The sexualization of girls and mental health problems

[redqueen]

In response to reports by journalists, child advocacy organizations, parents, and psychologists, in 2007 the American Psychological Association (APA) created a Task Force to consider these issues. The Task Force Report concluded that the sexualization of girls is a broad and increasing problem and is harmful to girls' self-image and healthy development. Sexualization is defined as occurring when a person's value comes only from her/his sexual appeal or behavior, to the exclusion of other characteristics, and when a person is sexually objectified, e.g., made into a thing for another's sexual use. The report states that examples of sexualization are found in all forms of media, and as 'new media' have been created and access to media has become omnipresent, examples have increased.

The APA Task Force Report states that sexualization has negative effects in a variety of domains:

* Cognitive and emotional health: Sexualization and objectification undermine a person's confidence in and comfort with her own body, leading to emotional and self-image problems, such as shame and anxiety.
* Mental and physical health: Research links sexualization with three of the most common mental health problems diagnosed in girls and women—eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression or depressed mood.
* Sexual development: Research suggests that the sexualization of girls has negative consequences on girls' ability to develop a healthy sexual self-image.


http://www.aboutourkids.org/articles/how_raise_girls_healthy_selfesteem

I just read a blog post bemoaning the fact that there's no T&A on display at soccer games.

So I thought I'd post this as an OP, because apparently far too many people are still not quite clear on objectification and why it's bad.

[Octafish]

1. K & R

Many parts of American culture serve to teach girls to forget that women are people, not things.

[redqueen]

11. I wouldn't limit it to American culture in particular.

Not by a longshot.

[Betty Karlson]

89. Japan has long ago accepted a link between

Eating disorders and Western Culture (and its depiction of women). No-one said it had to be American, but given the prominence of American culture within the Western culture - little will be changed without America co-operating.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Girls, and their clothing are FAR too sexualized. Even as athletes: Olympic 'beach' vollyball, etc

They have no haven from it any more.

[DailyGrind51]

42. I could not agree more!

There is little qualitative difference between the bikini mud or jello wrestling matches conducted in some college town bars and beach volleyball. The fact that the latter is an Olympic event says more about what has happened to the modern games than contributes dignity to the women's beach contest.

[theHandpuppet]

90. Yeah, I've never understood that

The men wear long, baggy shorts while the women barely have a string to wear.

[Captain Hilts]

107. Exactly. When men and women are doing the exact same activities & their clothes are so different

THAT's your clue.

When I did the Google image search for "olympic beach volleyball" no photographs of men came up until page four.



The men wear MUCH more:

[pscot]

136. 10

It's pretty stark.

[Tansy_Gold]

3. + a bazillion

and bookmarking to share with the insignificant other, who just doesn't get it.


This stuff starts so early and is so pervasive, that even when one tries consciously to overcome it, the insidious seeds have already sprouted their tentacles into the psyche. And then those situations come along that don't allow for the conscious process to battle them, the battle is lost.


Thank you for finding and posting this.



Tansy Gold

[TexasObserver]

4. recommend

[ceile]

5. Thanks for posting

[Lone_Star_Dem]

6. K&R

Excellent article.

[CoffeeCat]

7. As a parent of two girls...

...ages 9 and 10, I feel as if I am constantly fighting EVERYTHING, in order
to keep my girls from thinking that their self worth and value to society
lies only in their ability to be drop-dead gorgeous.

It's commercials. It's the Disney Channel (don't eeeeeven get me started). It's
the clothing in the malls. It's music on the radio that is highly sexual and
demeaning to women. It's how boys treat girls.

I might sound like some puritanical weirdo, but I'm a pretty hip mom. I was
a cheerleader in high school and don't mind that kind of stuff. But what
we're seeing is hyper-sexualization of young women and even girls. It's pretty
creepy.

Young female pop stars are also a lovely tidal wave to fight. Miley Cyrus got
little girls hooked on Hannah Montana, but now she's decided to "grow up" and
have you seen what she considers "grown up"? She's only 17, with her father
managing her career, and this is what they deem is "grown up" for a young
woman. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjSG6z_13-Q Why isn't grown up being
smart, funny, joyful and wise? Why does grown up mean slithering around on the
floor and spreading your legs? Miley Cyrus is a multi-millionaire and she
doesn't have to do this. But this is what she does. Don't get it. I wouldn't
be so concerned about this if she didn't have millions of ten year old girls
watching her every move. SAD.

/climbs off soap box...

[redqueen]

9. It really is ubiquitous.

I hope eventually the tide will turn, but the current trend sure isn't encouraging.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Disney Channel?

Wut?

[JHB]

18. It's a "tween diva" assembly line...

Think of every starlet who pops up out of nowhere, gets some popularity, then has messy gossip-page trouble: Brittany Spears, Lindsey Lohan, Miley Cyrus, plus some who mange to skip the flamout (Hillary Duff, Avril Levine), and a few guys (Shia LeBouf). They probably got their initial popularity boost in one of the Disney Channels shows, which is pretty much off the radar of anyone who doesn't have kids in the "tween-age" range.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. No, I'm aware of that.

But by the time they grow up and start having problems, they're off the Disney Channel.

[seabeyond]

22. my niece older than my boys, is here lots. she would have that garbage on. just the whole way

the two genders behaved with each other. was like adult behavior, adult script given to kids to act out. i turned it off, to her. my boys never interested in the shows.... she hung on those shows. i hated the way they portrayed female behavior.

[Kalyke]

98. In addition, it's Disney's over-hype of the Princess type.

We don't have princesses in the United States and I already tell my daughter that - even though she seems to like those annoying caricatures of womanhood.

I always say, "Hon, it's OK to watch this, but remember, we don't have princesses in the United States. We have a president. Run for that office when you're grown." :)

[seabeyond]

13. as a parent of two boys,

..... ages 12 and 15, i feel as if i am constantly fighting EVERYTHING, in order to teach my boys how girls are being conditioned and taught their self worth is only in their looks and sexuality. and why a girl that feels this little respect for herself is not going to allow my boys to have the kind of relationship with a girl that they want.

i teach my boys how all the commercials, comments, porn, show, movies are continually telling these boys what it is to be a man, and their role with females, that are damaging to both genders

you are right

ALL the time

ALL over the place

there are lessons for my son to see, what the conditioning of society does to their generation.

keep up the good work.

[Dawson Leery]

17. The Disney Channel is fairly clean, with only two exceptions

Miley Cyrus (recall the Vanity Fair spread with her backwood daddy? :puke:) and Linday Lohan.
Sure it's corporate made, but Disney is better for the kids than the Kardashians(who's only claim to fame is their father who defended O.J Simpson).

[LibertyLover]

101. As the mother of an 8 year old daughter

I couldn't agree more about the Disney Channel. We don't let her watch shows like iCarly, etc. because of the content. And believe me does she get upset, especially when we tell her to be home from a certain friend's house before some of the shows we don't allow her to watch come on. And don't get me started on trying to find clothes and shoes that are what I consider age-appropriate. Shoes, believe it or not, are the worst. I went out to buy my kid a pair of sturdy sandals for the summer and the only ones I found for girls at the first 3 shoes stores I went to were thin soled, high heeled (!), narrow strapped ones that wouldn't last through a week of play. I was going to buy her a pair of boys' sandals, but finally found something vaguely approaching what I wanted at the 4 store. Meh.

[Kalyke]

131. I've never noticed anything weird on iCarly.

And iCarly is on Teen Nick. Are your sure you're thinking of that show?

In iCarly, both she and Sam (Samantha) are enterprising young girls who run and host their own webshow with the help of a male friend.

They wear T-shirts and jeans, mostly. I've never seen either girl dressed in what might be considered sexualizing attire.

[LibertyLover]

140. My husband is the child's primary caregiver and stays home with her

while I work. He is the one that made the decision on iCarly (sorry - thought it was Disney, I don't watch tv much and not kids tv channels if I can help it), not so much about the clothing but about the some of the dialog and situations the characters found themselves in which he considered way too sexy for a then 6 year old child. I don't have much say about the way he's raising her because I'm not home much of the time. But I do buy her clothes and find it more and more difficult to purchase clothing that I consider appropriate for her age.

[Jennicut]

180. My daughters watch iCarly because the two girls are not vapid oversexualized idiots.

One of the few good shows around for girls. Yes, a bit over the top sometimes but still, not a bad show for girls.
Miranda Cosgrove seems pretty together and down to earth for a 16 year old.

[callous taoboy]

121. I had never seen Miley before the video you posted, CoffeeCat.

What a turn-off. I agree with your post 100%. I teach third grade in a country school and I know that my students are exposed to this crap. I guess that being out in the country maybe I'm not seeing them copy or outwardly admire this stuff. No doubt it is reaching them on a deep level and may influence them to behave / dress in similar style once the hormones start to kick in. Sad.

That aside, I am completely disgusted, overall, by how hyper-narcissistic our society has become. This video is a perfect example. Phony, fake, poseurs. Boys and girls, men and women alike. I am 45 and am now experiencing having teaching colleagues that are in their early 20's and it is unbelievable how immature and insincere many of them are.

[redqueen]

127. You just reminded me...

I was at the mall with my kids recently and we walked past a store called "Forever 21"... now maybe that name doesn't mean what I think it means, but I had to groan and then explain to my kids the reason for my response to seeing the name.

Women in their 60s and 70s are lavished with praise and attention for having obscene amounts of plastic surgery, so that they can look young and beautiful and sexy.

It's insane... truly insane.

[callous taoboy]

156. Maybe it should be called, "Forever 16."

I swear, that is the mental age of a lot of the people I run into who are in the 20 to 30 range.

[bobbolink]

152. That is really disturbing. I am now wondering about her relationship with her father.

It's hard to even say anything about that. I wish I hadn't seen it, but thank you for posting it.

[JerseygirlCT]

174. I feel for you

When my oldest was only in middle school, I'd wait to pick him up after an event, and think: "gee, maybe I got off easy not having girls. If I were the parent of so many of these girls, we'd be fighting about their clothing on a daily basis".

I so agree with you - it seems there's precious little time for girls to be girls anymore and a big rush to look like tarts instead. The lucky ones have parents like you.

