“The only thing that makes Ballet hot or artistic or cool is if the ballerinas hookup in front of me”
- the man next to me in a coffee shop
THIS IS A PROBLEM- if a college educated man only finds art in a true art form by objectifying the sexuality of the participants- this is a bad sign.
At least he’s being honest
Maybe ballet isn’t his ‘thing’….. but girls are!
Would you condemn a women who isn’t the least bit interested in the fire service, but who will whoop and cheer (and pay money to see) firemen strippers…. or pay to see a movie with some Hollywood heartthrob playing the role of a macho fireman? (But she would fall asleep watching a documentary about the fire service or fire engines).
I dunno, I wasn’t there to hear the remark….. is your objection about him being uncultured and crass, or about being sexist/ misogynist etc?
Thanks for caring to respond! I think you’re right, this guy is allowed to be into women and not into ballet. I think the harm in this comment was in the misogyny and objectification of the women’s sexuality. It almost sounded as if he doesn’t get joy out of women unless they are useful through making out with each other for his arousal or making out with him for his arousal. I was personally offended because he was assuming a sexuality onto ballerinas for his own entertainment.
Hmmmm…. I’m certainly not trying to defend this uncultured and disrespectful individual. But I am also quite wary of this whole area of sexual political correctness.
I never get how objectification *has* to be automatically degrading. To say a giant poplar tree looks gorgeous is not degrading to the spirit of the tree. To say a thoroughbred horse has fine proportions and superb muscle tone is not degrading to the conscious entity inside that horse’s body.
But when it comes to humans – and specifically women – there seems to be this PC law which states that a woman’s body cannot have value on its own…. or rather, it is insulting and degrading to a woman for a man to ONLY value (admire) her body, while paying little or no attention to the person inside.
This would be true if he were forcing her into marriage or trafficking her in the sex trade. But as long as the man is just voicing his opinion it seems ridiculous for society to attack him for valuing and admiring the female form on its own while completely disregarding the person inside.
If you see a woman in a magazine you might admire her figure, bone structure and the look she’s created. You are only interested in the outer form, not the personality and character of the model herself. You only think of her as an object (surface appearance, not soul). The man is doing a similar thing with the ballet dancers, only with the addition of a sex drive towards women and a laddish (ie insecure) personality.
(In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if male insecurity had a lot to do with his comment …… he might feel that to BE SEEN to appreciate ballet without thinking about sex is kind of like an admission that his sex drive/ heterosexuality is not very strong)
It’s a huge subject and both men and women are responsible for all these (often) over-sensitive and muddled up views about ‘objectification’. It’s true that for thousands of years women have been treated as objects (possessions). But it’s also true that women have always exploited their own physical form to gain social standing and power over men. Each day millions of women enhance their physical appearance (make themselves appealing as objects) knowing full well that men (and women) will tend to value/ respect/ admire/ flatter/ forgive them more as people as a result of their looks.
Lots of attractive-on-the-outside women are ugly-on-the-inside for this very reason….. they have used their good looks as a substitute for a good personality and character. And every time a woman uses her looks to influence a man’s behaviour towards her (as a person) she is encouraging men to think of women more and more in terms of outer appearance.
Your typical mainstream movie/ music celeb is 100% outer appearance. Any ‘personality’ they might exhibit is little more than an adornment to that physical appearance!
And so if a man (or a woman) admires a woman’s outer appearance but get confused and starts believing she must therefore automatically be a more wonderful, valuable and important *person* on the inside, that would be an example of the dangers of NOT objectifying women’s outer appearance
I think a crucial distinction needs to be made between ‘object’ and ‘possession’ (and ‘social standing’).
If we lived in a world were people didn’t try to control and own other people (and there was no cultural baggage of this from our recent history) then I think we’d all feel a lot more relaxed about making ourselves objects, and being appreciated and valued as such.
I wandered quite far from your post… I’ll shut up now, sorry!