what social causes are your thing?

angelica · February 2007

Trau wrote:

6. Objectification of women (Shakira has an album called Oral Fixation--is that really necessary?)

I am so with you on the objectification of women. It's such a vastly sweeping and insidious problem, one that most people I know--both men and women--contribute to in many ways.

even flow? · February 2007

know1 wrote:

I find it curious how so many people that are pro-legal abortion are also for animal rights.

Just a question - how would some of you feel if we started performing abortions on dogs and cats? After all, there is definitely an overabundance of unwanted dogs and cats.

Who needs the abortions when we spade and neuter them. And yes I think that humans could and should have this done to them too. After all if we don't care to hear our pets side of the story. Why should we have to hear some losers account of why they can't keep their fifth kid.

Recycling is my biggie.

Trau · February 2007

angelica wrote:

I am so with you on the objectification of women. It's such a vastly sweeping and insidious problem, one that most people I know--both men and women--contribute to in many ways.

I think one problem is that many women think that dressing and acting in overtly sexual ways is some kind of liberation; they're just teaching other women that their bodies are cheap, and justifying the objectification that already exists with many men.

angelica · February 2007

Trau wrote:

I think one problem is that many women think that dressing and acting in overtly sexual ways is some kind of liberation; they're just teaching other women that their bodies are cheap, and justifying the objectification that already exists with many men.

I see that most men and women in our western society have been desensitized to their emotions. By being out of touch with the depths of who they are, both sexes partake of objectifying themselves and others quite freely. And it goes far beyond sexuality...the patterns are perpetuated by most commonly accepted parenting practices. We teach our children to tune out, deny, and ignore their emotions and realistic perceptions, thereby teaching them to continue the desensitization and objectification.

Trau · February 2007

angelica wrote:

the patterns are perpetuated by most commonly accepted parenting practices. We teach our children to tune out, deny, and ignore their emotions and realistic perceptions, thereby teaching them to continue the desensitization and objectification.

Which parenting practices?

I see more of the problem coming from the media industries.

angelica · February 2007

Trau wrote:

Which parenting practices?

I see more of the problem coming from the media industries.

The psychological branch of transactional analysis covers the psychological interactions between humans, including within families. It is in the family that we learn our "scripts" or the ways we filter the circumstances of our lives. Children are taught to "stop whining". They are taught not to talk back, otherwise known as expressing how they feel. When children notice discrepencies in what they are told, they are taught to not "get smart" with their authority figure. In short most of us have been taught that it's entirely normal to objectify ourselves. And it is normal, which is not the same thing as healthy. The media sure is a part of it, but the media doesn't hook us unless their is a psychological aspect of us buried to be hooked unconsciously. There are reasons that at least 1 in 4 girls are sexually assaulted before reaching adulthood. These girls are assaulted by neighbours, relatives, authority figures, etc. These are VERY high numbers considering we see ourselves as a "civilized" society. Abuse of all kinds, including rape is a product of the root cause of our objectified feelings. When a human walks around largely unaware of how they feel, the find themselves desensitized to abuse red flags. On the other side of the coin, when men are desensitized to their own feelings, they tune them out in the child/woman they sexually abuse or assault, because feelings are not on their radar screen. Men and women commonly partake of abusive practises day in and out due to objectification.

know1 · February 2007

even flow? wrote:

Who needs the abortions when we spade and neuter them. And yes I think that humans could and should have this done to them too. After all if we don't care to hear our pets side of the story. Why should we have to hear some losers account of why they can't keep their fifth kid.

I wasn't asking if the pets NEEDED the abortion, I was asking how people would feel if they were GETTING abortions.

Trau · February 2007

angelica wrote:

The psychological branch of transactional analysis covers the psychological interactions between humans, including within families. It is in the family that we learn our "scripts" or the ways we filter the circumstances of our lives. Children are taught to "stop whining". They are taught not to talk back, otherwise known as expressing how they feel. When children notice discrepencies in what they are told, they are taught to not "get smart" with their authority figure. In short most of us have been taught that it's entirely normal to objectify ourselves. And it is normal, which is not the same thing as healthy. The media sure is a part of it, but the media doesn't hook us unless their is a psychological aspect of us buried to be hooked unconsciously. There are reasons that at least 1 in 4 girls are sexually assaulted before reaching adulthood. These girls are assaulted by neighbours, relatives, authority figures, etc. These are VERY high numbers considering we see ourselves as a "civilized" society. Abuse of all kinds, including rape is a product of the root cause of our objectified feelings. When a human walks around largely unaware of how they feel, the find themselves desensitized to abuse red flags. On the other side of the coin, when men are desensitized to their own feelings, they tune them out in the child/woman they sexually abuse or assault, because feelings are not on their radar screen. Men and women commonly partake of abusive practises day in and out due to objectification.

