for Feminists of a Certain Age (~45)

Great Debates
1

I am more or less a male of that same Certain Age, which is to say that I came into my early adulthood just as feminist theory was focusing on…sexual objectification! The reduction of the female human being to no more than sexual potential for the male consumer. The visual and erotic colonization of the body female. All that stuff.

The rest of you, those who were NOT women listening to and more or less identifying with feminism as women coming into early adulthood while that was such a big political hot topic…well, I don’t expect you to refrain from posting to this thread if you feel like it, but I would like it if posters would identify themselves by age, gender, and whether or not they were tuned into feminism in the late 70s and early 80s…

um, SO!!! These feminist theorists really turned a lot of previously unquestioned stuff upside down and inside out for us to look at and think about! The idea that it was POLITICAL (patriarchal) that females were situated as the sexual commodity – to be looked at with lust, to be evaluated according to their lustworthiness, to be sought after as delicious consumable possessions, acquired as status symbols, and so forth – rather than the result of some kind of built-in difference between the sexes in which men are hornier and their sexuality is more visually oriented by nature…

Certainly the mild claim was easy for anyone who didn’t hate women to agree with: that it was oppressive to REDUCE women to sex objects by treating them, in every imaginable circumstance, as if Sexual Opportunity was all that they were. But what about the more fervent stuff? It was my understanding at the time that many of the feminists were saying it WASN’T merely important that female people’s accomplishments and talents not be ignored whenever they weren’t sexual (the equal-opportunity gig), it was important that the sexual practice ITSELF be overthrown. Women would no longer experience human sexuality as a dynamic in which they were the spoils / prey / commodity. Men would (depending on which feminist was speaking) either be deprived of their colonizer-position as Sexual Consumer and be forced to acknowledge women’s own sexual agency, or we would be freed from the reciprocal tyranny of having to be the Appetite Symbols, the one who have to initiate and risk Rejection and so forth.

So there I was, a young adult male, hearing this, and I REALLY FERVENTLY WANTED to sit down with the women who were saying these things. They fascinated me. On the one hand, I had the strong sense that they were pretty clueless about the male experience of the same dynamic (= look, it ain’t the enthusiatic consumer that controls the market. no matter WHAT the negotiation, if I do in fact want to negotiate, I’d MUCH rather that people were enthusiastic and competitive about engaging me in such negotiations than be in a situation where they are reluctant and I am desperate to negotiate). On the other hand, they, at least, were talking about it, and I took them seriously, and the prospect of resolving this matter somehow struck me as the single most important issue of my generation. Maybe of the last ten millennia or so.

Well, feminist theorists kept saying and writing their stuff but weren’t living next door or sitting in the next row in my college classrooms; and everyday women of my age were not often happy about “representing the gender” and did not seem to consider it an ideal courtship behavior nor a cool way to hang out with male agemates to try to thrash out this stuff with me one-on-one. (OK, it DID occur to me that this was because I am insufficiently cute and appealing :frowning: )

THEREFORE: you, you female folk who were of that era and to some extent shared the sentiments of the movement…will you kindly come here and expound on what you believed then, and, if different, now? Let me play out my lifelong fantasy of talking feminist theory with partisan females on the subject of visual sexuality and sex objectification and being an object or a consumer and so on?

2

Well, I’m a little young for you - by about 10 years. My “feminist awakening” was in my college years - mid-1980s, but I did take a few women’s studies courses, so I’m familar with the thought (although it was a while ago, and I’m kind of blurry on much of it).

My belief then - It is wrong to treat women as objects. Women should be free to have one night stands if they want them - or not to have sex at all. I acknowledged the objectification logic as well as the consumerism logic.

I really hated the Diet Coke commerical where the guy took his shirt off while all the women oogled from the office. If its wrong to objectify women, turnabout is NOT fair play.

I’ve always hated Dworkin, McKinnon and that ilk. Too much victim. But I have read Backlash three times.

