AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
Do you think that sexual objectification is real?
- Thread starter Guy
- Start date
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
- Status
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
This thread is supposed to be about objectification. Not Guy being difficult to read, or Boce being a doosh. If we all have the virtue signaling out of our systems now, can we please get back to the original topic?
I have tried reach out & message with him one on one numerous times but every time he ignores me.
Now I have a clue why.
I'm not going to apologize NOW for being unaware of his condition after repeatedly questioning his creepiness.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
I put you on ignore because you said "Guy, you obviously need some professional help that is beyond the realm of this forum and sincerely hope you seek it out for your own benefit."
Thats why I didnt get your messages. You can PM me now if you want.
No worries, I'll just have to re-focus my meaner nature towards creepy pervs that deserve it.
Thank you for understanding my ineptitude.
Thank you for understanding my ineptitude.
D
Deleted member 37064
Guest
Agreed on the camming aspect. Far more to a cam show than just getting them out of clothes, or making them cum. As to strippers, I can agree mostly with it. But, at the same time, there's some strippers I got to know personally through conversation while they were dancing for me.
For me, it just seems way too impersonal to just watch and not converse or be involved some way. I need to have a connecton in some way. Otherwise, I either get bored, or feel weird about it and move on. I try to make my time in a model's room as enjoyable for her, as I think she wants to for me and others.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 10,895
- 65,722
- 1,793
- 37
- Twitter Username
- @jolene_brody
- Tumblr Username
- jolenebrody
- MFC Username
- jolenebrody
- ManyVids URL
- https://www.manyvids.com/Profile/303895/JoleneBrody/
In order to be sexually objectified wouldn't sexuality need to be dehumanized? Doesn't this really all boil down to the puritan mentality that our very unique human sexuality is somehow shameful, dirty and wrong? Society objectified SEX and successfully removed it from the table as one of our most important and fantastic and unique human qualities. you can only really sexually objectify me if you remove my humanity from the ogle, which of course makes it very hard to self-objectify.
D
Deleted member 37064
Guest
The dual nature of society:
They demonize sex publicly. Yet, immerse themselve privately into it.
In my opinion, it all boils down to what society deems and allows as normal. Which is why I listed the two examples with the Titanic and the Costa Concordia in my earlier reply. Societal change, over the course of time, allows for the reshaping of ideals and concepts that, for good or bad, tend to reflect the younger generation's often liberal ideologies about sex. Part of the experience of being human is to wonder what others think of us, so it's not a stretch to think that a hedonistic view of open sexuality can have negative connotations across the board. But the key here is having the discernment ability to correctly parse what "others think about us" in a manner to where we don't become a "self generated victim" whenever we strongly disagree with what someone thinks of us. I think the one thing this topic and its replies is missing, is that sexual desire and objectification are inseparable, and that Love is highly separated from the very human nature of Lust. Lust facilitates that we focus on the body of those we sexually desire, thereby reducing them to mere objects. If it weren't for the belief(and practice) that two people can agree to use one another for purely sexual purposes, then I question whether sex workers would have remained in business since, I dunno, the dawn of time?
Violet Dawn
Cam Model
- Aug 22, 2015
- 2,737
- 5,341
- 213
- Twitter Username
- @Violet_Dawn
- Streamate Username
- VioletDawn18
- ManyVids URL
- https://www.manyvids.com/Profile/147433/LunaBelle/
- Clips4Sale URL
- http://clips4sale.com/store/98721/LunaBelle
Yes. Objectification exists in many forms. Whether it be the waiter that someone treats like a tool, the girl in a porn magazine, or a guy who a woman treats like a walking wallet, it's everywhere. What is objectification? No longer treating someone like a living being, considering they have feelings, wants, goals, free will, etc.
I don't think objectification is necessarily a bad thing(in some situations, of course), although I am sure a lot of people see it that way. A model who walks down the runway is styling a piece of clothing, thus being objectified as a piece of art or a clothing rack. But that is her job. It's when people do it to a group of people, like men sexually objectifying women at all times or in general, that I find a problem. A woman in a porn film is temporarily turning her body into a product of sexual desire. But if you see that same woman outside that setting or she isn't consenting to your advances you shouldn't objectify her. I mean, you technically still can, just leave her the fuck alone and don't be a creep. Lol.