[nyc 4 Biden]

8. k&r

[Zorra]

10. "Sexualization" of women is profitable for large corporations.

It creates a huge market of desperate consumers.

[TheMadMonk]

14. The single biggest offender when it comes to sexualisation of the human female...

...of any age, is other human females.

Sort that out and you might have a beginning to the end of the problem.


We blokes may crudely comment on the pulchritudinous display in front of us, but for the most part we are NOT the ones who put it there.

As for bemoaning the lack of T&A, well guess who it is that lead us to expect it everywhere we go?

Turning the whole Burkha thing on its head for a moment, consider what fashions were for Western women in the pre-suffrage and later pre-liberation days. (no I am not advocating a return to those days) Consider the likely response even today if you comment favourably on (or sometimes even look sideways at) another bloke's girlfriend. Men (on the whole) do not like other men moving in on their "territory", never have, and probably never will. Whether or not women are "territory" is a whole 'nother argument. For the record, I fully support women being their own person IN EVERY WAY.

Men are the ones responsible for neck to knee (and further in both directions) clothing styles. WOMEN are the ones responsible for the fashions being complained about her.

Please note, I am not in any way defending practices that in some parts of the world (including certain bits of the US) are indeed truly barbaric, I am merely pointing out which gender drives clothing trends in which direction.

(Me wonders how many will read this far before exploding.)

As for the mental health problems: The enormous dichotomy of the many many messages about what a woman has to do and be to be a success would come close to explaining most of them.

(edited to add)
Media might broadcast some of the message, but in general much of the real damage is done by other girls: The In Crowd and The Bitch Brigade (often one and the same), the whole cycle of shunning and inclusion. Pretty much everything in that list is more often than not down to the actions, words and behaviours of other women and girls. Individual men might very well fuck up the lives and minds of individual women in this way, but it is most certainly women who do it wholesale.

[redqueen]

15. This isn't just about clothes. Women are free to dress as they like.

This is about the fact that women's bodies are used as decorations... and girls get the message.

Did a woman design the Evony ads? Beer ads? GoDaddy ads? Hardee's ads?

Am I making this any clearer?

[TheMadMonk]

25. As crystal. Women are free to dress as they please in order to...

...elicit a certain class of response from men and we're complete bastards for behaving exactly the way you expect us to.

How many women's and teen magazines are edited by men? Not bloody many.

Beer ads? Well here in Australia most of the local brews are pretty much sold by men to men. It's almost exlusively imported horsepiss that comes with tits and arses popping out of the screen. (Probably to distract us from the taste.)

Evony? It's a fantasy game. Guess what one of our biggest fantasies is? When you consider the basic banality of the game itself, the ads are about the only thing it has going for it.

The other two I've never heard of. But yes I understand your point. Unfortuantly you seem to be missing mine. That style of advertising is not chosen to demean women. It's chosen, because men have so little defence against it.

Once upon a time we men kept the objectification in its "proper place", titty bars, "gentlemen's Clubs" and French postcards. It was women who in many ways dragged all that vulgarity out of the shadows and put it on public display.

Yes, we men are very VISUAL when it comes to "appreciating" sexual display. Like it or lump it, what you call "objectification" is fucking programmed into our genes. Engorged vulvae and big purple bums do it for monkeys. For we humans, with our over active imaginations, a well turned ankle briefly appearing from beneath a floor length skirt was once enough to set a young man's heart racing. (And in all probability still does in Islamic nations.) Display customs change. The response doesn't.

WE men actually understood the problem a long time ago. Our solutions might have been wrongheaded and sometimes harmful to women, but they did work. They made it possible for us to function in mixed societies without having to spend the whole time ignoring our hormones.

It is women who rub our noses in our nature and then blame us when we behave exactly as we evolved to behave. Yes we (well most of us) can control it, but it IS a hard mental effort (particularly for younger men), and at the end of the day, we're going to "Grab our dicks, and double click for porn, porn, porn." whether you like it or not, because THAT'S THE WAY MEN ARE MADE.

Before you go pointing out that not all societies are like that, let me point out that those societies far more often than not, have evolved very rigid codes and customs of sexual display. And also that neither the men nor the women of those societies are free to behave or decorate themselves as they please.

You want that Freedom, you will (unfortunately (if you must have it that way)) have to put up with all that "male shit". You don't want the "male shit", then a rigid, formalised code of sexual display is what it will take to make it hapen.

There is no solution in pounding on every male sexual button while demanding that he change his fundamental nature. And then condemning him when he won't or can't.

Perhaps a solution can be found in educating children (male and female) exactly what it is that drives the base (instinctual) human being and how artificial social overlays are used to control or mask that animal being within us. Just as lessons in tribal dynamics might provide at least a partial solution to gang related problems.

[redqueen]

65. Lots of undesirable, damaging, counterproductive primitive behavior is "in our genes".

Behaving as if you respect the person you're interacting with has nothing to do with hormones.


"Yes we (well most of us) can control it, but it IS a hard mental effort (particularly for younger men), and at the end of the day, we're going to "Grab our dicks, and double click for porn, porn, porn." whether you like it or not, because THAT'S THE WAY MEN ARE MADE."

Many men are in fact not like that. No point in continuing to discuss this with you.

[treestar]

172. It is interesting how flawed men attribute their individual weaknesses

to mere maleness; slandering all other men merely to prop their own faults as being something beyond their control about which they can do nothing.

[redqueen]

184. For me what's really interesting is how few other men say shit about it!

I know if some woman was in here talking about how all women are just greedy and we can't help being gold diggers cause it's in our genes there'd be a couple dozen of us saying otherwise.

I'm always so impressed and thankful when a few men do bother to speak up, cause they risk being told they're lying to impress women, they're gay, they're deluded, etc.

Maybe one day enough men will be bothered enough by the stereotypes to start objecting in large enough numbers that this tired old 'we can't help it!' song and dance won't get trotted out so shamelessly/often.

[Kalyke]

100. So it's OK to objectify women if they're in a "gentleman's" (HA!) club?

It's NEVER OK to objectify women.

And it's demeaning to the male gender to say that all you are made of is a defective gene that's only interested in porn. That's idiotic.

[lumberjack_jeff]

193. Yes. Everyone should be able to strip and pole dance without

being seen "as an instrument (object) towards the (audience members) sexual pleasure"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification

:eyes:

Women work in a "gentlemens clubs" because being objectified can be lucrative.

Strip clubs are stupid, but the performers are the ones getting paid. It's silly to treat this demeaning spectacle as completely one-sided.

[pscot]

139. This is nothing but blame shifting

n/t

[wolfgangmo]

154. Oh puhlease.

I am a dude and I don't buy your line of horse poop. What you are saying is that men have no control over how they act - that that's the way men are made and, poor dear, can't help it if they see a woman. And it is the woman's fault for deliberately wearing, gasp, revealing clothing (whatever the fuck that is).

Your man is an animal theorum is not holding water, mate.

[treestar]

171. Nothing is "programmed into your genes"

that's just an excuse.

[seabeyond]

16. wow... and i made it ALL the way thru without exploding. really,

that wasnt your intent with the post, was it? but good of you to put a gender in their place before they even have a chance to respond.

ya, men know and are able to control themselves not to check out another mans woman. they have all this ability when confronted with another man, but unfortunately, per male, they are totally hepless from looking at another woman, sexualizing her when with their women.

really, just cant help it, gotta do it, nature of the beast, caveman in me makes me do it.

everything in society tells them that is who they are, cant change that, as a booze commercial says.

yes

there is a problem with our girls being conditioned right along with our boys. i think that is the point of the post. all of culture pointing to whorifying our girls, that is what being a female is, conditioning our young girls, and the young girls..... internally not jiving with it. our young boys, not benefitting from it.

i might also challenge the fact that any of us girls/women have any kind of control over the clothes trend.

[TheMadMonk]

26. Sarcasm aside. You actually do have it in a nutshell.

You only have to look to see what men do to women when society breaks down or when society refuses protection to certain subclasses of women.

Most men do, manage to keep their inner-caveman under control, but we also understand that there is a significant minority amonst us (too large to just put up against the wall and shoot, even if that's what they deserve) that can not, or will not, without strictly enforced rules of behaviour.

Something far too many of us are uncomfortable with is the fact that underneath all that social overlay, we are every bit as much an instinctual animal as any other. The only difference is we do have the ability to say "no" to those instincts. However, take away any reason to say "no" and the animal may very well emerge.

Um, on the last point. Try sending a bloke down to Target/K-mart to buy the perfect kinderslut outfit for his little girl. It is almost exclusively women who buy those outfits and dress their little girls in them. And it is almost exclusively women who parade their tots up on the Little Miss USA catwalk.

[seabeyond]

39. i dont buy that. merely an animal with ability to say no.

i think this is another easy out without thought to behave with justification.

the more and more i listen to men, and i listen a lot, i dont see a whole lot of differences of the wants and needs. a conditioning i do see, often, is

the fragile male ego. let him look at other women, he needs too. validates his sexuality. he is a man, he has gotta. the animal makes him do it.

on the other hand

the womans ego matters naught. suck up your feelings to protect the mans ego. and screw your ego, suck that up too.

not the way nature works.

we have made a caricature of the caveman that totally benefits men and is a constant jab at female, and really.... we dont know shit from the caveman. guesses we make to formulate an agenda.

men want young, good looking, big boobs, spread seed (bible, religion?), variation, visual, female body beautiful.... from cave man
girls want old, out of shape, same old same old, not visual, male body not beautiful so we dont need to see nude. no really... that is what turns them on.

too pat for male ego.

now... i will agree that it is a lot of the mothers that are giving this to the girl, BUT.... how a girl sees her self worth is thru the father and his behavior to her. how she sees herself is thru the mother, how to be a female.

educate.

[femrap]

120. Our culture has

ridiculed women for their 'mood swings' due to the ability to give birth and continue the species.

Yet males are constantly thinking of having sex...and they say this is 'natural.'

Fine. But if that is what is taking up their brain space, I don't think they should be allowed to make important decisions in government nor in the financial world.

