The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Why do men object to being objectified?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by louieee
you need to realise that objectification literally means you see them as an object rather than a human...in which case, you should just stick to porn and maybe get a sex doll? because attraction is nowhere near similar to refusing to treat someone as person


In which case....objectification is not present in the examples given by those looking for it, and it is something which has probably rarely occurred in human history.
Original post by KingStannis
But we are, i think, completely happy with that by product.


Only because men aren't picky about female attention - God knows we don't get much of it. Most men do take exception to gay men being attracted to them though I think.

(Note that this is not the same thing as saying objectification and attraction are actually immoral; I agree with you that they're not.)
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by KingStannis
In which case....objectification is not present in the examples given by those looking for it, and it is something which has probably rarely occurred in human history.



lol of course dude, sure.
Original post by scrotgrot
It's certainly worth noting that the way to objectify men is not, or at least not solely, about looks. For example, an action hero is quite as objectified as his skimpily dressed female co-lead.

Although it's supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, even the men in your photo are wearing bow ties and shirt cuffs, which connote a high social position, and leather trousers, which connote a life of rugged hard work. Even they are not being objectified solely through their looks.


Female and male sexual attraction differs, the supply and demand curves adjust according. There's no moral moral difference, they're either both bad or both okay. I argue the latter.
Original post by scrotgrot
Only because men aren't picky about female attention - God knows we don't get much of it. Most men do take exception to gay men being attracted to them though I think.

(Note that this is not the same thing as saying objectification and attraction are actually immoral; I agree with you that they're not.)


That probably plays a part. If a girl shows interest in me (even if it's just in my head) it makes my day lol.

I don't mind it if guys find me attractive. I guess i'm physically fit enough to not be in immediate danger and don't feel queasy about the male body so i guess that explains it.
Original post by louieee
lol of course dude, sure.


And here you are trying to save face for the fact you have no further arguments.
Original post by KingStannis
And here you are trying to save face for the fact you have no further arguments.


what the hell are you talking about? "arguments"? :s lol wot am I missing something here
Original post by KingStannis
Female and male sexual attraction differs, the supply and demand curves adjust according. There's no moral moral difference, they're either both bad or both okay. I argue the latter.

Well I don't think it's okay when women who are worth much more than their outfits and looks (famous doctors for example) are reduced to walking mannequins, when men aren't.
Original post by louieee
what the hell are you talking about? "arguments"? :s lol wot am I missing something here


"arguments" being the things that you have been trying to make against my points, and also being the things you have stopped making and instead preferring to resort to weak "lol ok then" responses.
Original post by gagafacea1
Well I don't think it's okay when women who are worth much more than their outfits and looks (famous doctors for example) are reduced to walking mannequins, when men aren't.


In what way are men not and women are?
Original post by KingStannis
In what way are men not and women are?

In what way?? What do you mean? I said a lot of times when it comes to successful talented people on tv, you see the hosts discussing their achievements while for women they say a thing or two about that and then immediately move on to their outfits and hair.
Original post by KingStannis
"arguments" being the things that you have been trying to make against my points, and also being the things you have stopped making and instead preferring to resort to weak "lol ok then" responses.



Calm your balls dude wtf :s
Original post by gagafacea1
In what way?? What do you mean? I said a lot of times when it comes to successful talented people on tv, you see the hosts discussing their achievements while for women they say a thing or two about that and then immediately move on to their outfits and hair.


That's not objectification; they're not being treated like objects, they're merely being appreciated for trivial things that don't matter, and their significant accomplishments are undervalued. I think this should stop, but it's a completely seperate issue to objectification, becuase they're not being seen as objects, they're being represented as lesser than they are.

And the only way to solve this problem is for females and perhaps homosexual men to stop givng a **** about this **** and thereby generate demand for it. 99% of men DO NOT CARE about "hair" and "outfits" on women. YOU (directed at all the female fashion fans otu there) need to change YOUR ways if you want to stop this sort of crap, as it's DEMAND YOU'VE CREATED that generates it.

I mean, ffs, heterosexual men being blamed for women caring about other women's shoes now.
Original post by gagafacea1
Well I don't think it's okay when women who are worth much more than their outfits and looks (famous doctors for example) are reduced to walking mannequins, when men aren't.


Are there any famous doctors? Harold Shipman maybe...

Here you show you have internalised a false image of value based on what job and social position someone has. This is quite as insidious as judging someone on looks, and quite as motivated narrowly by what attracts a certain segment of the population (i.e. women). It's just that as a society we have decided, very broadly speaking, to use this particular system to decide who gets the most money, respect and power.

Essentially this imaginary famous female doctor has made herself into an attractive proposition based, again broadly speaking, more on what confers sociosexual value on men rather than what confers sociosexual value on women. That's her look-out.

OK, I concede there is inherent value to society in the work of a doctor, it's not solely about financial security and social position. But it would be much the same story with, I don’t know, some popularly deprecated profession like banker or estate agent.
ffs i wish feminists would offer me a challenge I'm bored of running rings around you all.
Original post by KingStannis
That's not objectification; they're not being treated like objects, they're merely being appreciated for trivial things that don't matter, and their significant accomplishments are undervalued. I think this should stop, but it's a completely seperate issue to objectification, becuase they're not being seen as objects, they're being represented as lesser than they are.
And the only way to solve this problem is for females and perhaps homosexual men to stop givng a **** about this **** and thereby generate demand for it. 99% of men DO NOT CARE about "hair" and "outfits" on women. YOU (directed at all the female fashion fans otu there) need to change YOUR ways if you want to stop this sort of crap, as it's DEMAND YOU'VE CREATED that generates it.
I mean, ffs, heterosexual men being blamed for women caring about other women's shoes now.

I guess you're right, it is the females that are doing this. Also don't even blame this on us, we're like 1% of the population.
Original post by KingStannis
ffs i wish feminists would offer me a challenge I'm bored of running rings around you all.

bitch don't you dare call me that.
What garbage did I just read..?
Original post by gagafacea1
I guess you're right, it is the females that are doing this. Also don't even blame this on us, we're like 1% of the population.


I don't blame anyone. I just think that, if we're pointing fingers at who's responsible for women's achievements not being paid as much attention compared to things like "what outfit she's wearing", well don't look at straight men who watch football.

You have a much better case with the example of women not being seen as being as good at science. Here us men are to blame largely. Still nothing to do with objectification though.
Original post by Soldieroffortune
What garbage did I just read..?

When will you realize that this is (was) a parody..?