6 ms·

There is a very thin line between being a feminist and being an asshole. The problem with these women, who claim to be angered by women being treated as objects

There is a very thin line between being a feminist and being an asshole. The problem with these women, who claim to be angered by women being treated as objects is that they don't identify the real problem. Women are attracted to men and men are attracted to women. This is basic nature and no one can change it. Using either to sell a product is not exactly sexism. For example, many deodorants use both male and female models to promote their products. Sexism in my definition would be when given the same opportunity, when one gender is being paid or treated better than another gender, that would be sexism, because someone is being treated unfair. What hypermac (the company in question) did was not wrong. They hired models who were for god's sake ready to do it. They were ready to accept money and stand nude on their product exhibit. It would have been unfair if they were treated unfair, or against their will, none of which had happened. The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is the real problem. As long as such women exist, the product makers and corporations would obviously use them. So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. This is the real problem. I love the way that these rogue women go after men (and vice versa) only because they want an apology to feel superior and write a blog post about it. I think it must have been a great marketing campaign for HyperMac and the guy was right - These people deserved no apology for this particular event and this particular event alone (please don't generalize this conclusion). There's a great saying - Any publicity is good publicity. I hope these feminists realize this and stop fucking themselves up like this, publicly.

saraid216 14y ago
> The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified Root cause analysis, please. Five why's. You've answered one.
wahnfrieden 14y ago
Taking money for something does not mean that you're comfortable with it, that you're not being exploited (unknowingly or not), that what you did was right, that you understand the context of your actions, etc. Being a man or woman does not mean you speak for all men or women.
mwetzler 14y ago
I've never been called a "rogue woman" before. That's awesome. It's funny how women having an opinion is so offensive to some people.
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  I love the unintentional imagery of feminists as rebels against the system, with the implication that the rebellion is unjust and the correct behavior would be to know one's role. The term "rogue woman" about someone standing up for equality is so offensive it almost makes me laugh.
olgagalchenko 14y ago
Hahahah. The first line is gold. Took the words right out of my mouth.
mercurial 14y ago
> The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is the real problem. As long as such women exist, the product makers and corporations would obviously use them. So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. This is the real problem Either you think objectifying women is wrong, or you don't. If you do, then it's absolutely logical to go after the people deciding to run their marketing campaign this way. You will always find people ready to do whatever if you put enough money on the table. It doesn't mean it's not wrong.
- randomdata 14y ago
  What I fail to understand is why objectification of the body is wrong, but objectification of the mind is normal, if not encouraged. We spend a lot of time trying to make individual thought into an interchangeable machine. You don't even have to dig very deep in HN to see people boasting about the benefits of a college education, or why you should drop out, in order to make yourself like just like everyone else, creating an "us vs them" mentality. Then we put the most attractive minds on display for all to see. "Buy this and you can be smart and successful just like me!" Exploiting a woman to display her body to sell a laptop battery is no more wrong than exploiting a woman to use her mind to create the battery in the first place. In either case, we are not appreciating the person for being a person, just an object that gets the job done. Women are not free of problems because of their gender, but this case seems entirely about a non-sensical shame of the human body.
  - wahnfrieden 14y ago
    Very different issues you're talking about. It's disingenuous to equate them, but nice slip of rhetoric.
    - randomdata 14y ago
king_jester 14y ago
> Women are attracted to men and men are attracted to women. This is basic nature and no one can change it. Except when, you know, they are gay or on the asexual spectrum. > Using either to sell a product is not exactly sexism. For example, many deodorants use both male and female models to promote their products. People aren't objecting to the existence of ad, but rather that this marketing reduced women's bodies to a commercial commodity. Lack of self agency and a women's body as property is a very sexist issue that is present in US culture today and affects many. > Sexism in my definition would be when given the same opportunity, when one gender is being paid or treated better than another gender, that would be sexism, because someone is being treated unfair. This is the case today. We have well documented instances of individual sexist treatment and systemic sexist treatment, mostly towards women. > What hypermac (the company in question) did was not wrong. They hired models who were for god's sake ready to do it. They were ready to accept money and stand nude on their product exhibit. It would have been unfair if they were treated unfair, or against their will, none of which had happened. Getting a job isn't some kind of process that occurs in a cultural vacuum, a lot goes into why people take on jobs that are sexist in nature. Also, just because the company can hire models for sexist marketing doesn't mean they should. > The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is victim blaming at its prime. You are blaming cultural objectification of women on women. > So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. This directly against what feminism is even about in the first place. Feminism doesn't proscribe that you attack women who exercise their self autonomy. In fact, telling women to attack other women who act in a way they don't approve of is a common way to sow discord and distract people from the larger social and cultural issues that affect their lives. That is, you are telling people to ignore context and attack other people who are just as affected by our society as they are. > Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. This is the real problem. That you see no problem with ignoring corporate behavior and attacking individuals speaks a lot about how you feel with regards to corporate domination and control over people's lives. > I love the way that these rogue women go after men (and vice versa) only because they want an apology to feel superior and write a blog post about it. Lol "rogue women" > There's a great saying - Any publicity is good publicity. I hope these feminists realize this and stop fucking themselves up like this, publicly. So now feminists are fucking themselves up because a company engaged in sexist marketing and people called that out? What's really fucked up here is how willing you are to defend companies and marketing over the actual lives and experiences of people who are directly affected by that kind of sexist marketing.
wizzard 14y ago
> The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is the real problem. As long as such women exist, the product makers and corporations would obviously use them. So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. Why do people accept money to do things? What a great question. That ranks right up there with "Why do prisoners want to escape from prison?" Everyone has a price. If someone told you they'd pay you a million dollars to stand naked for a few hours in front of a gaggle of lecherous old ladies, I bet you'd do it. Scruples don't pay rent or put food on the table. Maybe your price is higher, or maybe it's lower like these models, but at some point you'd do it.