I had a bigger problem in college with Cosmo than with Playboy. In fact, a liberal student organization wanted our student government (which I was part of) to pull Playboy and the like from the shelves. I said, “only if we pull Cosmo and the other magazines that teach women to be objects.”

I hated any Women’s Studies class that included Freudian analysis. I always thought that school of thought should have been purged from Feminism - somehow “Feminist Freudian Analysis” always seemed like an oxymoron to me.

My belief now - Pretty much the same, but more grown up and realistic. Much less academic. And now I know that we are still fighting the basics - the right not to have to have sex with our boss in order to keep our jobs, for instance. Correcting that is way more important that getting an alternative spelling for women accepted.

3

43 last week. Became a sexually active person in 1974, age 16. Do not remember NOT being a “feminist”, i was raised that way.

But not swallowing everything whole.

the objectification thing? The issue, for me, is simply this: ** Because ** men see women as sexual object, they frequently exhibit an inability to see them as anything ** else ** . I think almost any non-Dworkin female you ask will tell you that what we really want is for you guys to see us essentially the way we see you: as different things depending on the context. If it is appropriate time and place…see me as an object of lust. In other times and places, see me as what I am: a whole, intelligent human being with many abilities, talents and other things to offer. Respect me for that.

That’s all. Pretty simple, really.

stoid

4

**

I can find no fault with a person looking at an attractive human being and appreciating them for nothing more then his or her physical beauty. What’s so terrible about appreciating beauty? Gratned if you simply view every woman as nothing more then a sex object there’s a problem. But that doesn’t seem to be the case from the diet coke commercial.

**

Well he is the father of psychoanalysis. If you include things like psychoanalysis in class then how can you remove the influence of Freud?

**

You don’t have to fight for that any more so far as I can tell. Unless I missed something with all those sexual harassment cases durin the 80’s and 90’s.

Marc

5

This issue bothers me a little. Oh and BTW I’ll be 43 in August. Feminism has meant a lot to me all of my life. Ditto what Stoid said about wanting to be viewed as a complete human being rather than a set of tits and ovaries. But there was something more, it also in a way should have freed us from competition amoungst ourselves. Correct me if I’m wrong but almost everyone is a little competitive and men are usually so in a more friendly kind of way. Sure they can be ruthless in their pursuit to be the dominate male but there is almost a certain amount of comaraderie among men that is often times lacking in females. When I was younger and sometimes even now, I run into females who’s posturing for recognition and particularily male attention borders on the pathological. Thankfully, and I think because feminist issues were so much in the foreground they were fewer then than with todays generation of young women.

I may have mentioned before on these boards how distrubing I find the behavior of young women these days. They seem to be much more willing to exploit their physical bodies than we were at much younger ages. Many of them seem to find it difficult or perhaps not even advantageous to cultivate close, loyal relationships with each other. Competition for male attention runs extremely high. And what competition, often I observe younger males with a more than cavalier attitude toward their female peers. The “player” persona in young men is rewarded over and over again by young women that find these kinds of males fun and challenging. Not only are these young women willing to exploit their sexuality in the most blatant of ways but many seem perfectly willing to betray their female relationships.

It has appeared to me for quite awhile now that feminism has lost a bit of ground. For me feminism always meant there was great dignity in being a woman. Yes, it meant sexual freedom too, but not freedom for the sake of becoming more like some men (note I said some) to turn our sexual freedom into another tool of explotation. Of course it’s become un-cool in some circles to even be smart or well read these days. I think these kind of cultural changes might run in cycles, and sometimes might even be necessary for us to progress. I do hope so.

Needs2know

6

Marc,

  1. I had a problem with the Diet Coke commercial. I would have thought it sexist had it been a bunch of men oogling a woman, and I thought it sexist when it was women oogling a man. Appreciation of beauty is all fine and good, but that was objectification - in my mind. Had Lucky looked up and waved to the women in the office building, I wouldn’t have had a problem with the commercial. That would have indicated his willing participation in his role, and made him a person instead of an object. Its subtle. You can have a different opinion.

