Quote:
Originally Posted by jdmulli
Seems to me that the above quoted post is simply, lightheartedly (my interpretation) illustrating one example of men being objectified. Certainly, it does not imply that one instance negates the history spanning objectification of women.
Actually, it used to be art to objectify women (and men) -- statues of the ideal form, paintings, poetry and whatnot. Now it is offensive.
It used to be polite to hold a door open for an approaching female. Now that's offensive too.
Compliments are offensive.
We are an offended people, but as some have stated, I guess its just growing pains. If no one got offended, nothing would ever change.
|
Art is most often representation, not really objectification. Objectification almost always connotes treating a person as a mere object; while art can be objectifying, I can't agree with a generalization as sweeping as "it used to be art to objectify women." But, I think your statement points to one of the many ways that men can fail to understand and empathize when they work from thoughts, rather than listening to actual experiences of women and taking those to heart.
Compliments are not offensive. But (assuming you are a straight male) you might imagine getting certain compliments from a gay man (e.g."you should smile more...you are much more attractive when you smile"). For most men, that would not be an unambiguously positive experience. Indeed, that rarely happens, because most gay men recognize that such a comment to someone who isn't gay might very well lead to homophobic violence.
And I think the old saw of, "it used to be polite to hold a door open for a woman" is a generalization that is terribly oversimplified and outdated. Most PEOPLE in this culture at this time appreciate having a door held open for them...but the old idea that it was gentlemanly to rush ahead to grandly hold open a door for a female was something that elicited ire from certain women in the past, because it was embedded in a sheaf of old-fashioned attitudes towards women which, taken as a whole, were Emblematic of a social system that was quite oppressive to women. As such, it took on a lot symbolic significance for a while.
And it is ironic that most folks who observe that "we" are easily offended usually regard that as something that they see in others....it is rarely uttered in a self-confessional way.