Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
We're all objectified, every day. Is there really a tremendous difference in being objectified for your body and being objectified somewhere on a chart as "employee 431"?
|
But aren't women objectified as an employee as well as for their bodies? That's the rub.
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Objectification's an odd word I've never been comfrotable with. If not for its allegedly evil effects, how would anyone reproduce?
|
I don't think it's that odd a word. Women are treated as sexual objects, to be bought and sold all the time, whether it is their image or their bodies. Or they are treated as if they can be bought and sold by men who are in no such position, reducing them to nothing but an object.
Of course women, in general, have their issues too. Some of it is a by-product of their constant objectification. The stereotype is that women see men for what they have or do instead of for who they are. Men see women for what they look like instead of who they are. Would women objectify men in a similar manner if the power dynamic between men and women was exactly the same?
Either way, can we all agree that Coltrane has been completely failing us in enabling our objectifying ways? I mean, let's stay focused here.
TM
Threaded Mode