I don’t have a problem with using beautiful people to sell products. I have a problem with using beautiful people as only sexualized objects when selling products. I’m not fond of Calvin Klein ads either. I do however, defend anyone’s first amendment rights to produce those ads.

  1. There are plenty of schools of deconstruction and analysis that aren’t as anti-woman as Freud. Feminism at that time was about rejecting patriarchy, and then you’d do Freudian anaylsis? Seemed hypocritical. Feminism seemed like it should reject the whole idea of penis envy.

  2. You are right, in that we have that right (and did before the 80s). But, having been a victim of quid pro quo sexual harrassment, and having worked with others who have been victimized the same way - our rights in this area are not always enforced - even when we fight for them. We have come a long way…and yet, we haven’t yet succeeded in wiping sexual harrassment out (and probably never will). And I’m not talking about suing when a co-worker comments “you look nice” or over risque jokes. Academic feminism is too removed from the real world, which is why it is rejected by so many young women today. Yet, there is still a need for a feminist awareness in women. In the real world, you may have a right to equal pay, but you may not get it. You may have a right to a harrassment free workplace, but you may not get it. You may have a right to discrimination free hiring, but you may not get it.

7

My credentials: 46 years old, female, college from 1972-76 (big ten U at that), so tuned in to ‘the movement’ as it were, that I attended what ended up to be the very first “Philosophy of Feminism” class at my U, and did an independent study on the subject as well.

Frankly, from what I recall, it was less about sex and how often/who initiates it etc, and more about workplace rights, freedom from assholish behavior sorts of things. I recall guys coming up to me in college (with out knowing me, you know) and asking ‘what would happen if I untied your shirt?’ or them thinking ‘wanna fuck’ was a clever pick up line. My focus was - “I deserve respect as a human being” etc.

the year after college ended, I started working at a half way house for women coming out of prison. I remember friends of mine telling me what a great opportunity it was to share the wisdom of the movement. Uh, huh. Well, for “Gwen”, the drug addicted prositute with knife scars on her face, it was more of an issue of attempting to stay off drugs, finish her GED so she could maybe earn a decent living, than to be all fired up about oppressive sexual behaviors.

My focus is still at the ‘treat me with respect as a human being’ stage, sadly, it’s not always there. I remember seeing a CEO (annual base salary in the 6 figure range), referring to his valued employees, and putting his arm around the female. This was last year. She looked like she was swallowing broken glass she was so uncomfortable.

So, I guess my answer to you, as a card carrying WL of the time in question, is that while for you, the main issues may have been sexual in nature, for me, it was human dignity, and fair/equitable treatment. Have to go polish my rose colored granny glasses now, thanks.

8

With regards to the sodapop commercial–

OK, I would not like it if I found myself constantly regarded by women, in every context, as ONLY a sexual prospect. I also would not like it if a pterodactyl swooped down and bit my ear off, a scenario that I worry about even less.

Day in and day out, being subjected to perpetual sexual objectification is absolutely and totally NOT one of the things I have to put up with. So much so, in fact, that things like the sodapop commercial and the existence of Chippendales constitute RARE and WELCOME signs that women have appetites reciprocal to ours.

Some of you have said that the problem is not so much that men sometimes objectify women sexually but that some men display

(Stoid)

OK…would it be fair to say that AS LONG AS you can be perceived and appreciated as a person with talents, wisdom, intentions, experiences, and so on–and therefore are not socially REDUCED to nothing more than a sex object-- that being seen and lusted after sexually (and being aware of it as it happens) is not altogether a bad thing?

Is it, in fact, generally pleasant?

Would you miss it if it completely and totally stopped happening? For those of you who are heterosexual, how would you feel about your own sexual feelings towards guys if you no longer experienced being looked at (randomly, by strangers or whomever) by males apparently feeling a sexual appetite for you? I mean, do you think you obtain some significant portion of your sense of your own sexual attractiveness from these little “being looked at” occurrences?