Look what has become of our economy...possibly the male animal should not be allowed to touch money?!:wow: :evilgrin:

[seabeyond]

126. except i dont buy that either.

i have watched, in raising of sons, from the youngest of time, my boys are asked, isn't she cute, isn't she hawt, always always addressing boys to be surveyor of a conquest. this is a continued commentary coming from adults. as soon as they hit puberty, every man starts talking to them about getting a girl.... odd bonding. but continually men are told their number one thought, all the time is sex. (today, all the outside influences are continual jabs to think of sex, no fuckin wonder they are continually reminded)

on the other hand, .... i have spent about all my time with males, one way or another. just how my life has turned out. i have very few females, tons of males. and they dont continually think sex, but do continually state this is who they are. it is the same trite sayings they repeat over and over and over that are not true that society conditions them what a man is.

[femrap]

129. Blame the Patriarchy....

this is the system that gives privilege to males. It permeates everything.

If you spend most of your time w/ males, maybe you feel the benefits of patriarchy.

What a man is....is what patriarchy wants him to be. If he is somehow able to confront this and not be brainwashed, good for him. And same for women...but they don't get the entitlements nor privilege.

I'm not specifically discussing the men in your life....this always happens when the subject of Gender/Patriarchy is mentioned. Step back and look at the culture and what it tries to make people into.

Not becoming brainwashed can be a lonely road....it all depends on how you look into the mirror and whether it's important to 'thine own self be true.'

[seabeyond]

130. it is what

i have been preaching for a long time on du. no, i dont get the advantage of it, i meet it head on continually. i get the opportunity to see it repeated in the experience of it. thru raising two boys, and a decided effort to not allow the conditioning per either gender, and being an older mother, independent for a number of years, living in texas, i have easily learned that it is in the conditioning and not innate or evolutionary, in so much of the behaviors assigned to both genders.

much of what i posted on this thread address patriarchy....

[ismnotwasm]

133. Men do not have an 'inner' cave-man

Anymore than women have an 'inner cave-woman' That's just silly. Whatever instinctual drives that influence our behavior should be adaptive at least, don't you think? It's not 'out of control' it's patriarchy driven pathology. Men and women meet and 'mate', as do men and men and women and women and certain combinations therein. Heterosexism is a destructive societal force in my opinion, and who is dressing in what is more of a reflection of what may or may not be healthy in a gendered society than well thought out personal choices.

Men are also responsible for their behavior. The part often not mentioned is that women, too, tend to be blamed for male behavior. Women have not reached economic parity, we don't have decent childcare or maternity leave, we still do the fucking dishes more often than not. We walk in fear. What is sold in magazines, in stores, in media is female sexuality, not that much different than prostitution, no matter who's doing the selling or promoting.

Men are also responsible to own their male entitlement. Very few do.

[redqueen]

20. I see that you've edited your post to absolve the media ("some of the message"?)

and put most of the blame on the girls themselves.

Well done.

[TheMadMonk]

28. The media can not be held responsible for behaviour that has been...

...common in the schoolyard or any other gathering of women since time immemorial.

Men gut each other with knives. Women do it with words.

Men and women each bear their own share of the blame. And most of it's down to niether understanding what's really going on in the minds (and more importantly below the level of the mind) of the other.

The only blame I'm directly laying at women's feet here, is this strange idea that you can remove remove the social overlay that makes hairy, sweaty men, gentlemen, punch all their psycho-sexual buttons and then demand perfect behaviour from them regardless.

[Mimosa]

82. Astute insights, Madmonk

You are very perceptive. In most western societies we women are the enforcers of cultural norms.

I'm of the baby boom generation. It seems to me the majority were raised far better than many raised their kids. I don't like the tolerance for vulgarity and violence which many people in their 30s have. I don't understand why the scripts in TV series like True Blood and Treme are overpacked with profanity. I can't even read posts about local restaurants on Yelp without having F, S and C words shoved at me.

No, I'm no prude. I appreciate literature. Emphatic words are sometimes appropriate. But bot F,S,P,C... all the time. ;)

[bettyellen]

91. "Whether or not women are "territory" is a whole 'nother argument" what a moronic statement

ypu obviously dont get it, the "mean girls" aren;t doing all that for themselves- they are doing it for men.
are they men going to pretend that they don;t enourage it? that;s bullsht

[MicaelS]

112. And precisely WHY are the mean girls doing it for men?

Solely for attention's sake? I have never encouraged that type of behaviour, I despise it.

As a man I have often thought as bad as men treat women, many times women treat other women worse. I despise the whole "mean girls / women" crap. I think any female who treats another that way is contemptible. I'm firmly convinced that the women are far, far too complacent about the ill treatment they receive from the mouths of other women. Women get treated badly by co-workers or classmates and do nothing. They don't report it, they just internalize it until they just quit their job, or hurt themselves in some fashion or kill themselves.

I believe that if girls learned from an early age that the instant they start using their tongue like a weapon toward another girl they get a swift punch in the mouth from said girl, that mean girls shit would quickly cease.

[bettyellen]

176. the mean girls go along to get along, and the nice girls let it slide because the odds are stacked

and people (like you and others here) will blame it mostly on women anyway. the shit men put them through is worse - always worse- and no one wants to hear about it.
yet you and other people want to shift the conversation to women vs women. what a bullshit distraction. the mean girls wouldn;t be gangng up wth the guys if the guys weren;t doing it in the first place. Doh.

[femrap]

117. If you

are stating that Patriarchy is NOT responsible for the problems women face....and that it is other women...you really need to go read some books or pull your head from the sand.

The 'other' woman are what patriarchy has designed so to keep the 'divide and conquer' tactic going.

They may be referred to as 'tools of the patriarchy.'

No, you as a beneficiary of the patriarchy are part of the problem.

If you aren't LISTENING to the other posters and Feminists, you will get nowhere but Ignored.

[TheMadMonk]

169. No, I am saying it is exactly those nasty male attributes which created...

...the fucking patriarchy.

Oh I listen, and I see what I see in a lot of arguments here. A refusal to accept what is, and a lot of wooly thinking where if "Everyone would just do the right thing, things would be great." Um, God, how's it going with those ten commandments?

Left to their own devices, the basic social dynamics of human beings are almost exactly like those of a troop of baboons or chimps.

I'll raise you a Stanford Prison Experiment, Abu Grahib, Wall street, Afghanistan, Iraq, 99.9% of Africa.................

Pick up a history book FFS. Like it or lump it. THIS IS NATURAL HUMAN BEHAVIOUR. Every now and then, occaional pockets of "decent" human beings do appear in history, and generally their fate is the same as that of the pink monkey. The other monkeys destroy them.

The only thing that keeps us even remotely in check is the enforcement of rules and customs with customs/traditions being the better of the two. Rules are imposed from above. Customs are enforced from all sides.

We live is a world where custom is more and more often discarded as quaint and irrelevant. Pretty much every one knows how they should behave. The law is there to tell us how to behave, and yet we're here having this bloody discussion.

I AM NOT saying that we shouldn't work to change things. What I am saying is that first step towards making those changes is understanding why things are they way they are now. Simply jumping up and down with demands that people(men) behave "propery" is not going to cut it.

[redqueen]

183. Who's jumping up and down and demanding?

I posted a some data in the OP which should make those who think objectification is A-OK a reason to reconsider that attitude.

[femrap]

192. I doubt if you have

read anything about the 'creation of patriarchy.' And what you consider 'normal human behavior'...well, all I gotta say is that, Gee, you seem to know everything already.

I hate dealing with know-it-alls. They are so very, very :boring: :boring: :boring: and :silly: :silly:

So you go ahead and think what ever you want and spew your crap at anyone who will put up with you.

The invention of gunpowder leveled the playing field. And religions are a big part of patriarchy.

But I don't want you to think about anything but what you are already typing in your head right now.

You're just another addition to the list. buh bye.

[Lilith Velkor]

21. I say again: girls should learn martial arts starting in third grade.

Nothing is better for the self esteem than knowing how to defend oneself.

[musette_sf]

23. K to the R!

I am in my late 50s.

I can attest that the following two negative effects played a great deal of havoc on my psyche as a teenager and young woman. In fact, it took me until my 40s to even BEGIN to resolve these for myself:

* Cognitive and emotional health: Sexualization and objectification undermine a person's confidence in and comfort with her own body, leading to emotional and self-image problems, such as shame and anxiety.
* Mental and physical health: Research links sexualization with three of the most common mental health problems diagnosed in girls and women—eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression or depressed mood.

I look back at old photos, and I now think, "How in the world could I have thought that I was so hideous that I did not deserve anything good in life?" I was beautiful... but I never believed it then.

[musette_sf]

24. "I just read a blog post bemoaning the fact that there's no T&A on display at soccer games"

Right, because every sports game should be like Gate D at the old Giants Stadium.

At Jets Game, a Halftime Ritual of Harassment
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/sports/football/20fans.html

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. I wear dresses that I think make me attractive

(full-length sun dresses that are form fitting) but that doesn't mean I want to be objectified.

Many native cultures wear far fewer clothes but their women aren't sexually objectified while some cultures cover their women from head to toe and treat them little better than livestock.

Clothes don't make the woman, the culture does.

[seabeyond]

31. my niece wears a too small, low cut to the nipple tshirt, with a push up and out bra

most of her boobs hanging out

and then bitches cause men look

i tell her, ..... sheeit, i am staring at your boobs and they dont do anything for me.

so

ok.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

34. Well, you know my story.

And lately I think I've learned a lot about who I am as a person and how I should be treated.

I made myself a sex object in the past thinking I was being free.

I was only being used.

Now I have a guy that respects me and he still knows how to push all the right buttons.

And sister I love it when he pushes the right buttons.

I hope your niece can learn that she isn't making friends she's only attracting flies.

[seabeyond]

37. damn, woman, you are right on. it isnt about not being sexual and not enjoying sex

it is about how you view yourself and your worth. and you will get what you attract. when girls are first walking into their sexuality, they see objectifying themselves as the definition of sexuality. it is not. but that is what our young girls are being taught. then they look at us old woman and say.... you just dont know. no. we just grew up and learned. lol

but it is for both genders. i wish the young would be able to experience their journey into sexuality without the adult world playing in it. they would do just fine. it is our adult world of sex that is retarding our kids.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

50. I meant to post about my weekend

We had a blast. BF and his family came up to my dad's place.

