them being necessarily sexual (like the kind of pictures you see of men of Men's Fitness and similar mags) and I don't think they'd be less attractive.
     
  16. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    I think a key difference is I'm not suggesting its purely men saying "get over it love, its empowering." I have no problem saying I'd argue against banning these things for selfish reasons, but I'm basing that specific example off what I've seen women involved in them say. The problem was every time they said it they were shouted down by other women with no experience in it who disagreed with them, but hey. Its not the people involved in it who's views are the ones causing problems and need changing, its the spectators on the sidelines.
     
  17. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    I'm not suggesting one at the exclusion of the other.

    edit: Also, men's fitness is a magazine aimed at men, there's no reason for it to be sexualised. I can however think of women's magazines that have had men pose for pictures that are clearly meant to be more sexual. Not in the same way as they're not explicit, but I'm willing to assume that's because of the way we've levelled things where breasts are sexual but not strictly explicit in the same way as genitals. In either case I've seen both demographics marketed to with the opposite gender in underwear trying to be seductive.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2015
  18. Wildlings

    Wildlings Baguette Jouster

    Which is why I'm talking about context. Sexualised pics of men are mostly in contexts that you'd define appropriate, sexualised pics of women are everywhere.
     
  19. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Gotcha. Have to agree with you there.
     
  20. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    The problem is that there is no one who is on the sidelines in this debate, or rather, the people who are discussing the effects of omnipresent sexualized imagery of women are just as subject to its effects as the women who make these images. I think there are healthy depictions of sexuality - comparing something like a feminist burlesque show to some of the nastier forms of pornography should demonstrate that to anyone - but I don't think that things like Taylor's t shirt is clearly one or the other until it's analyzed contextually. The fact is that women are objectified just… throughout our culture. I don't think it would be as problematic if it weren't so ubiquitous.

    [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SrpARP_M0o"]If Women's Roles In Ads Were Played By Men - YouTube[/ame]

    Stuff like this!

    Edit: Wildlings beat me to the punch :[
     

Share This Page