HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » History of Feminism (Group) » An example of junk scienc... » Reply #32

Reply #32


Response to seabeyond (Reply #31)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 12:20 PM

32. I guess that writer at iO9 had no problem seizing onto the evo psych angle.

To their credit, and to my surprise, writers at HuffPo did a much better job, despite the researchers best efforts to spin her research toward idiocy with boneheaded, patriarchy-coddlng comments like the following.

"It's both men and women doing this to women," Gervais said. "So don't blame the men here."




From HuffPo:


There could be evolutionary reasons that men and women process female bodies differently, Gervais said, but because both genders do it, "the media is probably a prime suspect."

Gee, really? Do you think?

So after going through all these rhetorical gymnastics to try to imply there's some merit to the evo psych bullshit theory she's just reinforced, we find out she hasn't actually been living under a rock as far as sociology and women's studies are concerned. Not completely. She seems to stick that "probably" in there to remind us how objective she is... reminescent of the way the media does when they pretend dems and repubs are equally guilty, or that there's a debate about global warming, or evolution. The theories linking widespread objectification in media and the altered perception of women and girls... along with the harmful effects of it... have been around for decades, and the overwhelming majority of studies confirm it.



"Women's bodies and their body parts are used to sell all sorts of products, but we are now for everyday, ordinary women, processing them in a similar way," she said.


Now? Yeah, I take back what I said about that rock.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
redqueen Jul 2012 OP
hifiguy Jul 2012 #1
redqueen Jul 2012 #5
hifiguy Jul 2012 #6
redqueen Jul 2012 #8
hifiguy Jul 2012 #10
redqueen Jul 2012 #12
hifiguy Jul 2012 #17
seabeyond Jul 2012 #14
seabeyond Jul 2012 #9
hifiguy Jul 2012 #13
seabeyond Jul 2012 #15
hifiguy Jul 2012 #18
seabeyond Jul 2012 #19
One_Life_To_Give Jul 2012 #2
redqueen Jul 2012 #3
seabeyond Jul 2012 #11
hifiguy Jul 2012 #22
seabeyond Jul 2012 #23
hifiguy Jul 2012 #24
seabeyond Jul 2012 #25
hifiguy Jul 2012 #26
seabeyond Jul 2012 #27
hifiguy Jul 2012 #34
MadrasT Jul 2012 #4
redqueen Jul 2012 #7
MadrasT Jul 2012 #35
seabeyond Jul 2012 #16
pscot Jul 2012 #28
seabeyond Jul 2012 #29
ismnotwasm Jul 2012 #20
seabeyond Jul 2012 #21
redqueen Jul 2012 #30
seabeyond Jul 2012 #31
LineLineLineNew Reply I guess that writer at iO9 had no problem seizing onto the evo psych angle.
redqueen Jul 2012 #32
seabeyond Jul 2012 #33
Please login to view edit histories.