I am not saying “Gee, please tell me it’s OK for me to ogle you”, nor am I saying “OK, you feminist womenfolks, admit it, you have no cause to complain about being ogled”. I’m saying (speaking for myself, but also speaking–unofficially and without authority–for all men, I think?) that OUR side of this same situation is something I’d like you to understand, too, as long as we’re talking.

In general, we don’t get those looks.

In general, whatever ongoing reassurances of our sexual attractiveness we might get from that kind of thing are reassurances we don’t get.

We see you. We feel sexual appetite. Do you feel it back when you see us? Would you like it if you felt safe and not socially peculiar if you could be more blatant about letting us know? Would you like it if we were more subtle and you womenfolk were more blatant, so we could experience ourselves as appetizing and you could be subjected to less intrusive ogling, is that the original proposition, more or less?

9

Generally pleasant???

Well, a lot depends on the circumstances…it is generally pleasant to attract the positive attention of someone you find attactive under appropriate circumstances…

It is not generally pleasant to attract the attention of someone when the circumstances are not appropriate (i.e. even if he’s cute, if he ogles while you are trying to make a point during an important business meeting, it isn’t pleasant - even if you know he also respects your mind).

It is often (though not always ) not generally pleasant to be ogled by people you aren’t attracted to. Forgive the homophobia implied by this analogy, but most straight guys don’t like to be “looked over” by gay men - despite the fact that it is, in a way, a complement. (If you get this, you are probably a long way to understanding the female perspective on this topic).

It is seldom pleasant to get leered at by a group of men - that comes off as threatening.

Women can be quite blatant - sorry you never experienced this. I have a rather good looking male friend I’ve watched beat them off with a stick. He finds it no more pleasant than I did back in my “turn heads” days.

Likewise, men often ogle women who are attractive, but there are many, many women who have never been at the receiving end of an ogle. They believe them to be reserved for women who look like supermodels. Few women experience this “day in, day out.” However, the expectation that we “should” look like supermodels weighs heavily on many women (and girls). Much more than the objectification issue, this is the issue that bugs me.

10

I’m about a quarter-century younger than you wanted, AHunter3, but here are my thoughts on the matter. (The following, BTW, only deals with heterosexual relationships; homosexual relationships are a different issue and I think beyond the scope of the OP.)

For far too long sex has been thought of as something that men do to women. This is true even today. Many young women do not enjoy sex much at all, and only have sex to make their boyfriends or husbands happy, because they think all their friends are having sex, or because they don’t know of a better way to get attention from men.

I think the only real reason to have sex is because you want to have sex. No one should feel that they are obliged to have sex, or that sex is a kind of currency that can be exchanged for affection or material goods. Yet a lot of women do feel this way. One of the goals of feminism should be to teach women that it is okay to not have sex if you don’t really want to – and that it’s okay to have sex just because you want to!

In a world where men and women are sexually equal, there would be no problem with men looking at women with desire. However, in a world where women are playing a sexually passive role they may be frightened by this. If they don’t feel that they have the freedom to actively choose their sexual partners, they may end up in a sexual encounter that they don’t really want.

11

Dangerosa:

Well, perhaps I’m one of the perennially clueless unflirtable ones. We had a thread on it here at SDMB once, I’m too lazy to look for it, but, you know, the folks whose friends come up and say, “Well, I see so-and-so has a seriously bad case of the hot pants for you” and they say, “Huh? Really?”, not having the vaguest notion that anything of the sort was true…

Lamia:

Mmmm…my wonderful delightful niece is 12. I don’t really care if she pursues a path consisting of a lot of initial chastity or chooses to be the most sexually active person in her age cohort, as long as she’s doing it for her own reasons, because it’s what SHE wants to do. I’d be sad if she had sex with a boyfriend just because she felt pressured. For that matter, I’d be sad if she eventually were a 24 year old virgin if her reasons had to do with family or social pressure.

