Is it possible to objectify women? If so is it wrong.?

Question

Some femanists would answer no and no.
"Turning people into sex objects is one of the specialties of our species, objectification is closely tied to (and may even be identical with) the highest human faculties toward conceptualisation and aesthetics (Camille Paglia).

Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy holds that the label
sex object means nothing because inanimate objects do not have sexualities. Women are their bodies and sexuality as well as their minds and souls. Veiwing or highlighting one aspect of an individual is helpful, E.g. We see Stephen Hawkin as intelegence, is this objectifying?

Additional Details

I'm sure Stephen hawkin is a multi faceted individual I was suggesting that when we look at his work we consider only that and not his emotions and sexuality.

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

My collection of 'Big Ones Monthly' is not pornography, it is a celebration of women through art.

However, Professor Stephen Hawking wearing nothing but a hamsterskin posing pouch whilst striking a Christine Keeler pose would probably fall short of my definition of 'art'.

Asker's Rating:

Asker's Comment:

I'm trying to hold that image.

Answer 2

Hell Pink is a goddess.

Answer 3

Is it possible to objectify women? I don't think it is. To objectify one woman in particular, yes. Is it wrong? I think it depends on the woman being objectified if she cares or if that was her intention in the first place.

For example women is men's mags have been objectified as the are flat, one demential for the sole purpose of arousal. In a sense they have become inanimate. Is this wrong? Defiantly not. These woman really have out witted men.
Some woman would argue that these magazines portray an unrealistic standard for woman. Which is true but these woman only exist in the magazine, they are not real.

I'm not even sure this makes sense anymore. What a question!

Answer 4

I think we get confused by the semantics of the word 'object'. For me, objectifying women is more about making them the 'object' (in a grammatical sense) of sexual desire. And is this possible, you ask? Why yes...and absolutely right. If women were not desired sexually life would be dull, and the species non-existant. I delight in being the object of sexual desire, provided I am also a human being whose thoughts and feelings are worthy of consideration. The problem is when women are ONLY viewed for sexual purposes. I'm sure Stephen Hawking is more than his brain, just as you are more than this question. We are sums of things and multiple objects.

Answer 5

Well, if I may express it colloquially (because I teach English to 13 year olds and have therefore forgotten how to use big words) to view something objectively means to view it unemotionally, with disinterest. Can any of us ever be objective about anyone else? Possibly sex slave traffickers and dealers in human organs, who see the human beings in their possession as commodities, can do this. But I suspect they feel a hatred and contempt for the objects of their trade that they would not feel if they were dealing in, say, pig iron or rice futures.
Personally I don't see Stephen Hawking as 'intelligence', but as an intelligent person (well, intelligent in some ways. btw, love his character on Futurama - 'Yes, it was my idea.' He seems like a good sport.)

Answer 6

Maybe you should remove the women bit from your question.

Being attractive in a physical form is just that, it works both ways, surely in history this shows through art. The Greek statues of both sexes show the desirable form, yet later you have the paintings of tubby people...whatever period.... which would you rather have as an ideal form? . Athletic build or a few rolls of healthy flab.

The example you offer , well yes in purist terms it is , but no PC freak will worry about it because it carries no sexual connotation. As opposed to say identifying a person through sex or colour, then you stand in the firing line to be accused of being whatever.

At a base level we have an inbuilt distinction of what is attractive, through social pressure we are supposed to ignore this, for fear of being labelled sexist or shallow.

Answer 7

I objectify my jazz mags - it's kinda safe that way...