Objectification is not male chauvinism

That can be attributed to simple curiosity about the adult world broadly defined, with no horniness in play. It's like watching mainstream movies aimed at a grownup audience.
Ok that soothed my mind. Thank you.
 
I remember in college, a feminist club showed a documentary called "Not a Love Story," arguing that all pornography is exploitive of women. (Gay porn was never mentioned.)
If you choose to do it and get paid. Don’t see the argument. Now if they said it can be degrading, etc. sure, depending on the porn. But exploitation denotes someone being used against their wishes for nefarious purposes and can’t see most porn rising to that level.
 
If you choose to do it and get paid. Don’t see the argument. Now if they said it can be degrading, etc. sure, depending on the porn. But exploitation denotes someone being used against their wishes for nefarious purposes and can’t see most porn rising to that level.
Well, perhaps "degrading" would be a better word than "exploitive" for the point the documentary was trying to make, But it did hammer really hard on "female sexual slave." They made the point that what a man really wants is a woman kneeling before him, worshiping him by sucking on him. And they showed a scene where a man was holding a gun while a woman knelt and fellated it.
 
Last edited:
Ok 11% 7 or under is sad. This was obviously put out by an anti-porn group. But also parents think it’s normal for boys to use porn but not girls, that’s sad and stupid!

The “11% of 7 or under” quote from the article was not referring to those who view porn - only the age at which they were first exposed to it.

Please be careful about pressing false narratives. It’s kind of like saying that kids become alcoholics when they receive their first communion.



—————-

Respondents shared their age of first exposure:
  • 7 years old or younger: 11.3%
  • 8-12 years old: 46.9%
  • 13-17 years old: 29.3%
  • 18 years or older: 12.5%
 
The “11% of 7 or under” quote from the article was not referring to those who view porn - only the age at which they were first exposed to it.

Please be careful about pressing false narratives. It’s kind of like saying that kids become alcoholics when they receive their first communion.
Misread, didn't mean to press false narratives.
 
I’m over fifty and in the world I grew up in, older men would often encourage young men to objectify and pursue women based on looks far more than any other quality. It might not have been most older men, but the voices that encouraged it outnumbered the voices that encouraged finding a strong and intelligent partner.

I’m my experience, the chauvinists were typically the loudest and were most likely to share a playboy, have pinup pictures, or to serve or buy liquor for minors.

“Good girls” would not typically have been encouraged by anyone to even look at porn.
 
Male chauvinism is the idea that men are superior to women. For a man to be a womanizer -- to pursue women as sex objects -- does not imply male superiority or female inferiority; it is simply acting on a natural instinct in an undisciplined manner.

So why does such behavior anger feminists?
for a man to see a woman as 'an object', a 'thing' rather than a person, seems fairly chauvinistic to me... if a man feels he would never see approximately half of the population as an object but the remaining half is fair game, that indicates a sense of superiority of one sex over the other—hence chauvinism. Is it possible to objectify without being inherently chauvinist?

do female chauvinists exist? of course, though history and geographical location just about always sees the male form as prevalent compared to the female form. Both are pretty twisted, since no one gender or gender-blend is superior to another.
 
What is classified as men's work or as women's work varies widely from culture to culture -- but in all human cultures, whatever men do is considered more important than what women do.
 
What is classified as men's work or as women's work varies widely from culture to culture -- but in all human cultures, whatever men do is considered more important than what women do.

I would say that is mostly true only among the attitudes of men and subservient chauvinist women. “Chauvinist women” being those who believe their place is to serve men.

I’d say most women I know are fully aware that how children are raised is truly the most important function of society. The rest is mostly a matter of defending your own interests against greed and competition - mostly against other men.
 
What is classified as men's work or as women's work varies widely from culture to culture -- but in all human cultures, whatever men do is considered more important than what women do.
historically, and with the probable exception of the Isle of Lesbos... but times change and in the past 50 years these outdated concepts are being eroded in most westernised nations. Nowadays, there are more and more women in top-flight positions, earning their own way, developing technology, standards, business models or copying the previous 'male-dominated' ones but replacing the top dog with a top bitch. Women's sports have grown exponentially, and it feels an outdated concept to younger people today that 'things women do' are less important than their male counterparts' achievements.

Things don't stand still, and I sense you are playing devil's advocate since most your posts don't suggest this deep-seated stance about men/women.
 
historically, and with the probable exception of the Isle of Lesbos... but times change and in the past 50 years these outdated concepts are being eroded in most westernised nations. Nowadays, there are more and more women in top-flight positions, earning their own way, developing technology, standards, business models or copying the previous 'male-dominated' ones but replacing the top dog with a top bitch. Women's sports have grown exponentially, and it feels an outdated concept to younger people today that 'things women do' are less important than their male counterparts' achievements.

Things don't stand still, and I sense you are playing devil's advocate since most your posts don't suggest this deep-seated stance about men/women.
Gold hahah
 
The word "chauvinist," by the way, originally meant a sense of national superiority. From Chauvin, a probably legendary soldier of Napoleon who believed in the imperial mission of France. In the '70s, feminists coined "male chauvinist" to mean a sense of male superiority.
 
I would say that is mostly true only among the attitudes of men and subservient chauvinist women. “Chauvinist women” being those who believe their place is to serve men.

I’d say most women I know are fully aware that how children are raised is truly the most important function of society. The rest is mostly a matter of defending your own interests against greed and competition - mostly against other men.
100%

And, as more and more things today, the raising of children isn't viewed in totally black &white terms... more and more men, as well as women, recognise that the raising of children is a SHARED responsibility, between partners (genders irrelevant) and it takes more than just the parents to do the job thoroughly. You need education, health care, politicians and neighbours to achieve the best outcome.
 
The word "chauvinist," by the way, originally meant a sense of national superiority. From Chauvin, a probably legendary soldier of Napoleon who believed in the imperial mission of France. In the '70s, feminists coined "male chauvinist" to mean a sense of male superiority.
I know :)

okay, I couldn't leave it at this so will expand:

a sense of 'inflated' national superiority; it was in the '60's that feminists took the word under their wings; and that Chauvin may not have existed (nothing definitive to prove he existed) at all but french Vaudeville made his name famous ;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top