View Single Post
Old October 23rd, 2014, 5:42 pm
FurryDice's Avatar
FurryDice  Female.gif FurryDice is offline
Hogwarts Graduate
Join Date: 28th December 2007
Location: Ireland
Age: 36
Posts: 2,591
Re: Feminism: Definitions and Opinions

Originally Posted by canismajoris View Post
Of course. If a casual observer can see it just by happening to be there, then why would it automatically be illegal to take a photograph of it? I don't think it would hurt (and I don't think it would be sexist) to suggest that people be mindful of accidentally exposing themselves when they don't intend to. Not even because there's risk of being exploited--I just know I've seen a lot of body parts I never wanted to over the years.
Of course, people - men and women - should be careful not to expose themselves. However, that should not not mean it's a free for all when they do. Just like people should be careful to remember to lock their cars - but it's still a crime to steal something, even if the owner forgets to lock the car.
Would it be a mitigating factor for a burglar if the homeowner forgot to lock their front door? Didn't have an alarm, or forgot to set it? Would it earn the burglar a reduced sentence, because the homeowner wasn't careful? Then why on earth are there such mitigating factors in sex crimes?

By the way, let me say that I understand that this case was thrown out because the individual in question hadn't broken any laws. I'm speaking about sex-related crimes in general.

Well without getting too graphic, I suspect a paparazzo doing that is probably hoping there won't be any underwear. And I think that's clearly invasive and wrong, but as I alluded to before, the relationship between the press and celebrities has gotten just... really weird and dark. Invading the privacy of celebrities is highly profitable, evidently, and as consumers that's really really the problem we should be thinking about. It's hard to condemn behaviors that we (as a group) would seem to desire.
I think there is something to condemn in society when society as a group seems to think that it's acceptable to violate the privacy of others. Clearly there's a market for these photos -both paparazzi and stolen. If there was no market for it, the paparazzi wouldn't be taking up-skirt shots, the hackers wouldn't be stealing.
And here's a question - why is there no demand for stolen nude pictures or paparazzi nude photos of male celebrities???

Originally Posted by Sereena View Post
Sexy is one thing. Thinking "Oh, I'm gonna wear this skirt because when I look nice my self esteem is better" and thinking "oh, I'm gonna wear this skirt and hope the men who see me in it will think I have no free will, no personality and a third boob where my brain should be" are two very different things in my opinion. No doubt some women like to be seen as objects but that's only because they've been reading too much "Fifty shades of grey".
I agree. Most people want to look their best but most people do not want to be denied the opportunity to choose, to say no -unless as you say, they take that Fifty Shades rubbish as a model for a relationship. And a woman looking attractive, having made an effort to look sexy, does not mean that she's available to anyone. A woman has tastes, too, and not every man is going to be her type.

Women dress nicely and wear make-up even if there aren't any men around. For most people (men and women alike) when you look good you feel good.
I agree. Women don't dress up just to impress men. Many people want to look good in general. But looking good does not mean that a person gives up their right to say no, gives up their right to choose who they spend their time with. If I wear a nice dress, get my hair and make-up done for a special night out, that does not mean that I give up my right to turn down a guy that I have no interest in. That does not mean some guy has the right to harass me -that's objectification. Dressing sexily isn't objectification. Feeling and acting entitled to someone because they look sexy - that is objectification

I don't think there are any heterosexual men out there who are completely indifferent to how women view them either. We all like to impress potential romantic partners, it's part of courtship but it's not the same as objectification.
Yes, looking your best to impress others is not the same as objectification. The difference is that with objectification, the woman is not given a say in the matter, some arrogant creep feels entitled to sex or to a woman's attention or to see her nude pictures just because he thinks she looks good. Her feelings on the matter don't come into it. That's objectification. And I stand by what I said - I do not think that most women want to be treated like that. Most women would actually like a say in who they spend their time with, who they sleep with, who gets to see them intimately. That is why I stand by saying that most women want to be seen as sexual beings, not sex objects. Sexy, but not just a toy to entertain a man. Most women these days feel that they have a right to satisfaction in a relationship too. And dressing sexy does not change that.


Pic by julvett at deviantart
"Relationships are like glass; sometimes it's better to leave them broken than to hurt yourself trying to put them back together." Anonymous
"Like this one time I sort of ran over this girl on her bike. It was the most traumatising event of my life and she’s trying to make it about her leg. Like my pain meant nothing." - Cordelia; Buffy the Vampire Slayer S1Ep11.
Sponsored Links