Objectifying Women

Bibbity

Active Member
It's good to remember that men do have the choice to look away. I certainly have changed my attitude regarding ogling, etc, and it's changed my life for the better. There are some attractive women I encounter at work and I feel like I enjoy them more now that I have learned to control my eyes. I see their overall beauty, not just a collection of parts. More importantly, I am able to enjoy them as persons to a much greater degree and can speak to them with a clear conscience.

Doesn't this kind of attitude just enrich your life?!  I think objectification takes away the essence of a person.  When I see someone from far away they become attractive in a 2D sort of way, they are only a 'look'.  When you get to know someone they become attractive or unattractive for completely different reasons. 

And sonofJack how sad for that guys daughter  :(  My BIL is very similar and makes rude comments.  I have no problems with calling him out on it so his daughter and son know that this behavior is adolescent and not acceptable to some people.  Sometimes men get the impression that this behavior is perfectly normal because of the 'vocal minority' and good men/women who feel they can't step up and tell them their behavior sucks.  'boys will be boys' and all that.....



 

LTE

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Bibbity said:
It's good to remember that men do have the choice to look away. I certainly have changed my attitude regarding ogling, etc, and it's changed my life for the better. There are some attractive women I encounter at work and I feel like I enjoy them more now that I have learned to control my eyes. I see their overall beauty, not just a collection of parts. More importantly, I am able to enjoy them as persons to a much greater degree and can speak to them with a clear conscience.

Doesn't this kind of attitude just enrich your life?!  I think objectification takes away the essence of a person.  When I see someone from far away they become attractive in a 2D sort of way, they are only a 'look'.  When you get to know someone they become attractive or unattractive for completely different reasons. 

And sonofJack how sad for that guys daughter  :(  My BIL is very similar and makes rude comments.  I have no problems with calling him out on it so his daughter and son know that this behavior is adolescent and not acceptable to some people.  Sometimes men get the impression that this behavior is perfectly normal because of the 'vocal minority' and good men/women who feel they can't step up and tell them their behavior sucks.  'boys will be boys' and all that.....
It is a much better place to be. There's a lot more enjoyment this way.
 

Rainiegirl

Member
I have a difficult time with this subject. The only person I tend to objectify is myself. I can recognize if someone is physically attractive or not but it really dosnt mean much to me. I don't care to look at other men and I never compare my spouse with anyone. I have a hard time understanding the need to do so. I picked my man because to me he is perfect so why would I find any pleasure in fantasizing about someone who could not measure up. This is why his addiction is causing me so much pain. In my mind, him looking at other women means that I'm not perfect to him. I'm not physically good enough.
My mind just can't comprehend it any other way because I just don't understand.
 

random123

Member
Rainie Girl, things are not really like that.

From an evolutionary perspective, it's totally comprehensive that man have this sexual drive that bothers women so much.

If it wasn't like that, may we wouldn't even be in this planet anymore.

I understand where you come from, but you should not go crazy over that.

As long as he respects and you have no form of contact with his porn, you should be fine... if that's not declining his sexual performance, of course.
 

Rainiegirl

Member
I don't believe that men are made to have a desire for objectifying or lusting for other women outside of there relationship. I believe that our society tells men that this is ok and normal for men to do. Everything I have read about how a pair bonding brain works seems to back me up. I've even found scientific articles that state that there is no difference between a male and female brain. The difference in thoughts and opinions between the sexes is based on how our scociety influences us. Testosterone my give men a higher sex drive but it dosent make them more prone to adulterous thoughts. Feel free to disagree but I have met men who never look at other women outside of their relationship, and I have known women who constantly do. I don't think it has anything to do with sexual orientation. This is only my opinion based on studies I have read, like this one:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10684179/Men-and-women-do-not-have-different-brains-claims-neuroscientist.html
I'm not saying this to offend anyone.
 

