Objectification

Hello again! This is Shield Wife. I would like to start off by thanking everyone who subscribed to my channel and left encouraging comments on my last video. I originally wanted to reply to every comment personally, though I’m not sure I will have the time to. I did want to let you know that I read every one of them and I appreciate every comment even if I don’t reply.

Now, I would like to discuss another frequently used word that is nothing more than an expression of misandry. That word is objectification. What does this word even really mean? Well, it’s hard to say. I’ve noticed that feminists like to use words that are deliberately vague or the have shifting definitions so that it lets them better obscure their intentions or weasel their way through arguments. They claim that objectification is when a man turns a woman into an object. I think that it is more accurate to say that in almost every case the word used, it is meant not to express turning someone into an object, but rather to degrade male sexuality.

Objectification merely expresses a hatred and disgust for male sexual desires. It is a tool to try to shame men for having feelings which are entirely natural and benign.

Feminists complain that when a man sees a woman and feels attraction towards her, he is not seeing her as a complex human being, but instead merely seeing her through the lens of his own desires and his own ends. Thus, objectifying her.  Well, I have news for you, that happens all the time with the people we encounter in our daily lives, and it is not nearly as evil as feminists seem to want to paint it.

For example, when the pizza delivery guy brings me a pizza, that is usually the most important thing about him, at least to me. I can’t put that much thought into what his home life is like, how his parents treated him as a child, or if he is happy or sad with his life. I just want the pizza.

And honestly, there is nothing wrong with that. Just because I don’t fully appreciate the depth of humanity in each and every person I come across doesn’t mean that I have dehumanized them in my mind. It doesn’t mean that they are objects to me or that I would mistreat them. Along the same lines, if I see someone attractive, I might feel lust towards them while at the same time may not consider all of the complex things happening in that person’s life. That doesn’t degrade them in any way, doesn’t make them more of an object.

I mean, you could walk down a city street with a hundred people and not give too much thought to any single person, you might notice an old guy, maybe a policeman, and there might be a girl who is really hot. There is no reason to think that the pretty girl is less human in your mind than the old guy just because you are more attracted to her. And she is not an object just because you’re thinking about having sex with her, anymore than the policeman is an object because you worry he might give you a ticket.

The truth is that none of us can fully appreciate the humanity of people who are not intimately a part of our lives. So why does male attraction towards females get labelled as objectification? Because the idea of “objectification” expresses misandry in such a way that virtually every man is guilty, virtually every man can be shamed. Every man can be painted as someone with sociopathic tendencies, which is what viewing other people as objects really implies.

It is one of many ways that feminists seek to enforce a hypocritical double standard, where women can dress or act provocatively and reap the full benefits of doing so, but when men react in a way which is only natural, it is somehow wrong or oppressive. Also, accusations of objectification almost always pertain to how men primarily experience lust and desire: Visually. On the other hand, for sexual outlets that are usually feminine, the word hardly ever arises. For example, we often hear that pornography objectifies women, but we seldom hear about anyone being objectified by 50 Shades of Grey or other romance novels.

Feeling sexual attraction is entirely natural, humans are sexual creatures. There is nothing wrong with looking at a pretty girl and feeling attracted to her or, for that matter, looking at images of attractive women for the express purpose of gaining pleasure from it. When a movie has an attractive female lead or a commercial has a young woman in a bikini, some women condemn it as a cheap attempt to appeal to men. To which I say – what is wrong with trying to please men? Why is male sexuality seen with such negativity? Well, perhaps it is because there are such major undercurrents of misandry within our society as a result of feminism.

You may have noticed that a lot feminists these days describe themselves, at least if confronted with the topic, as sex positive feminists. I think that any woman who describes herself as being sex positive while believing in objectification, which means writing off half of the population as perverted sociopaths, is a hypocrite and not sex positive at all. More accurately, she is positive about her own sexuality and thinks that her attraction somehow mystically gauges the character of men – as I mentioned in my creepy video – while being able to dismiss the desires of men as base and degenerate.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t men out there who act inappropriately towards women, who use women for sex, or who are jerks. There are plenty of men who are immoral, just like there are plenty of women who are immoral and who exploit men. In fact, there are probably more women who exploit men, as our misandrist culture condones and facilitates it. In any case, the fact that bad people exist has nothing to do with male sexuality or the visual nature of their attraction.