saraid216 14y ago

> The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified Root cause analysis, please. Five why's. You've answered one.

wahnfrieden 14y ago

Taking money for something does not mean that you're comfortable with it, that you're not being exploited (unknowingly or not), that what you did was right, that you understand the context of your actions, etc. Being a man or woman does not mean you speak for all men or women.

mwetzler 14y ago

I've never been called a "rogue woman" before. That's awesome. It's funny how women having an opinion is so offensive to some people.

jamesaguilar 14y ago
I love the unintentional imagery of feminists as rebels against the system, with the implication that the rebellion is unjust and the correct behavior would be to know one's role. The term "rogue woman" about someone standing up for equality is so offensive it almost makes me laugh.

olgagalchenko 14y ago

Hahahah. The first line is gold. Took the words right out of my mouth.

mercurial 14y ago

> The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is the real problem. As long as such women exist, the product makers and corporations would obviously use them. So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. This is the real problem Either you think objectifying women is wrong, or you don't. If you do, then it's absolutely logical to go after the people deciding to run their marketing campaign this way. You will always find people ready to do whatever if you put enough money on the table. It doesn't mean it's not wrong.

randomdata 14y ago
What I fail to understand is why objectification of the body is wrong, but objectification of the mind is normal, if not encouraged. We spend a lot of time trying to make individual thought into an interchangeable machine. You don't even have to dig very deep in HN to see people boasting about the benefits of a college education, or why you should drop out, in order to make yourself like just like everyone else, creating an "us vs them" mentality. Then we put the most attractive minds on display for all to see. "Buy this and you can be smart and successful just like me!" Exploiting a woman to display her body to sell a laptop battery is no more wrong than exploiting a woman to use her mind to create the battery in the first place. In either case, we are not appreciating the person for being a person, just an object that gets the job done. Women are not free of problems because of their gender, but this case seems entirely about a non-sensical shame of the human body.
- wahnfrieden 14y ago
  Very different issues you're talking about. It's disingenuous to equate them, but nice slip of rhetoric.
  - randomdata 14y ago

king_jester 14y ago

> Women are attracted to men and men are attracted to women. This is basic nature and no one can change it. Except when, you know, they are gay or on the asexual spectrum. > Using either to sell a product is not exactly sexism. For example, many deodorants use both male and female models to promote their products. People aren't objecting to the existence of ad, but rather that this marketing reduced women's bodies to a commercial commodity. Lack of self agency and a women's body as property is a very sexist issue that is present in US culture today and affects many. > Sexism in my definition would be when given the same opportunity, when one gender is being paid or treated better than another gender, that would be sexism, because someone is being treated unfair. This is the case today. We have well documented instances of individual sexist treatment and systemic sexist treatment, mostly towards women. > What hypermac (the company in question) did was not wrong. They hired models who were for god's sake ready to do it. They were ready to accept money and stand nude on their product exhibit. It would have been unfair if they were treated unfair, or against their will, none of which had happened. Getting a job isn't some kind of process that occurs in a cultural vacuum, a lot goes into why people take on jobs that are sexist in nature. Also, just because the company can hire models for sexist marketing doesn't mean they should. > The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is victim blaming at its prime. You are blaming cultural objectification of women on women. > So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. This directly against what feminism is even about in the first place. Feminism doesn't proscribe that you attack women who exercise their self autonomy. In fact, telling women to attack other women who act in a way they don't approve of is a common way to sow discord and distract people from the larger social and cultural issues that affect their lives. That is, you are telling people to ignore context and attack other people who are just as affected by our society as they are. > Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. This is the real problem. That you see no problem with ignoring corporate behavior and attacking individuals speaks a lot about how you feel with regards to corporate domination and control over people's lives. > I love the way that these rogue women go after men (and vice versa) only because they want an apology to feel superior and write a blog post about it. Lol "rogue women" > There's a great saying - Any publicity is good publicity. I hope these feminists realize this and stop fucking themselves up like this, publicly. So now feminists are fucking themselves up because a company engaged in sexist marketing and people called that out? What's really fucked up here is how willing you are to defend companies and marketing over the actual lives and experiences of people who are directly affected by that kind of sexist marketing.

wizzard 14y ago

> The real problem about women being objectified is that women are ready to be objectified - either for money or for some other form of compromise. This is the real problem. As long as such women exist, the product makers and corporations would obviously use them. So, if you want this to stop, you have to revolt when someone from your own gender (male/female) is ready to represent your gender infront of a public audience and accept to be objectified for money. Don't go after the corporation that hired them, instead ask these people why they let them objectify you, on behalf of you/your gender in the first place. Why do people accept money to do things? What a great question. That ranks right up there with "Why do prisoners want to escape from prison?" Everyone has a price. If someone told you they'd pay you a million dollars to stand naked for a few hours in front of a gaggle of lecherous old ladies, I bet you'd do it. Scruples don't pay rent or put food on the table. Maybe your price is higher, or maybe it's lower like these models, but at some point you'd do it.