Dad only embarrassed me 3 times that I could count so that's a low in-season average for him.

Anyway the BF's parents also brought his kid sister and I was playing with her with some of my old stuff. I left her in my room to play. She's awesome and I love her to pieces. I don't know if he was teasing me but he knows my view on marriage (NO!) and motherhood (HELL NO!) but he said I would make a great mother.

I said I just adored his sister and said I hope she would find a guy that made her as happy as he makes me and that I want her to make her boyfriend as happy as I make him.

"Hey! That's my kid sister you're talking about. No! No! No!"

Ha-ha, butthead. He wants to play to play so I play too.

"What's wrong with wanting to please your man," I purr as sexy as I can in his ear.

He winces. "Oh my God, it's worse when I close my eyes."

It's funny. As passionate as we are together he is so protective of her. I pity her first boyfriend.

[seabeyond]

51. No! No! No!"....

i grew up with two older brothers. i always said i have three fathers, and my father is the easiest

sounds wonderful nuke

[Nuclear Unicorn]

66. Why are men so terrified to see their daughters and sisters have sex lives?

My dad says, "No man wants his daughter to be the sort of woman he likes and no man wants his daughter with the sort of man he is." </gruff guy voice>

[seabeyond]

68. again, this is part of the virgin/whore that even our fathers teach us, and certainly

there sons from a very young age. now, what do you think a father saying that to his daughter, tells his daughter.

bad parenting

not funny

not cute

and i say this not to point at your father. (my father is still, to this day, saying stupid things cause he thinks he is suppose to and my sons mouths drop open when they hear it). i know your father is good, and you love him, he loves you. but that is what men are allowed, without thought, that helps to create a conditioning for the mens behavior, ..... and for the girls.

a man can never see his daughter as a stripper. but it is fine for the other girls. yet they will tell you they respect the stripper. as they say the crudest, most vulgar things to her. and she has to put a shield up, to protect her emotional self.

that is the hypocrisy of this whole issue, that we are never honest about.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

77. I absolutely hear you and agree

But in fairness I think my dad's statement acknowledges its own hypocrisy.

"...the kind of woman he likes..." He admits right he is being a hypocrite.

He also admits in the second part that men have a roaming, wanting nature but he doesn't want his daughter's lover to be like he is.

I love my dad because he is so honest and I think he hit the nail on the head. I always took his statement to be descriptive, not prescriptive.

He loves my BF because he feels my BF is a man of honor who will treat his little girl right. I can't fault him for that. He also hated my past BFs. I was giving myself away without expecting/looking for anything better. I guess dad could have been mad at me but that would only get him so far. I can understand it would be easier to be mad at the guys who were just looking for sex because you can chase them away but nobody wants to chase away their child.

Of course he did have a double standard for my brother but that's a WHO-O-O-OLE 'nother fight and I think you and I would also be pretty united against having to eat that crap sandwhich. THERE is your double standard! To his credit my brother married his HS sweetie and they've been together ever since but it was always understood the guy was free to roam but the girl wasn't.

[seabeyond]

78. really

i didnt read it close enough, what your father said. i have heard the same, but it wasnt daughter. it implied that the woman you marry doesnt like sex, and the one that likes sex, you dont marry, or whatever garbage. lol. is an insult to about all.

this is a little different.

i think it is so nifty that both families are getting together like this. you say NO to, and NO to.... but you know what it looks like it is lining up to me. lol lol lol.

just gigglin here.

[raccoon]

95. Part of the patriarchal society--women being seen as possessions. nt

[riderinthestorm]

113. It's easier to just philosophize over the sexualization of females rather than patriarchy

Our patriarchal society is the root cause of our dysfunction - including the sexualization of girls and their objectification by boys/men.

This is one of the problems with DU and women's issues. It takes 95 posts on a thread like this before anyone makes even a brief mention of the #1 reason men and women do the things we do in this culture.

We need to honestly examine the deep and terrible roots of patriarchy in societies and the damage they do to our psyches. Clothing choices are just one manifestation of women's place in this kind of society.

[femrap]

119. Thank you.....

Blame the Patriarchy....study it and see how it has f*cked up this entire world....I think it will destroy this world someday because the culture encourages 'boys to be boys' thereby reeking havoc with deadlier and deadlier wars. Most of the deaths in war today are women, children and the elderly.

I'd like to see a return to hand-to-hand combat thus only the warriors dying. But then the Defense Contractors wouldn't be making fortunes selling arms to both sides of the conflict.

WASF.

[riderinthestorm]

122. I'm outta time for DU today but I believe that you and I posted our rants about patriarchy

at the time same. I was #113, you were upthread at #114.

Sigh. And if we make it an OP, I'd take bets that the thread would drop off the front page within 15 minutes with lots of recs and not a single comment.

It's so much easier to just blame the Disney Channel!!!111!!

Peace.

[femrap]

124. Peace to you as well.....

I just went back to the Greatest Front Page and this thread has already been removed!!!

I don't get it.

[Romulox]

103. You don't think that this response might be related to the incest taboo?

Fathers and brothers find it disturbing to think of closely related women "that way". Seems like there is a simple evolutionary explanation for this behavior to me.

[seabeyond]

105. and are the women and sisters feeling the same concern for the brothers and sons?

no

what would the simple evolutionary explanation be?

[Romulox]

108. Male and female sexuality is not interchangeable, so a counter-example

doesn't necessarily disprove anything.

"what would the simple evolutionary explanation be"

One simple one would be that women, on the whole, are simply more selective of their partners such that such defense mechanisms are not as required.

[seabeyond]

111. it doesnt disprove or prove. the point of my post is, there is nothing to suggest

this behavior is per evolution, though it is the ready answer we give to so many behaviors for men. this, allows the patriarchy to thrive and grow, with no valid reasoning.

so

women are more selective, so there is not the defensive mechanism? i could argue and ask about the selective, but that is another conditioning given to female. i have also heard argue just how damn selective men are, hence the young, and hip ratio thing, but regardless.

women are more selective. that being the case, men, fathers, brothers would have less need to be concerned, whereas the sisters and mothers would be more concerned.

i am not getting your simple guess. and that is all it is.

[Romulox]

134. Picking a nit: people who say "there is no evidence", when they mean "I'm not convinced"

there is nothing to suggest this behavior is per evolution,

Of course there is something to suggest this: it is human behavior and we are products of evolution. You may not find this evidence compelling, but let's be more precise if we're building to an outrage.

women are more selective, so there is not the defensive mechanism? i could argue and ask about the selective, but that is another conditioning given to female. i have also heard argue just how damn selective men are, hence the young, and hip ratio thing, but regardless.

Denial that human beings and their behavior patterns are a product of evolution is a bridge too far.

[seabeyond]

137. women being more selective does not suggest male being more watchful.

the issue with evolutionary behavior is the total ignoring conditioning, patriarchy. what sounds more reasonable, logical. that women became selective with a patriarchal society that forced them to be very careful on who they got impreg by to ensure they had food to eat and feed their children seeing how the patriarchal culture ruled out women earning any kind of money that would put the food on the table, unless a prostitute?

or

evolution?

and how does that relate to father, brother dictating her sex life? thru evolution, or once again, a patriarchal society that has ALL control over their females, you know, just above an animal, a possesion.

but you want me to believe that a simple explanation of evolution of a woman being selective is why fathers adn brothers concern themselves with a sister/daughters sex life.

[Romulox]

151. You are really swimming upstream if you seek to explain away the incest taboo with "patriarchy"

the issue with evolutionary behavior is the total ignoring conditioning, patriarchy. what sounds more reasonable, logical. that women became selective with a patriarchal society that forced them to be very careful on who they got impreg by to ensure they had food to eat and feed their children seeing how the patriarchal culture ruled out women earning any kind of money that would put the food on the table, unless a prostitute?

Women have always had to be careful about whom impregnates them, because the human child requires more intense (and longer) care than any other animal on earth. Men are "watchful" (as you put it,) because it is a bad evolutionary strategy for a man to invest in a child not his own.

Again, it's hard to know what agenda is being served by plugging one's fingers in one's ears. Human beings are a product of evolution, and so is their behavior. Perhaps you are troubled by the fact that evolution doesn't completely, totally, utterly, and without any error predict human behavior? No one has ever made that claim. :shrug:

[seabeyond]

153. i didn't know we were talking incest. ????

"Women have always had to be careful about whom impregnates them," ... have they? how do you know that at beginning of time there were units and that it wasn't just a free for all. whomever getting preg by whomever and the group as a whole takes care of each other, ergo not needing the watchful eye of a particular man watching over a particular family unit ensuring it is only his???

what you describe is again, more advanced in a time when patriarchy and family unit and rules be enforced to then start ensuring that man invested only in his.

it makes more sense to me at beginning of time there wasn't that structure.

prove me wrong.

prove you unquestioning truth as fact.

[callous taoboy]

157. I think one of the issues here is that this isn't fostering a well-rounded person...

no pun intended. The focus now is often exclusively on sexuality and nothing else. The largest erogenous zone is the brain. I can find a woman physically attractive but if she has absolutely nothing to say that is a BIG turn-off.

[lumberjack_jeff]

163. This certainly suggests that the problem of sexualization of teen girls isn't the fault of dads. n/t

[redqueen]

165. Who suggested that sexualization of teen girls was the fault of dads? (nt)

[lumberjack_jeff]

36. It's hard to escape the conclusion

that for some, the definition of "objectification" is "attraction among the bycatch".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bycatch

[seabeyond]

38. and you are right there, too. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

29. I agree with the problem, but we clearly disagree about the cause.

As the poster upthread put it, "men invented the burkha". Sexualized fashion and media are largely held up as evidence of feminine liberation, freedom, modernity and empowerment.

One of the reasons that men and women talk past each other is that the problems women face are almost always defined in equity terms; eg "Teens girls are twice as likely to be depressed as boys". If boys were diagnosed with depression as often as girls, it wouldn't make the problem go away.