PS [auto-hijack] What should I send her for her 12th birthday? If Sassy Magazine was still around and as it was in its original incarnation, I’d give her a subscription. [/auto-hijack]

12

…and we do again, I see!

13

That’s a great attitude, I only hope that she has it for herself and will be able to hang onto it despite peer pressure.

Hmmm, that is a toughie. Is your niece creative? Does she like writing? If there is an independent or feminist bookstore in your area, you may be able to find a book about teen girls who run their own 'zines. I know there have been several books on the subject, including anthologies (the only title that springs to mind is “A Girl’s Guide to Taking Over the World”, but that has some mature sexual content that probably is not appropriate for a 12 year old). I ran a 'zine myself between the ages of 13 and 14. I swapped issues with other “zinestresses” around the country, it was great fun.

14

[37 year-old straight male.] Actually, I did have a gay guy try to pick me up one time when I was living in Vancouver and I did take it as a compliment. Actually, I thought it was quite cool because it was honestly one of the only pieces of evidence I have ever had that someone could see me and instantly find me attractive enough to be a potential sexual partner.

But anyway, I am not trying to negate your point here…but simply to emphasize that in addition to the circumstances, what also matters are your past experiences. If you are an average-looking male who is not used to getting much evidence of your sexual attractiveness to others, then almost any sort of attention of that kind can be flattering (admittedly a lot moreso when you find the person giving the attention attractive too!). But, I can understand that if your a good-looking woman who gets that sort of attention a lot to the exclusion of attention based on things you say, contribute to a job, etc. that it could be very much different.

Reminds me of when an ex-girlfriend once admitted to me that she was somewhat insecure and sometimes worried that a guy wouldn’t find her interesting unless she slept with him. To me this seemed just so totally backwards since I am not all that insecure about women finding me “interesting” in some basic platonic way but much more insecure that they will be attracted to me.

15

jshore:

Yeah, I know the feeling.

I went through a period in my late teens (and very early 20s) when I only extremely limited personal experience to indicate that “hetersexual women” wasn’t an empty set but a surprising number of males were indicating an attraction. Like jshore, I found it nice to think that SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE, would find me cute and desirable. I found it disturbing on another level, because even though I was vividly aware of being attracted to women, nothing seemed to be resulting from that; people had been saying or insinuating for years that they believed me to be gay; and now my reactions to guys expressing interest in me was at least kind of ambivalent. (Do I have to be attracted to them? Is it enough to be pleased that someone is attracted to me? Could I have a good time with this, without using or hurting the feelings of the other guy?) Besides, I was considerably shyer then, as a 19 year old virgin, than I had been at 16; I had been rebuked by a few women by then for being explicit about desiring them, so I had retreated into subtlety and caution; and girls my age were not giving me the same attention as the guys who were eyeing and double-entendr’ing and making overt suggestions, so I was starting to think I didn’t have a wide range of choices to make here.

Referring again to this thread in which Triskadecamus describes himself being clueless when a woman is flirting with him in the grocery store – subsequent posters said things like * “Oh yeah, she was definitely flirting with you, you should’ve asked her for her phone number” and “You blew it…She’s probably a little confused. You just stood there nodding and walked off.”

If the genders of the individuals had been reversed:

a) How many females–assuming you were open at that time to picking up / being picked up by someone and found the guy cute & interesting enough to be pickupworthy–would have found the behavior of Elaine-as-a-guy to be sufficient indication that he wanted things to happen between the two of you?

b) Assuming you did interpret this behavior as a (presumably non-intrusive, non-objectifying) come-on, would Elaine-as-a-guy be making a reasonable assumption if he figured “Well, if she’s interested, she’ll ask me for my phone number or do something to indicate mutual interest” --?

  • disclaimer: these aren’t actual quotes from the thread; they’re more like composites of different replies.