That was a really shitty way of explaining it, but that's how I view objectification.
I don't think objectification is necessarily a bad thing(in some situations, of course), although I am sure a lot of people see it that way. A model who walks down the runway is styling a piece of clothing, thus being objectified as a piece of art or a clothing rack. But that is her job. It's when people do it to a group of people, like men sexually objectifying women at all times or in general, that I find a problem. A woman in a porn film is temporarily turning her body into a product of sexual desire. But if you see that same woman outside that setting or she isn't consenting to your advances you shouldn't objectify her. I mean, you technically still can, just leave her the fuck alone and don't be a creep. Lol.
That was a really shitty way of explaining it, but that's how I view objectification.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
Well Nikola, that depends entirely on how it makes any woman feel at any given time.
Violet Dawn
Cam Model
- Aug 22, 2015
- 2,737
- 5,341
- 213
- Twitter Username
- @Violet_Dawn
- Streamate Username
- VioletDawn18
- ManyVids URL
- https://www.manyvids.com/Profile/147433/LunaBelle/
- Clips4Sale URL
- http://clips4sale.com/store/98721/LunaBelle
I personally think, in a sense, it does. Unless it's competitive cheerleading. My sister did that. Had nothing to do with cheering on a football game, that shit was rough.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
I think she is full of shit.
Was that garbage she is spouting was written for her by someone else, or are those inane ramblings just the sort of thing that come spilling out of her helium-filled little head anytime she is upright? That is what I wonder...
This is how little Miss Blank Stare really lost me:
- Right off the bat we hear how she is asked by a lot of straight guys who are concerned they are going to be "part of the objectification problem" rather than "the solution". This completely ignores another possibility; that objectification is a bunch of hogwash, the sort of religious tenet that only the immature, the desperate, or the perhaps the psychologically feeble, can accept without question.
- Then she lays out how objectification is at the root of all sorts of "inequality, discrimination, and even VIOLENCE"! A subtle reminder of rape? I don't know. Perhaps @IsabellaSnow would like to weigh in on the spurious ramblings offered up in the video.
- A mere 30 seconds in, and she moves on to the cure for what-all-ails-us. We need to disentangle the biological facts of attraction, and even lust (lol she actually said it), from the broader cultural patterns of manufactured objectification! Brilliant! So let's see what sort of insights she is going to wow me with... "DON'T TREAT WOMEN LIKE BARBIE DOLLS!"
Oh. Well thank God this ditz femsplained that for me. This is the height of absurdity. Only 1/6th of the way into to her junk-fomercial, and already she is forced to fall back on a tired cliche, thanks to a dearth of intellectual activity. Honestly, if some man is writing these scripts for her, he needs to be fired.
I poured gasoline on Barbie doll and lit it on fire shortly after I hit puberty. Would I do that to a woman? Absolutely not. So wut da fuk is this addle-brain talking about?
The rest of the video is rubbish. Absolute rubbish. Circular logic. Silliness of the highest order. White female supremacy, sugar coated and passed off as practical wisdom for consumption by the gullible.
Let us pray the backlash against such bankrupt philosophies has only just begun.
Anyhoo, that's what I think about it @Guy. What about you?
It exists, but it seems like it's only an issue when there's something exploitative about it. For instance, if I use tags to narrow down my search for a cam model who is petite, has small natural breasts, and a shaved vajayjay there isn't anything not objectifying about that. Clearly I'm looking for a woman with very distinct body features.
But if I happen to pay the girl for her services and am respectful about it, then what's the issue?
Subconsciously, we're all objectifying to some degree. Within seconds of meeting a new person, we throw them on a 1-10 scale and make all sorts of judgements and assumptions.
But again. Seems like it's an only an issue when someone is being taken advantage of.
But if I happen to pay the girl for her services and am respectful about it, then what's the issue?
Subconsciously, we're all objectifying to some degree. Within seconds of meeting a new person, we throw them on a 1-10 scale and make all sorts of judgements and assumptions.
But again. Seems like it's an only an issue when someone is being taken advantage of.
THE MOLLIE MARIE
Cam Model
I don't agree with this. I think it is flawed to say that everyone judges everyone else on a 1-10 scale upon meeting them, I know I certainly don't. I'm not constantly looking at everyone I meet through the lens of whether or not I find them attractive or want to have sex with them.