[seabeyond]

33. told you before, say it again. pta middle school talking about emotional wellness for teenage girls

at the time my oldest, 7th grade, was a mess in emotion. and he is very expressive. hearing it nightly.

i tell the people in pta, that is excellent for the girls, we need something for the boys, that they can talk. they can be assured of the emotions and changes they are experiencing. they need a man to listen to them. surely there is something out there comparable for the boys....

i had two women flat out tell me that boys dont care or feel. i had another tell me that her son just sluffs this stuff off, not a care in the world. i thought i was in a twilight zone. i was clueless all the other boys so well adjusted and not feeling, as both my boys are experiencing, feeling, thinking.... tons

i got not ONE parental support for the boys

so i hear ya

we cannot heal the girls, unless we bring along the boys too.

[RadiationTherapy]

30. Pop music as well. The constant sexual barrage is disturbing. I have been thinking about you

because I read a post once where you mentioned that 'love' songs and pop music was distorting our relationships...or something like that.

Pop music is what my daughter is most exposed to. She loves the rhythms and loves female vocalists, but the sexuality is so moronic and constant.

[Mimosa]

160. ITA the current 'music' is mostly raw sex

Yes, music has influence on kids. Much of the late 1960s early 1970s music encouraged young listeners to take drugs.

As for the Patriarchy, I think it most obviously exists in its most overt form in Islamic culture. In the West it is manifested only as much as most women will allow. We do have a lot of freedoms as long as we choose to use them and to make sure the daughters don't get brainwashed by a culture which would put them into psychic subservience.

[Johonny]

32. Isn't there a difference between women and girls

women are/can be sexual active, girls not so much. I think it will be hard to remove a certain level of sexualization from women and men.

[redqueen]

67. Yes, this OP is about girls.

Kinda got off track. Imagine that.

[noamnety]

35. I noticed it even on Hell's Kitchen last night

There was the men's chefs team vs. the women's chef team. And in the episode, they had to deal with the restaurant filled with a marching band - complete with cheerleaders with the pompoms, the whole works. I don't see how the sexualized gender crap is helpful in that context where the women are fighting to be seen as equals in a field dominated by men.

Didn't escape me either when the women won a challenge - their reward was a spa type day at the beach with some time out to play with Ramsey's kids (seriously!), and the men's punishment was rehabbing a polluted river - not a pleasant job, but still "man's work" - outdoor rough stuff. then when the tables were turned and the men won, their reward was an action adventure type thing in a skydiving tunnel thing, and the women's punishment was working inside cleaning the restaurant (women's work).

[DailyGrind51]

40. Remember the threads regarding Olympic women's beach volleyball?

Why does exhibitionism feature so prominently in any women's sports? Why can't being healthy, athletic, and toned, be rewards in themselves?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1578800

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1546528

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x8012126

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1547475

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1536731

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3772221

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3789017

[Radical Activist]

41. hmmm...

I'm glad you posted this because it encourages a discussion on an ugly aspect of American society. I don't have kids of my own, but I'm still disturbed when I see things like sexy underwear in the display window of a mall clothing store for pre-teen girls. WTF?

At the same time, I'd like the US to get beyond the attitude that the chest of an adult woman is a horror that must be hidden at all times. So... is there a way to do that which doesn't involve pushing sexuality and objectification on young girls?
I dunno. :shrug:

[seabeyond]

43. i dont think there would be nearly the issue of the adult womens chest if grown men didnt revert

to little ten yr olds jumping up and down, clapping hands, yelling bewbies, bewbies.

maybe our men can grow up a bet and boobs wont become the big deal.

[Radical Activist]

45. lol

I don't see that change happening soon.

[seabeyond]

52. no. because men like to behave this way, and conditioned society is reinforcing it for them

then men, like you, can say... wha??? this objectifying, what are you talking about, why are our young girls behaving as they are. not us?????

[Radical Activist]

59. You can ease up on the hostility

and stop directing it at me. We're agreeing with each other.

[seabeyond]

61. not hostile. girls/women reality. nt

[Radical Activist]

87. Nevermind

I don't know what your post means so I'll erase my response.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. The American obsession with boobs...

is the direct result of the Puritanical obsession of covering them up.

[nomorenomore08]

48. Exactly!

And that may go some way toward explaining the paradox of sexual repression combined with hypersexuality that we see in modern American society.

[seabeyond]

54. tits are all over the place, day in day out, 24/7, every part of our life.

the tit is not being hidden and the men progressively get worse.

that is crock....

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

55. You were one of the people complaining about the Janet Jackson half time video...

weren't you?

[seabeyond]

57. no. nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. Yet you're complaining about all that smut on the Disney Channel.

Go figure.

[seabeyond]

62. no, that is not what i was discussing. nt

[nomorenomore08]

64. I guess the point is that extremes are bad, one way or the other.

And maybe in some ways, oversaturation of sexual images is just as problematic as Victorian censorship. :shrug:

[Threedifferentones]

93. Men get worse?

Historically men all over the world treat women like property. We may not be getting any better, but we can't be getting worse in that regard.

It is pretty funny that men can think of women as sexual objects to be possessed whether they are wearing a bikini or a burkha. The clothes and the cleavage of modern life are NOT the root of this problem...

[redqueen]

94. Well said! It is definitely not about what women choose to wear. (nt)

[seabeyond]

99. yes

worse

in the past you actually heard, and often, men stepping up telling fellow males, that is not the way you treat/talk about women. today you dont. today it is a free for all.... anything, anytime, is good to go, especially with buddies to show off what a man you are.

after all, we are all whores for consumption.

[redqueen]

104. Good point.

Thanks for pointing that out... and often anyone who does go against this grain is ridiculed by those protecting the status quo... called a prude, a fake who's just trying to impress women, etc.

[geardaddy]

114. or the F word.

Guys that defend women from objectification often have their sexuality challenged.

[seabeyond]

123. exactly. yes. and right on.

it use to be more men/boys were willing to speak up and the jerk was the lone. now a days, that number has switched adn the men that do speak up dont have the support they use to.

i tell my sons, as hard as it is to speak up, it is that important that they do.

character

[seabeyond]

53. bullshit. nt

[devilgrrl]

80. You mean the American obsession with boobs on the "right" kind of women.

Which is what the OP is addressing.

[LanternWaste]

196. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

Post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

[leftstreet]

49. It won't change until penises are featured in tight clothing

...testicles BULGING from the sides of tight pants with a comehither fashiony look

(Is the plural of penis, penises?)

[seabeyond]

56. one of the greatest con of all time. the male body is ugly. the female body... a work of art

well, you know, female body does nothing for me, but the male body, the TEN male body.... lordy, talk about a work of art.

yet, all while i was growing up i was told by both gender, no one wants to see the male body. but the female body.... we ALL wnat to see that.

hm

and we bought it

get those naked guys out there, i am all for it.

[musette_sf]

70. "the male body is ugly. the female body... a work of art"

Michaelangelo would beg to differ, I think....

[seabeyond]

71. i understand. now, have you ever heard this being said. i have heard often on du

i have heard often in RL. have you not heard this?

[musette_sf]

73. oh yes

I have heard this over and over and over again, both on DU and IRL. Your observation is correct.

[Mnemosyne]

109. I believe it is penii. Re: the OP

I was born in 1958 and always taught to "find a good husband" - translation, 'good' = makes lots of money.

I raised a daughter and it was a constant battle trying to convince her she was beautiful without all the crap the media tried to sell her in the 1980/90's.

Now I have nieces, ages 13, 8 and 2, and the girl's clothing choices are pretty skanky these days. Even the baby and toddler clothes have sexual sayings on some of them, even for boys - "Mama's Little Stud" seen on a bib one day...

And don't even get me started on the toddler/tiara bunch...:grr:

And anyone regarding Disney Channel as "clean", really needs to pay more attention. It is rare that any Disney movie/show doesn't have sexual innuendos galore.

[redqueen]

72. "the chest of an adult woman is a horror that must be hidden at all times"

???

Not sure where that's coming from. There's a big difference between a horror that must be hidden and maybe just perhaps not used to sell everything from hell to breakfast

[seabeyond]

75. chucklin... that is funny. "used to sell everything from hell to breakfast" nt

[Radical Activist]

86. Your OP mentioned world cup soccer games.

It reads like you're referring to public nudity. It happens at soccer games in other countries but won't be shown on US TV.

[redqueen]

92. No, not nudity. Objectification does not require nudity.

Cheerleaders at school games are not so bad.

"Cheerleaders" at professional sporting events are excellent examples of objectification. And I wasn't the one crying about not getting my demanded share of T&A, so as far s whether it's shown or not, take it up with the whiners.

[Radical Activist]

110. Oh, I see.

I missed the other post. Yeah, having cheerleaders at world cup soccer would be dumb and pointless.

I'm less of a fan of high school cheerleading than you are. Besides sending an official message to students that girls are eye candy, it socializes teen girls to see men as the main actors, the focus of an event, while women are supposed to be in a lesser, supportive role while they celebrate boys being violent at football games.

[redqueen]

116. Oh no no... I'm no fan...

I just see it as less overtly sexualized / objectifying. As you say though, it's part of the culture of encouraging women to enjoy their role as 'less than' and 'eye candy'.

[LWolf]

44. I'm clear.

It's colored all of my adult relationships.

Growing up without a father figure, brother, or any male family members, and being unfortunate enough to be precocious when it came to physical development, I can hardly remember a time I didn't feel like prey on display growing up. No matter what I wore.

All of my relationships with males were about what they hoped to achieve with my physical person. It was never about WHO I was.

It left an indelible stain that I've never really overcome.

[seabeyond]

60. story. well developed 11 yr old niece, thought she was still a kid.

my sons 10 and 8 and her outside playing in sprinklers. she in her two piece, for a kid. her boobs are flopping around as she is squealing, along with boys, thru sprinklers.

a truck coming up street sees her, slows down, two men in front seat checking her out. pull into the driveway after us, reverses and comes back down sloooooooow. to the point, i am out of the house, walking into the yard, and they take off.

because of course, she doesn't get to be a kid, she has bewbies after all, and as the men say here, ..... fuck it, wont ever change.

how you feel, how it effects you, what it says to you, .... matters not. these men are clearly saying, just doesn't matter, their right, their ownership of your boobs and they do it proudly, without a shred of embarrassment.

