Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FourScore

(9,704 posts)
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:41 AM Feb 2014

It's so much more complex...

Last edited Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:20 PM - Edit history (8)

There was a thread this evening (it has since been locked, thank goodness) with a poll on how many people were BOTHERED by the SI image. Of course, it linked back to the photo, just in case you missed it the first time. The poll was broken down by gender, because, you know, that MATTERS. Anyway, I wrote the following post to try and explain that I was never bothered by the image per se. The problem for me was so much more complex. The thread got locked while I was writing, and I worked hard to articulate this, so I've decided to make it an OP. I hope you can forgive one more of these threads; because I really want this one to be an olive branch.

When I come to DU, I might quibble with a fellow DU'er on whether or not Hillary would make a better candidate than Warren. Or I might disagree with someone's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Or maybe I'll peruse n2docs latest comic postings. But, what I least expect is an in-your-face T&A thread. The picture itself seemed out of place here. It was shocking because of the location, not the content.

Please understand, to be a woman in our society means to live with perfect bodily images all around us. From early on this happens. Young girls resort to bulemia and anorexia in misguided attempts to be "thin enough". We grow up comparing ourselves constantly to the ideal, one that even Cindy Crawford admits she cannot achieve -- as she once stated, "Sometimes I wake up in the morning, look in the mirror, and wish I could be Cindy Crawford." She knows as well as anyone how the images are all smoke and mirrors. Actually lots of photoshop, but you know what I mean - IT'S NOT REAL! So we can never BE IT. Compound that with the current war on women that is happening all across this country. Do I need to provide you with the statistics of how much less we earn, or on the glass ceiling, or how women's reproductive rights are under attack, how our bodies are unnecessarily probed?

And then we come here and see THAT! It was juvenile, no question. But more than that, it was insensitive. Juxtaposed to that image was a map of how abortion clinics are closing all across the country. There was a post detailing a woman's rape, and another one reporting some asinine chauvinist statement by a FEMALE republican. The SI post was disgusting because of WHERE it was not WHAT it was.

I was proud of myself. I ignored the SI post. But eventually, on some other stupid thread, I was drawn in. Why? Because I could no longer sit idly by and watch women being ridiculed. I had reached my own personal tipping point on the matter. Suddenly we were FEMINISTS, as if that were a bad thing. Suddenly, we were BOTHERED about an image of beautiful women - Heh, what's wrong with us? Can't we take a joke? Why are we so overly sensitive? No. No. No.

For the first time, after 10 years at DU, I had a comment hidden by jury in one of those squabbles. And rightfully so. The point I was trying to make was valid, but I was wrong in how I was saying it. I felt so ashamed.

I want to try to do better now: It's not the IMAGE -- It's the CUMULATION!

So, let's be clear -- I love a gorgeous body. I love being attractive. And Manny, I love the Beatles. But what I don't love is insensitivity, and the pretense of innocence where baiting is concerned. You are not ignorant. You know damn well what you are doing. And it is not helping women. Not one iota.