Maybe it's not so apparent as a conscious effort of placing them on a 1-10 scale, but subconsciously your brain is filling in all sorts of gaps, putting judgements, categories, etc. Whether you're aware of it or not isn't a factor. You do.
It's psychology 101.
Fancy link to chapter in psychology book about first impressions.
It's psychology 101.
Fancy link to chapter in psychology book about first impressions.
Last edited:
THE MOLLIE MARIE
Cam Model
Okay, I'm not going to read a whole chapter of a book you've linked to try and figure out which part you are referencing, but on the first page I see...
"Second, our impressions are often based on physical appearance..."
Keyword that I'm going to point out, "often." And this alone does not mean that you are considering those physical traits with regard to whether or not you are *sexually attracted* to the person. Again, I think you are making assumptions that don't hold true for everyone, or at the very least, taking a meaning from this that simply isn't there. But again, I didn't read the whole chapter and am unsure of what, specifically, you want to bring to the conversation from that text.
I do agree that we make subconscious judgments based on people's appearances, I'm not arguing that point. Where sexual objectification comes into play is when you are just looking at this person as a potential sexual partner or not. This was the point I was trying to make with my first reply.
"Second, our impressions are often based on physical appearance..."
Keyword that I'm going to point out, "often." And this alone does not mean that you are considering those physical traits with regard to whether or not you are *sexually attracted* to the person. Again, I think you are making assumptions that don't hold true for everyone, or at the very least, taking a meaning from this that simply isn't there. But again, I didn't read the whole chapter and am unsure of what, specifically, you want to bring to the conversation from that text.
I do agree that we make subconscious judgments based on people's appearances, I'm not arguing that point. Where sexual objectification comes into play is when you are just looking at this person as a potential sexual partner or not. This was the point I was trying to make with my first reply.
This is really a really interesting point what you say about people's attitudes towards sex being shameful and therefore making is less human. I hadn't thought about this but now you mention it I do agree with this. Thinking back I realise that many people I have known who have been particularly derogatory are people who seem to have a disconnect between sex and what is socially "appropriate". So their female friends would be treated as humans, but any woman they thought was hot or might have sex with was suddenly a "slut". Nameless, worth only their body and a high five from their male friends. I wonder if some of this behaviour came from being raised to believe sex was wrong, as it might explain why someone would lump all shameful and disgusting behaviour into one area, because to them it's all as bad as each other.
I can't remember where I read this but somewhere recently I read an article which talked about rape and puritan views. It explained that if you are a puritan Christian, your punishment for multiple actions around sex is going to hell, therefore rape is no more punishable and would be lumped in with everything else. Which could be why some people believe women who "sin" by having sex or doing porn, shouldn't then complain if they then get attacked, even if they get attacked in a completely different circumstance.
I do think that to be sexually objectifying you would be dehumanising the person. It's part of the definition that you are degrading that person to object status, and therefore in this situation their humanity wouldn't matter.
I guess if you were staring at someone, it is objectifying if you look at a person, you know you are making them uncomfortable but you do not care and continue because you find them physically attractive. It is pretty human nature to care about what other people think and feel, so to disregard the other persons thoughts and feelings because you are getting sexual thrills would be dehuminising/sexually objectifying them. Kind of like watching an animal in a zoo, people don't care if the animal is uncomfortable with being watched. While you could stare at someone finding them attractive, but when they notice you, you look away to not make them uncomfortable, you are acknowledging that they are a person with feelings. Physical sexual attraction does not necessarily mean sexual objectification. I personally only think it gets to objectification (in a real life social situation sense) when you care as much about that person as you do meat on your plate. And I do think people who get to that point regularly probably have something missing in them and how they see others. It is not natural or normal for humans to be that desensitised when interacting with one another. There is a reason social media exists, we're curious as hell about one another.
I also agree with @Mollie_ that I don't think a moment of judging someone on their looks when you meet them is objectifying. Again, definition, you aren't seeing them as an object. You are just acknowledging the instant information you have available. Lots about someone's looks can tell you about a person, their skin tone, eye brightness, if they choose to wear make up, if they groom themselves, how healthy or clean their hair looks, how they choose to dress. You can even tell things about that particular day. Then expressions and body language tell you a lot about a person, their mood and what they are saying to you. Bear in mind that while we are one of the few animals who primarily use sound to communicate, we still do communicate a lot with our bodies (which most people don't consciously bother to read or have no practice so cannot read). Sexual attraction might be a part of your initial assessment of looks, if they have a pleasing face you may decide you would like to spend more time with them, or be more willing to trust them.