LTE

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Rainiegirl said:
I don't believe that men are made to have a desire for objectifying or lusting for other women outside of there relationship. I believe that our society tells men that this is ok and normal for men to do. Everything I have read about how a pair bonding brain works seems to back me up. I've even found scientific articles that state that there is no difference between a male and female brain. The difference in thoughts and opinions between the sexes is based on how our scociety influences us. Testosterone my give men a higher sex drive but it dosent make them more prone to adulterous thoughts. Feel free to disagree but I have met men who never look at other women outside of their relationship, and I have known women who constantly do. I don't think it has anything to do with sexual orientation. This is only my opinion based on studies I have read, like this one:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10684179/Men-and-women-do-not-have-different-brains-claims-neuroscientist.html
I'm not saying this to offend anyone.
I think that this ends up at one key question, is monogamy the normal state for humans. I believe that it is and live my life accordingly. I don't claim to be beyond temptation, but I am always the one in control of my actions and I will not act out sexually.

I believe that a man can be truly monogamous and control his interest in other women if he chooses too. Sometimes you just have to avert your eyes.
 

random123

Member
Hello again, Rainie!

Well, older studies do not make me believe this article is that right; it is moderately clear that men's brain are one way and women's are another, for this reason, studies show that homossexual people even tend to have a brain similar to the opposite sex... so how is that article so right?

If it is, I wonder why such groundbreaking study was not taken to a relevant spot like Science or Nature instead of staying within her university.

Anyway, undoubtedly, the environment plays a huge whole in everybody's life and it obviously can deeply motivate people to betray others, but there is one thing: every human behavior is based on a result of biological facts ? like genes, hormones, brains ? + environmental factors; so still, if the environment is motivating men's brain to be like that in the last thousands and thousands of years, that's how it should be; if that could've been different, we would have several examples of different societies working like you wish.

If you consider "testosterone" a stronger hormone, you automatically accept it as prone to look for variety in sex; otherwise, you are basically saying that the 2 nuclear bombs Japan got had the potential to destroy the country, but the bombs should have destroyed a single home each, like 2 dynamites. It is like saying the potential of gravity should take you to the floor like a feather in case you jump from a building... None of the two things I said make sense, do they? Well, that's how things work.

It's simple like that: people get extremely used to what they have available all the time... then you might say: "WELL, WHY IT ISN'T LIKE THAT WHEN IT COME TO DRUGS?"

Well, it is like that: the drugs get less effective and they start to take more to compensate ? or even take stronger drugs.

Humans in general are made monogamous, they are not born like that; obviously, cultural and hormonal factors make women much less prone to be like that, but you probably already know that as soon as society gets a little less strict our 15 years old daughters end up in a bed with 3 guys at the same time and then are bullied until they commit suicide. It is sad, but extremely true.

Anyway, I not telling you that men should betray or anything like that, I just want you to have one thing in mind:

Your husband may like pornography, but he loves you and even thought he watch some shit, you should be happy because he is doing anything but watching; millions of women are betrayed everyday by men that do not see a single difference between a Playboy and a real life orgy.

At the end, you are a lucky woman unhappy because of a foolish thing, like an teenager saying "I hate my parents" because they couldn't get a video game.
 

Bibbity

Active Member
I agree with Rainiegirl and I disagree that men are biologically programmed to "spread their seed".  A big part of junk science is understanding who benefits from it and understanding that it is a male dominated sphere.  Males conduct studies, males peer review, males publish and males critique.  It is very male biased.  Men enjoy the idea that they are not made monogomous because it makes their behavior less accountable and it also perpetuates pornography.  How many people want you to remain asleep in your life?  Junk science might also tell you that women are born liking lipstick which is why we wear it and then we buy more lipstick.  Just my opinion of course but junk science is a very real problem in our media according to a lot of scientists.  For example the government spent millions promoting the dairy and meat industry including conducting studies to prove meat and dairy is good for you.  Who benefits from this?  Rich people are always in bed with governments who always fund studies.

On the other hand I do believe it is biologically wired in to see others as attractive.  This is completely different than objectification.  To say that objectification is biologically inherent has been proven time and again to be wrong when studying other tribes of people without access to media.  Studies we rarely see.  The only difference between a man and womans brain is the way the hemispheres communicate with eachother.  Mens brains are more compatmentalized.  Looking for variety in sex is a desire for both men and women but the hormones responsible for pair bonding keep them with their partners.  These hormones are present in both sexes.  There are anthropologists who contend that women were just as involved in hunting as men and when we compare other mammal species this is likely true.  Which idea feeds into the masculine ego?  You cannot deny that a patriarchal society shapes our ideas about the sexes.  Men are allowed to go out and have sex with lots of women but women stay at home and are loyal.  Who benefits from this idea?

