Men's Group

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)

44. Case in point:

Reply to Warren DeMontague (Original post)

Wed Aug 1, 2012, 05:07 PM

Aug 2012

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/07/30/the-best-thing-about-the-olympics/#comments

A bunch of men ogling female athletes and commenting on their bodies: objectification.

A bunch of women doing the same to male athletes: totally fine because . . .

Admiration of someone’s sexy physique doesn’t objectify them any more than a discussion narrowly focused on their athletic ability renders them Water Polo Objects. It can be a different story when done in conjunction with pervasive cultural messaging that members of the admired person’s gender are only here for sex.

So in other words: it's always ok for women to do this, never for men.

/the list is even titled "33 *things* to love about the olympics" then only shows pictures of men. Doesn't get more blatant than that. But somehow that's still ok.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

69 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Poll: Would anyone here object to or be offended by skimpy outfits on male volleyball team members? [View all] Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 OP

Doesn't bother me. rrneck Jul 2012 #1

Im interested in hearing you elaborate on that, if you want to. Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #2

Same here. If I can get in a ten fingered hotspot rrneck Jul 2012 #3

Took a while, but here are my current (probably incoherent) thoughts on the subject. rrneck Aug 2012 #63

Really interesting post. It's gonna take me a while to sink my teeth into. Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #65

Thank you. rrneck Aug 2012 #66

Nope ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jul 2012 #4

Where was the outrage... ZenLefty Jul 2012 #5

This loincloth offends me: Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #7

Doesn't look like much under that loincloth. ZenLefty Jul 2012 #9

If a military recruiter is nearby.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jul 2012 #39

Hey, at least it's him in his prime... ElboRuum Jul 2012 #22

Of course not.. Upton Jul 2012 #6

BUT right here on DU.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jul 2012 #12

This passes muster for what the law calls hifiguy Jul 2012 #18

Doesn't offend me, however . . . caseymoz Jul 2012 #8

I think the complexity begins and ends with the opaque and subjective definition of "empowerment" Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #10

On your title . . . caseymoz Jul 2012 #13

I must be crazy. ElboRuum Jul 2012 #14

If you have no choice . . . caseymoz Jul 2012 #15

I was going to go a point by point route with my post... ElboRuum Jul 2012 #16

Jefferson by way of Nietzsche . . . caseymoz Jul 2012 #17

Ugh. ElboRuum Jul 2012 #19

I stopped reading on the second paragraph caseymoz Jul 2012 #20

You know... ElboRuum Jul 2012 #25

Would you vote for someone just because they had been a neurosurgeon? TheKentuckian Jul 2012 #41

Fair rebuttal. caseymoz Jul 2012 #42

"Empowering"? I think it's reasonable to inquire as to the nature of that power. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2012 #11

I'm not certain that stripping caseymoz Jul 2012 #21

It empowers one to extract currency from the audience's wallets. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2012 #23

I know of very few who hold on to it. caseymoz Jul 2012 #24

The unattractive have no similar dilemma to resolve. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2012 #32

Your last statement, it would seem so, right? caseymoz Jul 2012 #33

Their 1% er power derives from what they spend it on. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2012 #35

*** Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #37

And if they spent their last penny on politics? caseymoz Aug 2012 #54

Whether it's empowering or not I think is very much dependent on the person 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #40

100% I agree with you. nt caseymoz Aug 2012 #55

Yes. Skimpy outfits without a purpose (like swimming/diving) have got to go. applegrove Jul 2012 #26

So you think they should play naked, then. Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #27

Sexy is fine in advertising. Or on the beach. I just think something overtly sexy, like a bikini on applegrove Jul 2012 #28

One question. ElboRuum Jul 2012 #29

No. Neither the exposure of the male or female body is shameful. Depends how it is couched. In what applegrove Jul 2012 #30

In all seriousness, I agree that the primary function of a sport uniform should be utiltiarianism Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #31

Ok, just trying to suss out the meaning... ElboRuum Jul 2012 #34

2012 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue Cover. For RESEARCH PURPOSES ONLY! Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #36

Another one of those "it's ok when *we* do it" situations 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #38

Skimpier outfits on the men's volleyball team? Raster Jul 2012 #43

Case in point: 4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #44

That excuse is for people who have enough education to string a lot of words together. lumberjack_jeff Aug 2012 #45

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #46

Caption for Pic #2... "Hey, check out my wedgie!" OneTenthofOnePercent Aug 2012 #50

She is signaling her blocking position. Warren Stupidity Aug 2012 #69

I'm outraged. ZenLefty Aug 2012 #51

When I was a kid, I hated the Olympics. Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #47

Okay, I FOUND A TRULY OFFENSIVE ONE! Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #48

It's not that bad. I only see one boob there. n/t lumberjack_jeff Aug 2012 #52

I see a giant ass. Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #53

I'm offended that he got to meet my favorite Olympians and I didn't. At least yet. stevenleser Aug 2012 #57

faux second-wave outrage is really just jealousy. OneTenthofOnePercent Aug 2012 #49

I can't very well say 'Yes' seeing as how I have posted videos of skimpy clothed men stevenleser Aug 2012 #56

And even more offensive pictures! opiate69 Aug 2012 #58

but... but... Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #59

I suddenly have a strong urge to move to Brazil.... opiate69 Aug 2012 #60

They eat em in Thailand. Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #61

Ditto that.... opiate69 Aug 2012 #62

I enjoy objectifying those women 4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #64

But wait! ProudToBeBlueInRhody Aug 2012 #67

Post removed Post removed Aug 2012 #68