Now, there is another side to objectification that feminists like to pretend doesn’t exist. And that is gay men. When the issue of gay men arises, feminists start becoming even more vague and try to change the subject. See, gay men don’t fit into the patriarchal objectification paradigm that feminists want to live in. They have a sexuality not that different from straight men in that they are highly visual, yet their attraction is directed towards other men. Does that mean that they see other men as nothing more than lowly sex objects? Does it mean that a man can look at someone lustfully without degrading that person? No, it can’t be that, then the entire objectification myth crumbles. So, it’s better just to avoid thinking about it too much, and luckily, not thinking is something that most feminists are pretty good at.

This is why I disregard any accusations of “objectification” in any kind of media. It generally just means that it has something in it that might appeal to a straight man. Feminists have created a term that makes men seem like sociopaths –you see, it dovetails into their conviction that all men are potential rapists. The same group of people who claim all the glory for the sexual revolution of the 60’s are trying as hard as they can to repress men’s sexuality, to shame them into only having the feelings that women give them permission to have.

That’s all for now. I have a couple more videos planned that will be posted in the weeks to come. Until then, don’t forget to subscribe, and if you’d like to support my channel, you can donate at my blog, which I’ll link below.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Objectification

  1. I posted a reply on youtube, then decided to re-copy it here.

    First let me say, I loved this video. I’ve been saying this stuff for years, but no one takes me seriously because I am man.

    I do have one criticism though. Is it really necessary for you to use the term “feminist?” Whenever I try to share videos like this with my friends and family, they rush to the defense of feminists because “that’s not what feminisms about.” And if you read feminist writing, indeed its not. There’s a big divide between women who call themselves feminists and famous feminist authors.

    I think we all might be better off using a generic term like “modern women.” If you devote your post to tearing down feminists, then we will get drawn into a long conversation about “What does the word feminist really mean” and that will derail the conversation. I’d rather focus on the misandry in today’s society, and have the focus of the conversation be about that, instead of the focus being on feminism

  2. Very insightful.

    As a trained linguist and pro-non-irrational-feminiist I contend: “Male sexuality” is different form “attraction”. I we would go as far as saying “Self Objectification” can be a form of sexuality expressed from the internal perception of sexuality imposed by culture. In turn, males and females can objective each other sexually.

    “Rape” is a tough burden. US society still seems to blame the female victim of men. The society deems the dress or actions of the female as her fault. Instead of looking at the psychology and culture that allows rape to be possible. Should we not ask why “date rape “is common among college campuses, today?

    The answer seems to oppress all men of their visual sense of attraction. In this regard, because a small “%” of men rape women, all men need to be controlled. I would concur the motivation to label “objectification” in this regard, is to take or limit the possibility of men rapping women. However, it has not created a tangible soultion, and leaves men to rapped by men or women.

    • ““Rape” is a tough burden. US society still seems to blame the female victim of men. The society deems the dress or actions of the female as her fault. ”

      No, a small amount of members of society blame women for their assaults, including defense attorneys, who everyone considers scumbags anyway. And yet, women not the ones who go to jail for their rapes. Women are not the ones who get beaten to death, like Luke Harwood, for false rape allegations. If you mean the police asking what the victim was wearing, that’s for forensic and legal purposes.

      “Instead of looking at the psychology and culture that allows rape to be possible. Should we not ask why “date rape “is common among college campuses, today?”

      It might have something to do with the fact that young women and men in college are prone to drink heavily in unknown venues and disregard basic personal safety, despite schools specifically teaching it. According to Wikipedia, “The majority of students raped are proven to have been using alcohol or drugs.” That also means they could’ve consented while drunk and forgot. Of course, the guy might’ve been drunk too, but that’s rarely considered rape.

  3. “I do have one criticism though. Is it really necessary for you to use the term “feminist?” Whenever I try to share videos like this with my friends and family, they rush to the defense of feminists because “that’s not what feminisms about.” And if you read feminist writing, indeed its not.”

    Aww, come on. “That’s not what feminism is about” means they don’t know jack what feminism is about, they only like the idea of equality for women, and think that feminism truly is that, period, end of. It’s not just that, or masculism and egalitarianism wouldn’t even exist.

    I easily found links that disprove this “feminism isn’t about that notion”:

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-objectification/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification
    http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/faq-what-is-sexual-objectification/
    http://womenshistory.about.com/od/sexualityandsex/a/Objectification.htm
    http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/01/conflating-sexual-objectification-with-sexual-empowerment/

    Now, if they mean that this isn’t how they think, and they consider themselves feminists, welcome to “you’re not really a feminist”.