[LWolf]

69. That's my entire childhood, from 10-11 yrs on, in a nutshell. nt

[chrisa]

177. Oh god that's so creepy.

:puke:

That's just so creepy on so many levels. Disgusting.

[redqueen]

185. I grew up thinking that was normal.

I think a lot of other girls do, too.

It is so commonplace... it just doesn't shock me at all. Maybe other girls growing up didn't see that kind of stuff going on... but I sure did.

[raccoon]

96. You and me both, sister! I too grew up without a father figure, brother, male family members

close by to let predatory boys/men know they have some male to deal with if they treated me as prey.

And it wasn't about the way I dressed. I dressed conservatively.

"All of my relationships with males were about what they hoped to achieve with my physical person. It was never about WHO I was."

[LWolf]

190. It certainly left me with permanent scars.

I hope I've moved beyond those years, but I still remember.

:(

[nomorenomore08]

47. It just boggles my mind how a society can be simultaneously so sexually repressed

and yet so hypersexualized. If nothing else, it certainly demonstrates the human mind's capacity for cognitive dissonance.

[seabeyond]

63. it boggles, but it makes sense too. you have two extremes. our females are virgin/whore.

we have two extremes fighting each other and females arent either extreme. it is when we make females only sexual beings. and that is what both sides do.

when people start seeing women as humans, you dont have either extremes. cannot be done.

[redqueen]

74. Exactly. It makes perfect sense. (nt)

[AngryAmish]

132. What are some societies which are not?

Middle east? Nope.

Africa? Please.

China?

Japan?

Chile?

[riderinthestorm]

142. Your examples are continent wide, in areas very much westernized (and colonized)

among those areas where the culture and society has been largely left alone, those cultures are very different. Typically egalitarian or even matriarchal, very little clothing, sex is often casual etc. etc.

Some cultures and societies do still exist like that: Australian aborigine tribes that dwell inland, native tribes in Indonesia, in the rainforests stretching from South America to Africa etc. etc.

Ya know, those that haven't been "infected" with religious and cultural patriarchy.

The "white man's burden" has been a global cause and because of their strength in weaponry, as well as men's inherently greater physical strength, it's everywhere with rare pockets still demonstrating how things used to be in many places of the world before patriarchy predominated. Women in societies like the US have only begun to climb out of patriarchy's clutches via birth control, free access to education, doors opening in the work place etc. I'd say we've come a long way in the past 50 years. Do we have the right combination of male and female empowerment and egality yet? Of course not. Do we make continue to experiment with, and make stupid mistakes, on things like sex or marriage or clothing or child rearing and how it fits into the new dynamics of our changing culture? Yes.

[AngryAmish]

155. Typical noble savage bs.

These "native" cultures you claim to know about - do you know the rates of interpersonal violence including rape? They are staggering - way higher than other, more civilized parts of the earth.

Patriarchy existed in China while my ancestors in europe were still living in holes in the groound. THat caste system of India, and other quaint customs such as siteein India - when did they get going? They learned that from the Raj?

[riderinthestorm]

159. Religious patriarchal bullshit isn't just a white man's issue.

I used that term euphemistically but the patriarchy of religion is manifest and demonstrably more so with your examples.

Were ALL tribal cultures and society either egalitarian or matriarchal? No. But there were many, many more than now. You don't have to be any kind of an expert to do even the most basic googling on matriarchy and native cultures to find it out yourself.

And I'd like a credible link to your stats on interpersonal violence in matriarchal societies, including rape.

Rape is a crime of control and domination. It has nothing to do with what a person is wearing or what they are doing. I'd be very interested in your cites that have stats on true matriarchys (that have been untouched by patriarchy) that have "staggering" levels of interpersonal violence. I'm thinking you are referencing native tribes who do NOW, after being fucked up the Europeans every which way, but who never had such problems before when they were truly egalitarian or true matriarchys.

[AngryAmish]

178. Ever hear of the Yamamano?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ya%CC%A7nomam%C3%B6> wikipedia, I know, but...

"Historically, more than a third of the Ya̧nomamö males, on average, died from warfare.<3> The scholar Chagnon claimed that men who participated in killings had more wives and children than those who did not.<1> Some Ya̧nomamö men, however, reflected on the futility of their feuds and made it known that they would have nothing to do with the raiding.<1> These findings, originally reported by Chagnon, have been empirically replicated several times.<4>
The accounts of missionaries to the area have told of constant infighting by men in the tribes for women or prestige. There is historical evidence of continuous warfare for the enslavement of neighboring tribes, such as the Macu, before the arrival of European settlers and government."

[Fearless]

76. It's not about sexuality it's about perception and treatment of women

and men for that matter. Sexuality has nothing to do with how a person is treated. But in practice how a person is treated is too often related to sexuality. Treat the problem not the symptom.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

79. I suspect the worst is the unhealthy competition aspect.

"I'll never be as sexy as Miley Cyrus. I'll never be as sexy as the 'popular girl' of my class. I 'm worthless."

[nomorenomore08]

81. Yep.

We're all bombarded with images of what we're "supposed" to be, that most of can never hope to live up to. But young girls probably have it the worst.

[Shanti Mama]

83. OF CEO'S AND CORPORATE "HO'S"

I've not read all the posts carefully. I certainly don't hold men responsible for the situation. It takes two to tango. This is a cultural problem. It's not about clothing, it's about our screwed up culture. I had already read the APA study, having learned of it from this newsletter. (www.docmikebradley.com)

OF CEO'S AND CORPORATE "HO'S"
For a minute I thought he was making this up, but as an adolescent psychologist I guess I should know have known better. Zach was laughing loudly as he described the wonderful dance for high school kids he had recently attended at the local community center. He especially loved the theme: CEO's and Corporate Ho's: "The boys all dressed like corporate leaders, you know, like bosses, and the girls all dressed like, you know, ‘ho's' (whores). It was FANTASTIC," he raved. "The girls, they were all like, willing to really be ‘ho's'---you know what I mean? Not all of them, but a whole lot were. Even girls that would never do that stuff normally were, you know, doing that stuff that night. They were all into it. It was GREAT!"

I was stunned for a moment, not quite knowing where to go with this. Before me sat this great 16-year-old young man. A caring, intelligent, sensitive and hard-working kid who had just participated in the equivalent of a white supremacist rally, held at our local community center no less. Think not? Think again.
There is a secret war raging in this nation of ours, but it's not religious, racial or political---it's sexual. Our daughters are under attack, being programmed, abused, and raped in astounding numbers. Last year 20% of our daughters in high school were sexually assaulted. In our universities, every fifth coed was raped. Perhaps even more stunning in this supposed age of equality, 93% of these wounded women said nothing. Only 7% decided that what had happened to them was a crime of violence that required reporting to the police. Many felt too ashamed to report, believing that it was their fault ("I had too much to drink" and "I guess I was leading him on"). Others thought they wouldn't be believed. And a frightening number of them didn't even understand that they had been raped.

In my office too many of those young women have talked out this profound act of denial---or perhaps this profound effect of cultural programming which teaches them to be sexual second-class citizens, creatures clearly worth less than the boys. "Did you say ‘no' to the guy who forced you?" I asked one confused coed. "I said no over and over," she answered. "Actually," she softly cried, "I was sobbing and begging ‘please, no; please, no', but he pinned me down and…" After she calmed a bit, I softly asked, "Can I ask why you didn't report it?" This smart, 20-year-old, post-feminist female locked eyes with me and asked, "Report what?" And before I could answer she added, "Isn't that just the way it's supposed to be sometimes? I mean, he didn't stab me or anything."

As I sat there looking into her pained, confused and tear-stained face, all the female-degrading lyrics, videos, phrases and jokes (been ‘bitch-slapped' recently?) of this culture seemed to suddenly swirl behind her head. I could hear the echoes of all her sexual programming resonating around her, now having led her to this bizarre place, a schizophrenic world where she could compete nose-to-nose with the most talented males by day, and then be brutalized by them at night---and never think that something was wrong: "Isn't that just the way it's supposed to be sometimes?"

If you don't like scary novels, don't read the report I'm about to cite. But if you've got a daughter or a son, you really must read the Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls (available online at www.apa.org/pi/wpo/sexualization.html). When you're done I suspect you'll suddenly begin hear the battle sounds raging around our daughters, and better understand how so many of our girls get taught to submit to sexual abuse like POW's.

What can we parents do to fight back? Talk with your kids, but use questions, not lectures. Watch their terrible shows and listen to their terrible music with them, and then quietly ask things such as, "Do you think these females are being portrayed as 2nd class citizens?" and "When a guy forces sex, is that about love or violence?" Dad, take your daughter out for a coffee and have a stumbling, stammering chat about what goes off in a teen boy's brain when he sees a girl dressed provocatively: "Honey, as an ex-14-year-old boy, I have to tell you that when they look at you dressed like that they are NOT thinking about love relationships." Mom, get a latte with your boy and ask him a question you don't want answered: "Son, in today's twisted world, girls are being told by their culture to have casual ‘party' sex, and I know that some will approach you saying that all they want is sex. As a female I can tell you that girls are just not wired that way, regardless of what they say. And later on, they feel lousy about what they're doing, to a point where many of them become depressed, anxious, and even suicidal. Here's my question that I want you to not answer, but to please consider: ‘Are you willing to hurt a girl just to have some sex?' Thanks for listening."

The key is not to have one marathon talk, but to have a thousand mini-talks with short questions designed to get them to think, not long-winded answers that sound like morality lectures. Slowly help them to build their belief systems about what sex should really be about, and to value themselves accordingly. Give them a fighting chance in this scary, secret war.

[seabeyond]

85. this deserves its own thread.

this is exactly what i am seeing. and it is also exactly the conversation i have had with my oldest, and will have with my youngest son in a couple of years.

i love the conversation with the father sitting down talking to his daughter. that, too, is right on.

couldnt agree more, with everything said. and that doesnt happen often

i didnt go into the site the author spoke of. i will tomorrow.

thanks.

[lumberjack_jeff]

106. Fascinating read.

And yes, it should be its own thread.

[whathehell]

84. Agreed...Particularly when people are STILL ambivalent

about sex --- in relation, particularly of course, to females.