Why do you suppose so many men find the "playboy" lifestyle so unfulfilling?  Why is this forum full of married men looking for deeper connection to their wives?  Men simply are not wired for casual sex.  The seperation of the sexes starts very young.  Men are just as much victims of patriarchy as women are. 
 

Gracie

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Well Random, I can tell you that for a lot of women (myself indcluded) it is a betrayal to be looking at pornography in any form.  Being  "biologically wired" to spread seed is an excuse.  This premise allows one to think only men have the drive to procreate.  I hate to be the bearer of different news than you may have heard, but women also enjoy variety in sex.  Many in fact enjoy sex with different men.  But instead of being held hostage by their pesky hormones, society call them other names most of which are not complimentary.  They do not get the excuse, "Girls will be girls" or "Boy oh boy those hormones really take over your brain don't they"  or "Girls are biologically wired to just enjoy the hunt and capture".  If you look at some of the Indian Cultures in South America that were studied before they were tainted by civilization, men and women enjoyed equal sexual rights.  There was no agressor.  They had family units.  People freely excercised their desire. 

From an evolutionary perspective, it's totally comprehensive that man have this sexual drive that bothers women so much.

If it wasn't like that, may we wouldn't even be in this planet anymore.


If the above statement is true, then you are assuming that men are the only important part of "being on the planet".  That is so untrue. 

And just as a note my husband's sexual drive does not bother me.  It is that his sexual drive was hijacked by porn.  And if in fact to goal is to "populate the planet"  what happened to the reasoning brain that says "Wait, my sperm in my hand is not fertilizing a woman" 

Just curious, because men do have a choice to not view porn, just as women have a choice to not view porn.  And when you get to studies, it is interesting to note that their is no biological basis for anyone commiting crimes, any crime.  Because at the end of the studies they have done, there is always "They have the brain power to choose" And trust me in college I read a lot of those as they relate to sexual abuse and assault, domestic violence, murder etc. due to my major. 


 

Gracie

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
There was this great poster I saw that really got to the point regarding objectification.  I cannot find it in a size to fit here and I do not know how to resize it.  So here is the text:

She is someone's sister/mother/daughter/wife

I thought this was so powerful.  Whenever "looking at body parts" remember she is someone.
 
S

SO Reboot Partner

Guest
Gracie said:
Well Random, I can tell you that for a lot of women (myself indcluded) it is a betrayal to be looking at pornography in any form.  Being  "biologically wired" to spread seed is an excuse.  This premise allows one to think only men have the drive to procreate.  I hate to be the bearer of different news than you may have heard, but women also enjoy variety in sex.  Many in fact enjoy sex with different men.  But instead of being held hostage by their pesky hormones, society call them other names most of which are not complimentary.  They do not get the excuse, "Girls will be girls" or "Boy oh boy those hormones really take over your brain don't they"  or "Girls are biologically wired to just enjoy the hunt and capture".  If you look at some of the Indian Cultures in South America that were studied before they were tainted by civilization, men and women enjoyed equal sexual rights.  There was no agressor.  They had family units.  People freely excercised their desire. 

From an evolutionary perspective, it's totally comprehensive that man have this sexual drive that bothers women so much.

If it wasn't like that, may we wouldn't even be in this planet anymore.


If the above statement is true, then you are assuming that men are the only important part of "being on the planet".  That is so untrue. 

And just as a note my husband's sexual drive does not bother me.  It is that his sexual drive was hijacked by porn.  And if in fact to goal is to "populate the planet"  what happened to the reasoning brain that says "Wait, my sperm in my hand is not fertilizing a woman" 

Just curious, because men do have a choice to not view porn, just as women have a choice to not view porn.  And when you get to studies, it is interesting to note that their is no biological basis for anyone commiting crimes, any crime.  Because at the end of the studies they have done, there is always "They have the brain power to choose" And trust me in college I read a lot of those as they relate to sexual abuse and assault, domestic violence, murder etc. due to my major.