I'm not sure I am smart enough to understand all of what you are saying, but I get some of it. I think you are talking about a problem that is not necessarily a reason for objectification as I am thinking of the word.

What I get from what you're saying is more of a...criticism of conformity that children are typically taught. I don't think this necessarily causes women (and now men, as well) to be sexually objectified.

You also mentioned abuse; I would not consider teaching one's child to conform to be abuse, necessarily. Children must be taught, to an extent, to know their place; we're talking about children after all.

Before I ramble further, I guess I'll have to ask you to explain to me what "objectified feelings" are. Been a few years since my last psychology course!

angelica · February 2007

Trau wrote:

I think you are talking about a problem that is not necessarily a reason for objectification as I am thinking of the word.

To me "objectification" of anyone is when we tune out who they are as a person--we ignore and gloss over their thoughts and feelings, while treating them like a thing or object. This is commonly noticed on the level of female sexuality, which you have referred to. When women objectify themselves and are then perceived to be "inviting" objectification from men. What I am talking about in general is the cause/reason for this type of objectification as well as other insidious objectifications. The media contribution to objectification is a symptom of the root cause.

What I get from what you're saying is more of a...criticism of conformity that children are typically taught. I don't think this necessarily causes women (and now men, as well) to be sexually objectified.

I specifically refer to teaching children to tune out their emotions. Our emotions are our direct feedback system telling us how our environment is affecting us. When we teach children to tune this system out, we cripple their emotional intelligence, and their ability to gauge life accurately. It can lead to boys later tuning out direct emotional responses from women that they date-rape or otherwise assault, or abuse physically or emotionally. Or they might treat women they meet on the street in a shallow surface way, not considering the person's feeling. Desensitized girls can grow up and be abusive to friends, boyfriends, husbands children, etc. or they may objectify themselves and take on the "object" role, at the expense of their selves.

You also mentioned abuse; I would not consider teaching one's child to conform to be abuse, necessarily. Children must be taught, to an extent, to know their place; we're talking about children after all.

I specifically refer to abusing one's child--mistreating them in any way--as abuse or abusing them. There are ways to teach children to be sensitized and true to their feelings and to be independent, enlivened thinkers, while also teaching them to get along in their families and society. I know from experience with my 24 year old and 17 year old.

Before I ramble further, I guess I'll have to ask you to explain to me what "objectified feelings" are. Been a few years since my last psychology course!

I'm guessing that you consider it objectification if a man treats a woman like an object. If that is the case I agree. I also see that he's treating her like an object when he acknowledges her physical appearance but tunes out her thoughts and feelings or who she is inside. I am saying he is doing so because he tunes his own thoughts and feelings out, and their value, because he has been taught to do so in his life. And if the woman also considers herself mostly just the package and the image, at the expense of who she is as a person, she is objectifying herself as well. When women are abusive to their children, they are objectifying them--they are tuning out the pain and hurt they cause them, and treating them like feelingless objects. When anyone is abusive to anyone, they are tuning out the human being and treating the other with a lack of understanding and empathy. The root of this problem is that the person has tuned out their own humanity, and does not have empathy and understanding for themselves. What we don't have inside, we cannot give to others.

surferdude · February 2007

angelica wrote:

To me "objectification" of anyone is when we tune out who they are as a person--we ignore and gloss over their thoughts and feelings, while treating them like a thing or object. This is commonly noticed on the level of female sexuality, which you have referred to. When women objectify themselves and are then perceived to be "inviting" objectification from men. What I am talking about in general is the cause/reason for this type of objectification as well as other insidious objectifications. The media contribution to objectification is a symptom of the root cause.

Let's not forget that this is much more subtly done against men as well. It is reflected in the percentage of mother's receiving custody of children. Fathers have been made dispensible by the court system and society and are only seem as income providers by both. Hence more media coverage over the the relatively few "deadbeats dads" than the vast number of dads without any custody rights to their own children, or laws that don't require the father to be named on the birth certificate.

angelica · February 2007

surferdude wrote:

Let's not forget that this is much more subtly done against men as well. It is reflected in the percentage of mother's receiving custody of children. Fathers have been made dispensible by the court system and society and are only seem as income providers by both. Hence more media coverage over the the relatively few "deadbeats dads" than the vast number of dads without any custody rights to their own children, or laws that don't require the father to be named on the birth certificate.