Walk a mile in our shoes. The spiked ones. They're the sexiest. Do it for a day. I dare ya.
45 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It's so much more complex... (Original Post) FourScore Feb 2014 OP
Great post. boston bean Feb 2014 #1
Great post. DanTex Feb 2014 #2
Thank you. FourScore Feb 2014 #38
This is a good post quinnox Feb 2014 #3
I used to say that there were only three groups it was still okay culturally for merrily Feb 2014 #4
I believe there is at least one more group unc70 Feb 2014 #6
Not really comparable. merrily Feb 2014 #8
How about overweight people? nt tblue37 Feb 2014 #23
Thank you FourScore! 3Stones Feb 2014 #5
You are so welcome. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #9
Don't beat yourself up over it Riftaxe Feb 2014 #7
+1 Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #43
K& R. nt sufrommich Feb 2014 #10
Well said. nt DLevine Feb 2014 #11
K&R Chorophyll Feb 2014 #12
I'm glad it resonated with you. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #14
Right, it's the commercialization, it would drive anyone nuts. bemildred Feb 2014 #13
Thank you. This hits the nail on the head. n/t MadrasT Feb 2014 #15
I wish it would get more views, but I guess it's just not sensational enough. FourScore Feb 2014 #16
Maybe I should change the title to "TITS!!!" and see if it garners more attention. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #18
Nailed it! JustAnotherGen Feb 2014 #17
Agree in general except marions ghost Feb 2014 #19
Kicking it to he top with it's new title. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #20
Wow. The title change added 60 views in 20 minutes. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #21
Changed it back. I felt bad. I'm more comfortable with "boring". n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #24
Well said and right to the heart of the matter. nt UtahLib Feb 2014 #22
Thanks. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #25
Thanks for posting this. Sheldon Cooper Feb 2014 #26
I'm glad. :-) n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #27
K&R. Very well put. MineralMan Feb 2014 #28
You're welcome, MineralMan. FourScore Feb 2014 #29
Well said. nt hack89 Feb 2014 #30
Excellent post n/t hlthe2b Feb 2014 #31
Some people are here only (or primarily) to fuck with other people. PeaceNikki Feb 2014 #32
+1 Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #42
Great post, FourScore! Waiting For Everyman Feb 2014 #33
If this flame fest had started with the SI post hootinholler Feb 2014 #34
This is true. But it has reached a fever pitch with the SI post. n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #37
Spot on, and let us also point out ... frazzled Feb 2014 #35
Great post frazzled. n/t seaglass Feb 2014 #36
wow. great post. boston bean Feb 2014 #39
+1 Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #41
Rec Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #40
Really well said. Squinch Feb 2014 #44
Thank you! n/t FourScore Feb 2014 #45

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
2. Great post.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 03:01 AM
Feb 2014

One unfortunate thing about internet forums is that complexity loses out to bumper stickers. It's too bad that DU can't sustain a conversation about gender issues at the level of this OP.

FourScore

(9,704 posts)
38. Thank you.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:30 PM
Feb 2014

"One unfortunate thing about internet forums is that complexity loses out to bumper stickers." - Best line of the day.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
4. I used to say that there were only three groups it was still okay culturally for
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 03:25 AM
Feb 2014

US comedians to mock, even to PC audiences: women, Christians and Arabs.

Gradually, that has changed.

unc70

(6,094 posts)
6. I believe there is at least one more group
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 03:47 AM
Feb 2014

Southerners. Particularly towards white male Southerners. Even if they are fellow DUers. The mocking is not limited to just comedians.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
8. Not really comparable.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:13 AM
Feb 2014

A professional comedian won't be able to eat or pay the rent if he or she alienates the general public. So, when the pros insult a group, it means that it's okay with a lot of the American public to insult that group. When someone on DU does it, I have no idea what it means as to America as a whole.

Riftaxe

(2,693 posts)
7. Don't beat yourself up over it
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 03:53 AM
Feb 2014

Remember those girls in high school whose one true purpose was to make every other girl not part of that cliques life hell?

They all joined DU and just to piss off the rest of us, both men and women.



bemildred

(90,061 posts)
13. Right, it's the commercialization, it would drive anyone nuts.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 11:08 AM
Feb 2014

Endless streams of marketing drivel presented as news and entertainment and decorated with perfect bodies and perfect clothes and perfect accessories.

FourScore

(9,704 posts)
16. I wish it would get more views, but I guess it's just not sensational enough.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 11:48 AM
Feb 2014

Thank you for your comment.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
19. Agree in general except
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:02 PM
Feb 2014

I do think there is a place for discussion about this at DU. The original OP was overly provocative but it did initiate the topic at least. And then the pile-on.

What you say about the damaging effects of such blatantly fetishized body images --to women, especially the young, is absolutely true.