Are you "sexy" or are you a "slut"?, a "whore"?...There's NO male equivalent to the ugly terms and the concepts behind them....It makes for VERY confusing messages for girls.

I guess it's the perk of Male Dominance "I want to fuck you, but then I'll degrade you for it"...Duhhh :silly:

Schizophrenic and highly confusing, not to mention enraging, the double standard that, for all of our "sexual revolution" shit, still rules.

[Hydra]

88. We have a bit of a problem, culturally

We're all being objectified in one or more ways, and we're allowing it to happen and we're playing along.

How many people define themselves by their work? Where they live? How much money they have? How "prime" their spouse is? How awesome their kids are?

The sexualization is just one more flavor.

I don't even see it, myself. People get mad at me because their clothes, new hairstyles, perfume, etc. don't make me turn various colors of reddish desire or green with envy.

Like anything else, we have to decide the truth and act on it- and I don't see it in making people into cardboard cutouts.

[raccoon]

97. Madison Avenue and Hollywood are to thank for that. Sex sells.

There are some real good posts in here. The "double standard" is still very alive and well and if anyone doesn't know that, they haven't been paying attention or have very selective perception.

[Zorra]

102. Link: American Psychological Association Task Force Report On Sexualization Of Girls:

http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report.aspx

[femrap]

115. What a great article....

I should have it framed.

Just walk through Target or Walmart's little Girls' Clothing section...cute little Street Walker outfits for them. I was blown away. And now the Clothing Manufacturers are forcing them into bras and sexy underwear WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY before it's necessary.

Let the girls be girls while they can be. And when they grow up, call them WOMEN!

[redqueen]

118. Isn't it?

I wish there was some way to see how many unrecs this thread gets. I'm just curious.

[femrap]

125. I just went back to the

Greatest Front Page and this thread is already gone!

WTF?

[Lost4words]

128. K & R

and why do I think its done, to exploit them younger and younger as consumers. Godless PROFIT!

no other reason, so what if lives are destroyed, it makes share holders happy! We are all being fucked for the ALMIGHTY buck!

[Silent3]

135. This thread is chock full of oversimplification...

...of complex cultural issues.

Edit: I meant to reply directly to the OP, not the particular post this post is now a reply for, but where this post ended up is just as good a place as any.

[redqueen]

138. Your reply is too vague to address.

*shrug*

In general though, yes... addressing complex issues on a message board often will involve some simplification. The gist, however, doesn't suffer from it.

[Silent3]

144. Lots of people seem to be looking for one root cause...

...one bad guy (and in this thread, "guy", meaning male, certainly applies) that's to blame. Evil corporations. The evil patriarchy. Men in general, who, except for a few rare examples (men who show their credentials by joining in on male bashing) are just no damned good.

There's plenty of blame to go around, and plenty of problems for which it's pointless to look for blame. Much of human culture is chaotic and random, small effects being amplified over time by complex positive feedback, large efforts nullified by strong negative feedback, most of it unintentional and undirected.

If men are mostly to blame for the sexualization of women and girls, at a rough guess I'd put the blame at 60/40 men vs. women. There might be a few men out there turning profits on the fashion industry, for example, but so are plenty of women, and the men in that industry are just us much, if not more, responding to market demands rather than creating them. You can't have it both ways that women are both fully the equal of men yet nearly powerless to resist advertising and fashions pushed by men, and that every woman in the advertising fashion industry is powerlessly pushed along by men.

I barely notice what women are wearing myself -- especially the shoes that so many women obsess over. To me, fashion seems mostly like women are trying to use it to impress and evaluate and bond and compete with other women. Maybe some of the choices they make have been pushed in one direction or another by various men at various points, but things like fashion mostly have a life of their own. Some here speak as if there's an evil cabal of misogynists and capitalists who have an elaborate and devious plan to push women into some carefully-designed role that they have brilliantly designed to maximize profits -- not just of the fashion industry, but for every aspect of life from how much you have to pay a woman to bake a loaf of bread to how much a obstetrician can charge to deliver a baby, and they can do it all through Miley Cyrus videos, lipstick ads, and adjustments of hemlines.

[redqueen]

145. Blame is not the focus. I think the defensiveness is misplaced. (nt)

[Silent3]

146. Defensiveness of what?

I might have been defending men in general in that post a little bit, but, while I am male, I'm not a powerful business man or advertiser and I don't work in the fashion industry or produce Miley Cyrus videos. The term "defensiveness" generally refers to defending oneself or one's personal interests. Even to the extent that dismissing hypothetical evil cabals from significant blame is "defending" those hypothetical evil cabals, they aren't me or my interests, so "defensiveness" is a curious word choice.

[redqueen]

148. I disagree.

I think defensiveness can be less personalized... to the point that it becomes "it's not all men's fault!"

And truly it isn't... very many women are completely invested into the patriarchy. But it is still a patriarchy.

[lumberjack_jeff]

164. The logical step after identifying the problem, is identifying the cause.

Is the problem the media and industry, or the parents who purchase their products?

[redqueen]

166. False dichotomy.

The problem is whoever goes along with it and thinks it's acceptable. Consumers, producers... not an entire industry though, that's too broad.

[seabeyond]

147. i see it as a whole lot of conditioning of two genders. hurts both genders.

effects both genders. is not a one gender issue. both are victims and perpetrators. one cannot be healed without the other. i dont think this is innate or evolutionary behavior, though. it cannot be seperated by gender.

if that is male bashing, then not a whole bunch more to be said.

[redqueen]

149. Exactly... it's the way both genders are conditioned to relate to each other.

And it's harmful to everyone.

[Silent3]

150. You seem to always get pissed off at suggestions...

...of innate or evolutionary explanations. While it's almost impossible to absolutely prove anything about innate human behavior 100% conclusively (since we can't practically or ethically strand babies on islands and watch from a distance to see what kind of new cultures the survivors would form starting from a cultural blank slate) the trend in behavioral studies seems to be that human behavior has a much bigger genetic and biological component than we used to think it did.

When you see what happens to human behavior simply by changing blood levels of sex hormones -- too much testosterone and men get short tempered and violent, low testosterone and extra estrogen (like men getting treatment for testicular cancer) and suddenly you have men who hardly ever cry no matter what getting weepy watching Love Story.

When you see how twins separated at birth, raised by completely different parents in different places, having often developed amazing similarities in tastes and life choices, the role of genetics appears very powerful.

When you look at how rare matriarchal cultures are compared with patriarchal, across time and geography throughout human history, without clear means for all of those dispersed cultures to collaborate in favor of patriarchy, biology looks like the better explanation.

This isn't about absolutes of behavior, it only has to be about tendencies. Human culture, it seems, is often good at amplifying tendencies.

I think this angers you because you see biological explanations as equivalent to biological excuses, and damn it! You aren't go to let anyone get away with a convenient excuse for sexist behavior! Let them have an excuse and they'll play it for all it's worth!

[riderinthestorm]

161. I'm not pissed off at your theory but I don't agree that biology looks like the answer

It looks to me more like matriarchys are cultures that weren't touched by patriarchy.

I'd be very interested in any links you have that describe biology as the reason for patriarchal societies. I'm open to other ideas. I've been 50 years as a student of history and women's issues, anthropologists and social scientists have convinced me that it's religious and cultural patriarchy (or matriarchy) that gets the attention for women's status in a society.

Reducing the issue to it's most basic terms, women produce life. From ancient fertility symbols demonstrating the power of women in those cultures, to the rare untouched matriarchal cultures still extant - females have traditionally wielded a lot of power. I just don't see how "biology" has a really large role to play in changing that dynamic. Men and women had to come up with something more persuasive.

[Silent3]

162. I think you have to start with individual behavior, which shows strong...

...links to biology and heredity. I don't know that anyone has ever done a study on matriarchy or patriarchy as biological functions. That's probably outside the scope of what's possible to do experimentally.

Making that sort of study the threshold for evidence is like a creationist demanding that an evolutionist show an experiment that turns pond scum into people, with the implication being that if the evolutionist can't show that experiment, for some reason "God did it!" wins by default.

I've been 50 years as a student of history and women's issues, anthropologists and social scientists have convinced me that it's religious and cultural patriarchy (or matriarchy) that gets the attention for women's status in a society.

Well, where do "religious and cultural patriarchy (or matriarchy)" come from? They aren't dropped in from outer space, fully formed. Those things are produced by and built upon the dynamics of individual behavior. Since matriarchies do form, obviously biology plus the right circumstances can, at least sometimes, lead to cultures which rank females not just equal to but higher than males. Perhaps hunter-gatherer groups tend to produce a dynamic that favors women. The propensity toward patriarchy, however, especially in most agricultural and post-agricultural societies, suggests to me that biology tends to favor men ending up in power over women.

In matriarchies, are men "better" than men in patriarchies, measured by the standards of the things about many men in our culture that annoy and anger many women? Or are they just less able to get away with things women don't like, but still driven by many of the same tendencies? Are women less sexualized, or more sexualized? Maybe matriarchies sometimes produce women competing with women over physical appearance, attracting males, or over fertility.

Reducing the issue to it's most basic terms, women produce life.

That power comes with a price, however, of being more vulnerable and dependent during and just after pregnancy. Whatever the symbolic power of producing life, it's biologically a costly thing.

[redqueen]

167. I don't think it induces anger so much as frustration.

Because no one is saying there is no evolutionary aspect... what's being said is that we overcome our primitive instincts all the time, this situation is no different.

[Silent3]

168. I have heard people, not necessarily in this thread...

...argue against the evolutionary biology of some of this stuff too. As for overcoming the tendencies biology generates, tendencies will still lead to large-scale effect when you consider that not every individual attempting to overcome a biological tendency will succeed. Plus, there are plenty of behaviors that, as individual choices, aren't particularly bad or good, but as a group dynamic might lead to undesirable results. For instance, I don't think there's anything wrong with either men or women wanting to look at erotic images of members of the opposite sex. But if more men have that tendency than women, the sum of individually acceptable choices will likely be cultural outcomes where either women are sexualized in media more than men, or, to prevent that, things like heavy-handed religious norms to block the individual choices that lead to that sexualization.