    To be accepted as a feminist by other feminists by and large, you need to believe that:

    -Patriarchy exists, and is an ideology that favors men being leaders and getting more privilege, simply for being born with a penis, while treating women worse, on purpose, for not having a penis.
    -Women have it worse, on the balance than men, forever and ever. In every domain that matters. Domains where men have it worse only matter when black men have it worse than white men (ie life expectancy, suicide), on the racial axis, NEVER the gender axis.

    You can hate men, want them reduced to 10% of the population, and want trans people (especially trans women) to be “mandated out of existence” without getting your “feminism membership” revoked.

    But dare say that men should have help and rights and DV shelters, and you’re an evil misogynist MRA who’s against equality and wants women back in the kitchen.

    You can’t be a feminist who focuses on men’s rights (primarily because no one gives a shit about it, so it seems the focus is warranted), to them it sounds like someone who says they wants racial equality but who’s in the KKK.

  4. And to add to this

    “This is why I disregard any accusations of “objectification” in any kind of media. It generally just means that it has something in it that might appeal to a straight man. Feminists have created a term that makes men seem like sociopaths –you see, it dovetails into their conviction that all men are potential rapists. The same group of people who claim all the glory for the sexual revolution of the 60′s are trying as hard as they can to repress men’s sexuality, to shame them into only having the feelings that women give them permission to have.”

    The CDC study for 2012 says that in the last 12 months, men have been “forced to penetrate women” (read: had non-consensual sex with women) at rates almost equal to women’s rate of rape by male perpetrators. But the study didn’t count forced to penetrate as rape, so it made the rate appear incredibly smaller than women’s, and made it seem as if mostly men rape men, and mostly men (as in over 90%) are rapists at all.

    Count the forced to penetrate and male-on-male rape becomes the lower number for male victims, and female perpetrators actually show up on the radar (80% of male victims report a female perp, given about a 50/50 ratio on rape, this makes females roughly 40% of perpetrators.)

    • @ Schala,
      Thanks for the well thought of and work cited reply…

      1.) 2nd Wave vs 3rd Wave Feminism…
      I’m a strong supporter of 2nd Waive Feminism, the idea to work together to provide “equal opportunity” for all . “3rd Waive Feminism” on the other hand is something I don’t truly understand, as the few young women or women my age that I have met, seem to support these radical ideals that seem or would defend the radical notions that women should be in charge of everything because men cause all the “ills” of society.

      2nd Wave in Practice…
      Living in Korea, where the rate of women’s divorce is on the rise because Korean Culture is heavily influenced by Confucianism, (which in the name Confucianism, asian wives had their feet mutilated so they would not be able to leave the house at all) Many Korean Woman do not like holidays that force them to literally work in the kitchen for long hours while men are forced to do nothing. LOL, I tried to help at my wife’s mom’s house, and I was told to sit down and do nothing (Twice). I finally got to sneak a couple of dishes in the sink when no one was looking.

      Moreover, my wife makes more money than me, but if I choose to, can force her not to work by Korean Costumes, which both of us agree just is irrational. We work together financially. By Sharing house choirs, this free up our time to research and plan what we may be able to accomplish together, like making babies and how, if she makes most of the money, will we be able to afford the time she needs to deliver a child and go back to work. Or, if children are even possible given our economic situation.

      2) Girl Power or Group Power?
      RE: “You can’t be a feminist who focuses on men’s rights (primarily because no one gives a shit about it, so it seems the focus is warranted), to them it sounds like someone who says they wants racial equality but who’s in the KKK.”

      A brillant analogy, this in reference to “The 48 Laws of Power” is one problem of group power. Meaning, a group, that can demonize or create an enemy than attacks it together, finds the ability not to blame each other but to push to attack the perceived threat (see the Devil).

      “The Devil” for the KKK was the evil “black man” who would take their jobs and their women (i.e. opportunity) from them. The man, ideally “white male in power”, still makes more money in corporate America than most women, thus I have to agree with 3rd Wave Feminists that yeah, in management jobs where a woman won’t leave to have a kid because her career was more important should be paid the same or more in comparison to her male peers. Some women do make more, but last I checked in 2007 “pre-crash” men in high paying postions were making more than female counter parts.

      On the other hand, 2008 post-crash, more women had jobs or higher paying jobs than their husbands. For example, house-holds where a man was making $90,000 USD in construction a year, made less than their wife who was a female school teacher or nurse, because these skilled workers had no work. “Divorce” was an option some women with more “traditional” values became a more tangible option because, their family values pushed men to be the providers even though their vows stated “richer or poorer, for better or worse”.

      So I contend, women as a whole make more in the USA in comparison to male counter parts, but this would take more research in “unemployment” and other “social economic factors” to confirm or develop a “ratio” or “algorithm” to abstract hard data.