I don't think any of this is objectifying. If you consciously put them in a scale of one to ten then yes that is objectifying (and you may have issues with your own self esteem), but that is a completely different story from meeting someone and judging their appearance. I don't know what you've read, but that sounds like an misinterpretation of data.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
Isn't rating a woman on the 1-10 scale pretty much judging their appearance?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-happens-to-the-brain-during-cognitive-dissonance1/
"people may think cognitive dissonance is a bad thing, it actually helps to keep us mentally healthy and happy. It may make us feel satisfied with our choices—or at least lets us justify them—especially when they cannot be easily reversed. Resolving dissonance may help prevent us from making bad choices or motivate us to make good ones. This desire to be at peace with our decisions might be just the thing to inspire us to go for that run after all.people may think cognitive dissonance is a bad thing, it actually helps to keep us mentally healthy and happy. "
Another load of bovine excrement!
It may this or may that, not to mention it's not gender specific and we all know there are significant differences.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
Guess it depends really.
Had an elderly family member, as he got close to death he got real friendly with Jesus. He was very critical of Christianity in general his whole life until then. Bedridden, he could see the end coming...I guess embracing the myth helped him face what was unavoidable. I don't see the harm in his case.
Of course, that is entirely different from this crap going around now. Indoctrinating a significant portion of a generation with ridiculous ideas that don't stand up to critical examination of any sort...diverting their youthful energy into nonsense like these vacuous objectification/male gaze theories...infantilizing them with ideas that their "fears" and their "feelings" reign supreme over any other concerns...teaching them to say things like "RAPE!" and "CONSENT!" as emotional manipulations so they can run around like a bunch of useful idiot automatons sowing division...disgusting.
However well intentioned, such delusions are imo doing a disservice to society, if for no other reason than they distract from real issues.
Pitiful.
Much better production values.
Well once again, it's no small defeat to apologize when you are being an asshole. Of course he would ignore you, why wouldn't he? You said some inflammatory remarks to him. You insulted him.
But stop being a four year old. "I SAID SORRY BEFORE SO I DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT NOW!" You are pretty ignorant when it comes to how to act like a decent human being.
I will NOT apologize for previously calling him out for his creepiness in the past or the future, but I am thankful for finally being made aware of his condition and hold no ill will towards him whatsoever.
Vera
Cam Model
- Jun 5, 2014
- 2,075
- 9,684
- 213
- Twitter Username
- @fallonfairbanks
- Clips4Sale URL
- https://www.clips4sale.com/studio/90357/brie-white
Breh, I am just going to say it, using big words doesn't make you sound smart if you can't put together a coherent sentence. Your point is only valuable if it can be understood by your target audience.
That aside, I don't think open sexuality is a hedonistic view. If you want to pull the philosophy card, open sexuality skews more existentialist, or post modern depending on your view. I also don't think it implies negative connotations, because if sexuality were TRULY "open," women's sexuality and commodification wouldn't be the only matter of contention.
Love and lust are not separate. You are taking a very antiquated, moralistic view. You assume lust is automatically bad. I have a lot else to say but it's late and I am, admittedly, just here to stir the pot.
Objectification is, by definition, when a human is stripped of its autonomy and treated as valuable for an exploitable characteristic. It's inherently about removing AGENCY.
Is objectification a real phenomenon? Yes. Does it happen to women? Yes. Is it about being sexually attracted to women? No. Does it make it wrong to be attracted to women? No. Does it make it wrong to be sexually aroused by a situation where a woman uses her sexuality to achieve an object? No. Does it make it wrong to grab that woman's ass, pressure her to spend time alone in hopes of getting sex, or attempt to buy her attention when she wouldn't otherwise be interested? Yes.
Objects are passive. They can't act. If you put a woman in a position where they can't act or contest their situation either physically, sexually, or emotionally, you are objectifying them. (See: hanging out in the friendzone in hopes of getting laid, pressuring into sex, leering for kindergarten level examples. This is obvs not in order.)
Last edited:
- Status