For sure. This is a very complex subject. It's hard to do it justice in a few posts--it is definitely happening in all kinds of ways. Also I think you and I agree that in the patriarchical way, men are objectified to be tough, stoic and to go to war etc, and as a result of this approach men die much younger than women on the whole. That's a big deal. And men and women equally support this system in all kinds of ways.

Trau · February 2007

I see what you're saying now. I don't think, however, that this source is necessarily as large as others, but I am limited by my own experiences and those of others I know.

The media has so much access to young people, and has a monetary interest in showing people what it does. Young girls have people like Shakira, who should be able to stand on her musical talents alone rather than sexing up her image and referencing blowjobs in her album's title.

surferdude · February 2007

angelica wrote:

For sure. This is a very complex subject. It's hard to do it justice in a few posts--it is definitely happening in all kinds of ways. Also I think you and I agree that in the patriarchical way, men are objectified to be tough, stoic and to go to war etc, and as a result of this approach men die much younger than women on the whole. That's a big deal. And men and women equally support this system in all kinds of ways.

The smart girls are always the sexiest.

Trau · February 2007

surferdude wrote:

Let's not forget that this is much more subtly done against men as well. It is reflected in the percentage of mother's receiving custody of children. Fathers have been made dispensible by the court system and society and are only seem as income providers by both. Hence more media coverage over the the relatively few "deadbeats dads" than the vast number of dads without any custody rights to their own children, or laws that don't require the father to be named on the birth certificate.

And what about abortion? A man has no say in whether or not what he perceives to be his child lives or dies. But should the woman choose to have a child he does not want, he is forced to pay money until the child is an adult.

OutOfBreath · February 2007

You know the word oral doesn't have anything to do with sex in itself, right?
Oral fixation means fixation on mouth or speech. Perhaps a subtly risque title, but it's really one of those that may sound dirty, but really isn't...

This does not mean I like shakira or her music btw.

Peace
Dan

angelica · February 2007

Trau wrote:

I see what you're saying now. I don't think, however, that this source is necessarily as large as others, but I am limited by my own experiences and those of others I know.

The media has so much access to young people, and has a monetary interest in showing people what it does. Young girls have people like Shakira, who should be able to stand on her musical talents alone rather than sexing up her image and referencing blowjobs in her album's title.

I agree that this type of thing is out of control all around us. It goes far beyond Shakira...Britney, Christina, etc. What I've been talking about is a different facet to the media accountability which stands on it's own at the same time. The media is working with principles that are already in place, and that work: sex sells. And we, the masses, show our support with our consumer dollars. Why is this? And when 30 something year old men were buying into the Britney image when she was a 17 year old or even 20 year old girl, we can see how different aspects come together in agreement. As women, we might dress similarly or buy the magazines etc. How do we each play our part in perpetuating this?

angelica · February 2007

OutOfBreath wrote:

You know the word oral doesn't have anything to do with sex in itself, right?
Oral fixation means fixation on mouth or speech. Perhaps a subtly risque title, but it's really one of those that may sound dirty, but really isn't...

This does not mean I like shakira or her music btw.

Peace
Dan

Double entendres are a potent, potent tool in the music industry. I actually like Shakira, by the way.

Trau · February 2007

OutOfBreath wrote:

You know the word oral doesn't have anything to do with sex in itself, right?
Oral fixation means fixation on mouth or speech. Perhaps a subtly risque title, but it's really one of those that may sound dirty, but really isn't...

This does not mean I like shakira or her music btw.

Peace
Dan

I'm sorry, but I refuse to believe that the title was chosen for reasons other than its risqué quality. It's not like Barbra Streisand released an album with that title. Look at Shakira's image.

angelica · February 2007

surferdude wrote:

The smart girls are always the sexiest.

I've met very few men who say this type of thing...but I gotta love the ones that do!!

Trau · February 2007

angelica wrote:

I agree that this type of thing is out of control all around us. It goes far beyond Shakira...Britney, Christina, etc. What I've been talking about is a different facet to the media accountability which stands on it's own at the same time. The media is working with principles that are already in place, and that work: sex sells. And we, the masses, show our support with our consumer dollars. Why is this? And when 30 something year old men were buying into the Britney image when she was a 17 year old or even 20 year old girl, we can see how different aspects come together in agreement. As women, we might dress similarly or buy the magazines etc. How do we each play our part in perpetuating this?

Yeah, I understand what you're saying. But as far as actual dollars, I'm willing to bet more is made from females. Guys aren't the types to buy music made by these kinds of chicks just because they find them hot.

The image is marketed to other females, in reality. Society not only corrupts males into objectifying women, it also corrupts women into believing they they should act like objects.

what social causes are your thing?

Comments

Categories