[redqueen]

170. Why heavy-handed religious norms?

Why not just a recognition that maybe half-naked women shouldn't be used to sell everything from hell to breakfast?

Why not a recognition of the fact that women aren't decorations, and perhaps we shouldn't be trying to use them as such?

[Silent3]

175. I'm talking about what I've seen in practice...

...if you can take your suggestions and turn them into a cultural paradigm that sticks, all the more power to you.

Why not a recognition of the fact that women aren't decorations, and perhaps we shouldn't be trying to use them as such?

Do you want mere recognition, or do you want enforcement?

If you don't want enforcement, and if you still respect individual choices that might not please you but don't go beyond the bounds of consenting adults, a woman would have the right to function as a decoration if that's what she wishes -- the freedom to be Vanna White if that's what she wants.

Can you culturally inculcate such a strong distaste for such things that few women would choose that, few men or women would create opportunities like that for a woman, and most people would respond in a strong negative way upon seeing such things that the PR for using a woman as a decoration would be strongly negative?

My guess (and I admit it's just a guess, but I think a conceptually strong guess) is that the combination of broad personal freedoms and innate biology is likely to produce a society where you get more sexualization of women than men. It seems very unlikely to me, as some on DU would have it, that the automatic tendency for a free society, free also from the malevolent manipulations of greedy capitalists with women-suppressing agendas, would be either the near disappearance of Vanna Whites, or an egalitarian balance of Vanna Whites and Vance Whites.

[redqueen]

182. I can see people responding in a strongly negative way, yes.

First, though, people have to understand what objectification is. Once they do, it's very easy to see it and react accordingly. Most people though still just don't get it.

Either that or they do get it and they just don't care. Which is why I posted this. To give those that get it but don't care an idea of why maybe they should re-think their priorities with respect to the issue of objectifying women so that they can be viewed as decorations.

[seabeyond]

179. it is not sexual prowess, it is ability to dehumanize.

whether it be a scantily clad woman, homeless, drug addict, or civilians in iraq.

this is the biology of it. but when doing the evolutionary behavior part of it, they leave all the story out of it, but men needing to look at scantily clad bodies. hearing that males are more adept at dehumanizing people isn't a stretch, but not nearly as flattering. there is good and bad in that ability. need and abuse in that ability. like with most all of our biological traits.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/bt-woman/study-men-see-women-in-bikinis-as-sex-objects-14191510.html

"So basically they are particularly likely to treat these women as objects, at least that is the interpretation of the data we have so far. It is a preliminary study but it is consistent with the idea that they are responding to these photographs as if they were responding to objects rather than people."

It was "shocking" to find that the pictures of scantily clad women deactivates the medial pre-frontal cortex, Professor Fiske went on. "The only other time we've observed the deactivation of this region is when people look at pictures of homeless people and drug addicts who they really don't want to think about what's in their minds because they are put off by them."

The panel of 21 heterosexual male students were first rated in terms of their sexist attitudes to women, using answers to interview questions. Then they were placed in a brain scanner while viewing a set of images of women in bikinis, women in clothes and men in clothes. The scientists also used "sexualised" images, where the head of each semi-naked photograph was cut off so that only the torso was visible. The men were then given memory tests on what they had remembered about each image, with and without the heads.

"Heterosexual men had the best memory for the sexualised bodies of women – this is cutting-off the heads

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/bt-woman/study-men-see-women-in-bikinis-as-sex-objects-14191510.html#ixzz0rD8fnf00

[Silent3]

181. Interesting info, but is this just extra info...

...or is it meant to contrast something you think I said? The title of your post is "it is not sexual prowess, it is ability to dehumanize", which makes it sound like you think I claimed something else was sexual prowess, when I've done no such thing.

I have no particular issue with whether any innate behaviors are flattering or not. They simply are. What you posted seems to support what I'm saying, however: Less sexualization of women is something that would seem to have to be actively been promoted, perhaps even actively enforced. If you have an idealized vision of sexual equality, achieving that vision might even require heavy-handed enforcement that limits some degree of personal freedom. If sexualization of women, as a form of dehumanization, comes more naturally to men than women, then one does not need to suppose, as some have in this thread, that the sexualization of women we see in our culture simply couldn't be there unless it imposed or enforced by some conspiracy of misogynistic capitalists or the like.

[seabeyond]

186. you are talking about evolutionary behavior and biology

thru out your posts. you are criticizing people that challenge evolutionary behavior.

i gave you an example of the difference between biology and the fad of evolutionary behavior and why so many think it is crock.

[Silent3]

187. I don't see how what you posted says anything for or against...

...evolutionary behavior. I certainly don't see the conflict between biology and evolutionary behavior if you see one there. Evolutionary behavior is simply a lens through which to view results such as the results of this particular experiment. To the extent than lens is useful in gaining understanding, it can help guide future experiments and help make predictions for things that lie beyond the practical or ethical limits of experimentation.

I certainly don't dispute the primacy of direct experimentation over experiment-free theorizing. Data has to come first, and theoretical ideas have to adapt.

In the absence of hard data, however, you need some explanatory model for how and why humans behave the way they do. If not evolutionary behavior, then what? If what you favor is an almost purely cultural model, where biology and evolved behavior patterns matter very little, and what we're taught and what we observe around us are such overwhelmingly powerful influences that biology and evolved behavior can practically be ignored, the overall trend of the data we do have certainly doesn't point in that direction.

If you aren't arguing against biology, but are arguing against evolved behavior, I'm not sure how make that distinction clear. Evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology, and everything in biology makes much more sense when understood as part of an evolved system.

[seabeyond]

188. here is another study. men cant remember their names when looking at womans boobs

they took a woman, plenty of cleveage, have her address male in work setting. it took so many seconds for men to remember their name when asked. the conclusion, evolution makes us this way.

nothing else was addressed. not the purposeful making the womans breast the center of attention. and not biology.

biology was not even considered, actual science. it merely concluded.... men can't remember their names when looking at breast.

guys on du jumping up and down, yelling hooyah... duh,... so true....

biology

men tend to think exclusively from left side of brain. single focus. when a man is focused on ANYTHING (they used boobs) it will take him a certain amount of time to pull away from the single focus to remember his name, or the ability for the question to go thru his brain to receptors that will hear the question and be able to answer.

that isnt what the evolutionary behavorist used the study for.

they used it to promote an agenda on male sexuality.

[Silent3]

191. But why would breasts command so much attention?

Would a funny hat have the same effect? If that study didn't test other potential distractions and attention-getters, that would be a flaw in that particular study.

Nevertheless, I don't see where pointing out flaws in studies like that gets you. There are plenty of other studies that link behavior to sex hormones, for instance, and show that the very same people act differently with different hormone levels, hormones which obviously don't suddenly change the upbringing, education, or cultural environment of these people. Is every one of those studies biased or rigged too?

Is your premise that sexist culture comes first, sexist culture biases the science and the interpretation of the science? And if that's true, or true enough to make a big difference, (a conclusion which I certainly don't give you for free), what then? Does that justify a conclusion that once we sweep away all of the bad, bad biased patriarchal science, we'd find little or no biological bias towards sexism in human behavior, that the blank slate of humanity is sexually egalitarian?

If so, how would you explain the way human cultures through history, separated by time and geography, have been more likely to turn patriarchal than matriarchal? Where would that bias come from, if not biology and evolved behavior?

On what basis would you conclude that humans would be so exceptional in the animal kingdom, where clearly defined sexual roles and sexually defined behavior are the norm, not the exception?

[seabeyond]

194. evolutionary behaviorists have create a caricature, cartoon of male.

they have done the same with females.

the difference

most females would be all over it, calling bullshit

some men hold it close, it is their very identity to what a male is. too bad so many of our boys today are learning what a man is thru this caricature being promoted and fed by society.

[Silent3]

195. So basically this comes down to...

...the less you like the results, the more you distrust how the results were obtained. If the result is what you consider a caricature, and you can envision any possible reason that such a caricature wouldn't result from evolution, then a very large burden of proof is on the so-called caricature, with more noble and enlightened human behavior being the default hypothesis.

I also get the sense that you're determined to take what's meant to be descriptive as if it's proscriptive. If someone dares say this is how a man or a woman would tend to behave, that really means they can be "excused" for behaving that way, or even that they should be encouraged to behave that way.

[Captain Hilts]

141. If you had to live it, as we do, you'd understand better. nt

[riderinthestorm]

143. Heh . DU at it's finest. A meandering message board of non-sequitors

insults, misinformation, fun, laughs and....

conversation.

I often think of DU as just a way to join a conversation from home, without having to apologize for abruptly leaving because of work or family or whatever. It's impossible to take it too seriously.

If you'd read through the thread however, you'd see that femrap and I have made the exact same point upthread. You can only put out your knowledge and observations however, to the best that you can, hope someone sees your info, and maybe stops and thinks for a moment. Redqueen and seabeyond are doing their best to actually dialogue. I'm off again for a few hours for afternoon feeds. Hope to check in later and hope you've contributed Silent3. You are so right, this issue has so many layers and imho, the clothing choices we make are just symptomatic of larger, and definitely more complex! issues.

[Old Troop]

158. As a dad of two (grown) daughters, I think the whole thing is horrible.

It's not just the commercials or TV shows; parents are putting their young daughters in "beauty" contests that are nothing more than soft pornography for pedophiles. Then there are "cheerleading" competitions for very young girls that seem to be more about slutty costumes and lots of makeup than athletic competition. I'm not a prude - when my daughters came of age, they got frank talks and birth control, but parents encouraging their kids to act this way is terrible.

[chillspike]

173. Has anyone ever thought that perhaps it's our view of sex

that is skewed and causes all these social and emotional problems? Sex has been so over hyped as something every body has to aspire to get at all costs. But did Nature really intend us to be really this crazy about getting sex? I'm not a puritan or religious nut but didn't Nature reallyonly intend sex for reproduction? But look at all the "weird" sex were are having compared to what Nature originally uses sex for. I mean, blow jobs, as good as they maybe, are not what Nature requires. It's like people are brainwashed to need it so much and so it occupies a large portion of our thinking and aspirations when maybe it really shouldn't.

[okieinpain]

189. on a lot of this it's women leading the charge. n/t.