This is just butts to sell magazines--it's not really intended as a depiction of "feminine beauty"--it's a cartoon, a caricature, a distortion. It's male fantasy (just as food porn and house porn are marketed to women). Do we really live in houses that look like those in the magazines? No, but so many women spend their lives trying to get that look and feel bad that they never achieve it. And they will do the same with culturally accepted depictions of their bodies. "Women as toys, playthings"--this is what the SI cover is about. That is a form of subtle subjugation. It may seem light-hearted but it isn't to women who have suffered from objectification or dominance.

All too often women see these body images and think this is what men want them to be, and it screws up relationships for all concerned. So these pix aren't benign. They should be limited to the usual sources for them. Where those who need them can find them. Not in your face. I object to such images being used to sell stuff on the net too. Same thing. Offensive.

I think the SI cover is a good chance to talk about this. Some people will never get it. But maybe some will.

PeaceNikki

(27,985 posts)
32. Some people are here only (or primarily) to fuck with other people.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 05:17 PM
Feb 2014

There are bullies all over the internet. DU is no exception.

DU'ers are especially creative in their passive aggressive digs. They used to have to be FAR more discreet since mods existed and understood nuances and history more than any jury could. In addition, many DU'ers LOVE to watch the drama. And they end up on juries.

meh.


good post, though!!

Waiting For Everyman

(9,385 posts)
33. Great post, FourScore!
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 05:21 PM
Feb 2014

I don't want to see sex-posed asses in GD. Put it in V&M or the Lounge if it must be somewhere, but not here. And I don't care if it's pretty asses or ugly asses, female asses or male asses, I don't wan to see it. No, I'm not a bit negotiable about it, I don't want to see any asses where they aren't expected to be so I can avoid them.

I don't feel the need to be accommodating to people who clearly don't mind offending me, by saying "I don't mind" or "it doesn't really bother me". Yes, I'll say it, people who posted that have a lot to learn about what is appropriate, and yes it is most definitely offensive.

Being pressured to "ok" it, and say it's fine, is like being pressured to laugh off a sexist joke. I don't think so, not gonna happen. I'm not that concerned that somebody might call me a prude. They should go ahead and bring it. I couldn't give a fluffy fuck.

hootinholler

(26,449 posts)
34. If this flame fest had started with the SI post
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 05:29 PM
Feb 2014

I would agree with you, but it didn't. I still mostly agree with you, but this started way before that post.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
35. Spot on, and let us also point out ...
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 05:38 PM
Feb 2014

with regard to the inappropriateness of the posting on THIS SITE, that every other sort of demographic has been entitled to object to the way it has been portrayed in the mainstream media. African Americans have rightly objected to the portrayal of black people in Hollywood and in advertising as hapless maids and servants, tap-dancing steppin fetchits, and Aunt Jemimas. Gays have also succeeded in protesting the ways in which they have been portrayed in mainstream media. It's an important part of any group's march toward equality and respect.

For some reason, however, despite decades of protest, women are apparently not allowed to object to the way in which they have been and continue to be portrayed in the media. It's bad enough for the media to continue to push such imagery--created and sold by males to a predominantly male audience--but we don't expect fellow liberals to be promoting and defending these images ... here, on this site.

Listen up, DU: you would not be arguing in favor of posts that contained stereotyped and objectionable images of black people or gay people. You should declare such images of women off limits here as well. I hope that all our gay and black members (many of whom are also women!) agree with me on this.

And as a final remark: YOU don't get to decide whether such images are "okay" or not. When people complain that the images are offensive to them, you need to respect that. And you don't need to respond with "I know a woman who likes these pictures" or any of that kind of stuff. This is not about you, or a friend, or a past experience: it's about a class of people: women, who represent 50% of the population and who still have not achieved equality.

boston bean

(36,186 posts)
39. wow. great post.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:34 PM
Feb 2014

I really appreciate the reasoning. I hadn't thought of it in those terms. But you are so right!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»It's so much more complex...