That Brain Power to Choose is morality, ethics - working through the issues.

Many are looking for some kind of affirmation that looking at Porn is okay or bad. Science! Consensus! A Book! the Internet! I'm not sure when "everybody else is doing it, so that makes it okay" became the fashion for ethical dilemmas, but It never worked with my Mother or my philosophy professor or as a free pass when speeding.

My favorite so far has been "but it is easily accessable". So is dirt, that doesn't mean it is a good idea to be filthy all the time.

EDit - Also, I love me some Gracie wisdom. Tell it like it is.
 

sonofJack

Member
The text of that poster is motivation enough to change the attitude that "porn is harmless." The thought of my children being viewed in that way is too appalling for words.

Just this past week, my son revealed to us that his ex-roomate was working her way through University as a dancer at our city's only "gentlemen's club." Before I could summon an articulate response, he added "one more reason why I'll never set foot in one of those places." His attitude is that rather than being titillated by this association with a sex-trade worker (the arguments against strippers being such are hopelessly invalid), he finds it sad that anyone would allow themselves to be exploited in such a way. His most insightful comment: "how is she going to hide this from her resume after graduation? I mean, like, anyone can find out anything about someone now."

Perhaps the kids are all right.
 

random123

Member
So I made a post here earlier and it was considered rude, thus deleted, so I'm afraid to offend someone posting once more.

Just letting you know that I'm not ignoring any of you ^^
 

Androg

Administrator
Admin
Moderator
These articles might of interest to some in this discussion:

"Guys: Where Do You Fall on the Monogamy Spectrum?"
http://yourbrainonporn.com/guys-where-do-you-fall-on-the-monogamy-spectrum

"Pair Bonding 101: Beware Novelty-As-Aphrodisiac"
http://yourbrainonporn.com/pair-bonding-101-beware-novelty-as-aphrodisiac

"Guys Who Gave Up Porn: On Sex and Romance "
http://yourbrainonporn.com/guys-who-gave-porn-sex-and-romance

"Committed Relationship: You?re Wired For It"
http://yourbrainonporn.com/committed-relationship-youre-wired-for-it

In my view, it's useful to understand the tension between our biological programs because it actually makes it easier to acknowledge our occasional inner conflict as perfectly natural, and then choose with the rational part of the brain. But it's also useful to understand that our behavioral choices can make the "voices" of one biological program or the other much "louder." Loud enough, and they may make it very difficult to choose rationally. This is what addiction does to an addict, for example.

Yes, we have the ability to choose, but it's also important not to knock our "choosing machinery" (i.e., the reward circuitry, which also powers our inner compass for moral choices) out of kilter by chronically overstimulating it. A book called "Cupid's Poisoned Arrow" goes into this discussion in more detail.
 

tj

Member
Wanttobebetter, I saw your topic and read it last Friday, we went out of town this past weekend and I found myself thinking of the subject title of your post.  I too am a much older fellow and like you I remember girls from my past vividly, not so much women for I got married at age 20 after a 6 mo. courtship.  I too see a female as an object many times, sometimes with lust sometimes just for their beauty or wit.  I think it's a 2 way street, they see us as objects too for one reason or another, but the ability not to get carried away is the key eh?  I fantasize ex young gfs as dynamite when in reality they were just blips in my growing up.  The key here that I'm realizing is that the experience they had with me was part of their development too, been that way since the dawn of time.
We're all objects to someone for some reason but we must control the reasons eh?  I'm on day 54 today and feeling good signs of improvement.  We can all help each other here.
 

jkkk

Well-Known Member
I've been following this discussion closely and it's very telling just how much the women part of Reboot Nations is engaged in it. Which is great.

It is telling because it shows just how much women are affected by objectifying. By being objectified and by seeing their men objectify.

I also think that a differentiation should be made between (1) "Objectifying Women" and, errr, (2) "Objectifying Women".

Under (1) I would categorize the vast majority of behaviour described here. Quite a good example of that kind of dude would be the runner described a few posts above.

Under (2) falls objectifying as a compulsive disorder, a genre of sexual addiction.