      3.) Rape Data…

      Thank you…
      “Count the forced to penetrate and male-on-male rape becomes the lower number for male victims, and female perpetrators actually show up on the radar (80% of male victims report a female perp, given about a 50/50 ratio on rape, this makes females roughly 40% of perpetrators.”

      On Youtube, I was attacked, I think because of grammar issues, but may because of sharing my views… I was almost raped or “forced to penetrate” a woman once. It was awful experience that many people I tell laugh at, including my wife, but it really helped me to be a lot more “considerate” of people, women, in sexual situations.

      May be being “considerate” of human beings is the simple answer to reducing rape on college campuses.

      4) Just for Fun…
      Anyhoot, here are some fun related links on the web you “might” enjoy 🙂

      “The Big Feminist But” Graphic Novel Project
      http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/832892268/the-big-feminist-but/posts

      “A Brief History of Wonder Woman” Movie Bob: The Big Picture

  5. I never go out in public dressed like Shield Wife is in her videos, that is with my cleavage showing. Nor would I make a video from home dressed like that, precisely because I do not want people, male or female, to be looking at my breasts.

    • I know what you mean. The Video Response Girls were charged with overuse of the “boob window”. On the other hand, breasts are part of female sexuality. In this regard, I have always wondered how much should women hide their sexuality in order to be able to function in a mix-gendered situation.

      The movie “Boys Don’t Cry” is an example of this type of de-sexualization and the possible negative effects. In that movie, a girl dresses and acts as a boy, and even gets a girl to fall in love with them. Later, in the movie as “he” is revelad as a girl, get’s violently raped in front of their girl friend (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0171804/synopsis).

      In this case of this film, when the “Boy” has bounded their breasts they are treated relatively well in the community of the film. When, the breasts are reveled it starts the film’s narrative descent into tragedy for the hero.

      Consider this then, can people be “naked in public” in our society, a point stated in the book Gulliver’s Travels, when he discusses the horse peoples’ reactions to his clothes. Or, Tribes where tops are not worn by women nor men because it’s just too hot and limited material is used to make “net” instead of a “garment”.

      Let’s not even go to issues the US Armed Forces failings to give women an equal and fair working environment even though the uniforms are gender neutral. (http://www.stripes.com/news/us/documentary-unveils-rape-in-us-military-with-testimonials-1.179411)

      Now, I’m not going to argue that perhaps the “boob window” doesn’t get more views, but on the other hand, have we been tricked to objectify breasts and damn anyone who exposes them?

      LOL, on a hot day, I would walk naked in the street if I could, like in a San Francisco parade, no wants to see me naked but the practicality of cooling minus sun burn would be my rational, not showing off 😛

      Just some food for thought.

  6. @ Aiston
    I know what you mean. The Video Response Girls were charged with overuse of the “boob window”. On the other hand, breasts are part of female sexuality. In this regard, I have always wondered how much should women hide their sexuality in order to be able to function in a mix-gendered situation.

    The movie “Boys Don’t Cry” is an example of this type of de-sexualization and the possible negative effects. In that movie, a girl dresses and acts as a boy, and even gets a girl to fall in love with them. Later, in the movie as “he” is revelad as a girl, get’s violently raped in front of their girl friend (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0171804/synopsis).

    In this case of this film, when the “Boy” has bounded their breasts they are treated relatively well in the community of the film. When, the breasts are reveled it starts the film’s narrative descent into tragedy for the hero.

    Consider this then, can people be “naked in public” in our society, a point stated in the book Gulliver’s Travels, when he discusses the horse peoples’ reactions to his clothes. Or, Tribes where tops are not worn by women nor men because it’s just too hot and limited material is used to make “net” instead of a “garment”.

    Let’s not even go to issues the US Armed Forces failings to give women an equal and fair working environment even though the uniforms are gender neutral. (http://www.stripes.com/news/us/documentary-unveils-rape-in-us-military-with-testimonials-1.179411)

    Now, I’m not going to argue that perhaps the “boob window” doesn’t get more views, but on the other hand, have we been tricked to objectify breasts and damn anyone who exposes them?

    LOL, on a hot day, I would walk naked in the street if I could, like in a San Francisco parade, no wants to see me naked but the practicality of cooling minus sun burn would be my rational, not showing off

    Just some food for thought.

  7. Schala, I can only say that I believe the kinds of rants you just went on- bashing feminists, actually hurt the Men’s Rights Movement.

    Those people hate us. But I think we need to be about more than hating people back.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s