What's the difference? Maybe it sounds strange but in my view real addicts (nr. (2)) would rarely say as this guy from the post above - "I'm following THAT". Why? Because addiction is about isolation and secrecy. Most of addicts will do their very very best to avoid being caught. I'm not saying that it would not happen. I'm saying they are trying to avoid it, that's just part of their addiction, a symptom.

A lot of discussion is going on about nr (1), I think. And rightly so. Women, partners, have every right to feel aggrieved and depressed about their significant others looking around. I guess most of the cases described here are cases of addicted partners, so it might well be that they fall under (2).

I'm not saying that (1) is fine and OK, and harmless. It is not and it may lead to (2) but maybe it doesn't have to?

I personally am (2). I started working on this a few weeks ago. I think I'm doing fine, it gets better. Some moments are more difficult. Sometimes a "flash" gets created when I look away too late or the particular image is too powerful. It is a sad and debilitating addiction, where finding new "targets" rushes dopamine in the system. So, from my perspective, I never think "what did that girl put on herself (read: I cannot avoid looking, c'mon!)", because in my case it's not such a big deal - if the "attractive" women will not be there, I could as well lay my eyes on any other.

I'm writing all this to raise the issue of a possible difference in those two topics. There are guys here to whom the addiction of objectifying causes significant pain. To their SO's as well and to their relationships. For such guys the cultural or moral aspect, if I can put it this way, is an issue secondary to their addiction.
 
S

SO Reboot Partner

Guest
jkkk said:
I've been following this discussion closely and it's very telling just how much the women part of Reboot Nations is engaged in it. Which is great.

It is telling because it shows just how much women are affected by objectifying. By being objectified and by seeing their men objectify.

I also think that a differentiation should be made between (1) "Objectifying Women" and, errr, (2) "Objectifying Women".

Under (1) I would categorize the vast majority of behaviour described here. Quite a good example of that kind of dude would be the runner described a few posts above.

Under (2) falls objectifying as a compulsive disorder, a genre of sexual addiction.

What's the difference? Maybe it sounds strange but in my view real addicts (nr. (2)) would rarely say as this guy from the post above - "I'm following THAT". Why? Because addiction is about isolation and secrecy. Most of addicts will do their very very best to avoid being caught. I'm not saying that it would not happen. I'm saying they are trying to avoid it, that's just part of their addiction, a symptom.

A lot of discussion is going on about nr (1), I think. And rightly so. Women, partners, have every right to feel aggrieved and depressed about their significant others looking around. I guess most of the cases described here are cases of addicted partners, so it might well be that they fall under (2).

I'm not saying that (1) is fine and OK, and harmless. It is not and it may lead to (2) but maybe it doesn't have to?

I personally am (2). I started working on this a few weeks ago. I think I'm doing fine, it gets better. Some moments are more difficult. Sometimes a "flash" gets created when I look away too late or the particular image is too powerful. It is a sad and debilitating addiction, where finding new "targets" rushes dopamine in the system. So, from my perspective, I never think "what did that girl put on herself (read: I cannot avoid looking, c'mon!)", because in my case it's not such a big deal - if the "attractive" women will not be there, I could as well lay my eyes on any other.

I'm writing all this to raise the issue of a possible difference in those two topics. There are guys here to whom the addiction of objectifying causes significant pain. To their SO's as well and to their relationships. For such guys the cultural or moral aspect, if I can put it this way, is an issue secondary to their addiction.

I think everyone wants to be seen as good and noble in their actions, leaving the "other" as a warning.

The thing is we are all people that make mistakes. We don't like to deliberate the metaphysical, preferring the more tangible, a comparison that can serve as a guide. Boundaries of behavior are an issue for PMO addiction. It is one of the reasons we see mentions of lists and books and internet articles and try to get some kind of consensus of what is okay. Lists, laws and religious tracts are not morality or an ethic. It is just following the pack. It is just easier than really delving into what is right or wrong for our own moral compass. Some will make that trek, but I suspect most won't.

This is a touchy subject, a cognitive dissonance for both genders. "There's a person" vs "It's all for me" or "He loves me" vs "He values strangers"
 
Top