here's my contribution re: male gays



e: oh we're talking about male gaze

(07-16-2011, 09:26 PM)Tachikoma Wrote: Can I just fucking establish for at least the second time: YES. PATRIARCHAL SOCIETY DOES BAD SHIT TO MEN TOO. EVEN STRAIGHT WHITE MEN, SOMETIMES.
That doesn't somehow mean we're magically on an even footing, and it doesn't stop it from being really shitty to derail and talk about men in a discussion about sexism.

I do think it's important to discuss how gender roles affect men, too, but to turn it into an argument of men vs women is short-sighted and disrespectful. While feminism focuses on women's issues, it is not to the detriment of men; if men were to start speaking out against shitty gender stereotyping too, even that which affected men, they'd be fighting the same cause. That doesn't, however, mean that their causes shouldn't be distinct.

If we were discussing racism against people from the middle east, would you all be swanning in demanding to know what we're all doing about racism against african americans? Of course not. While broadly they are the same cause - abolishing racism - it's fairly well understood that different groups have distinct causes with differing needs. Why do people not accept this as the case for gender?

Probably because men and women are more closely intertwined than any two random ethnic groups. I mean the term "Male Gaze" immediately references males, so it's really no wonder (not saying this view is necessarily correct, but it makes sense why people would do this)

Quote:Being a big muscly manwhore is totally okay, but being a woman who's slept with more than one person in a short period is "disgusting." Why is it okay when we, as men, do such things, but when women do it, it's "morally wrong?"

I'm pretty sure this is morally wrong for men, too. Maybe idiots will think that for some reason doing a lot of girls is totally awesome, but those are just idiots. Even the media makes an effort to show that meaningful relationships are better than one-night stands. In fact, when this isn't the case, it's usually played up as comical because they know that such behavior wouldn't be tolerated in the real world (for example shows like Seinfeld, or Tony Stark in Iron Man). And a real world example of it not being tolerated I guess would be people like Charlie Sheen? People laugh at him because of how fucked up he is, they don't applaud him for it.

Hi
it isn't morally wrong for anyone of any gender to be promiscuous, provided all parties are safe and informed.

(07-16-2011, 09:54 PM)Tachikoma Wrote: Hi
it isn't morally wrong for anyone of any gender to be promiscuous, provided all parties are safe and informed.

Not saying there's a problem with promiscuity, there's only a problem with it in the event that the person doing it is doing it like a dirtbag (in other words, both parties not being safe and well-informed). The term 'manwhore' generally brings that kind of negative image, of a dude who's just banging girls left and right without caring about them.

I don't think you fully get it.

Sleeping around with multiple people, regardless of gender, is "morally wrong" in the whore-ish sense.

The general public-- not Just Random Idiots In The Minority, the general public, do not see it as morally wrong for men, because as men, it is apparently what we are supposed to do. The more women you sleep with, the "manlier" you are. The more men a woman sleeps with, the "sluttier" she is.

This is how it is in society. I am not talking about minorities that use Rational Thinking-- I am talking about society as a whole.

Male Gaze is based off of society, not the minority. You and I are allowed to think that it is morally wrong for both genders, but that doesn't mean society will. And this is the problem.

---

I don't think you fully get it.

Sleeping around with multiple people, regardless of gender, is morally wrong.

The general public-- not Just Random Idiots In The Minority, the general public, do not see it as morally wrong for men, because as men, it is apparently what we are supposed to do. The more women you sleep with, the "manlier" you are. The more men a woman sleeps with, the "sluttier" she is.

This is how it is in society. I am not talking about minorities that use Rational Thinking-- I am talking about society as a whole.

Male Gaze is based off of society, not the minority. You and I are allowed to think that it is morally wrong for both genders, but that doesn't mean society will. And this is the problem.

(07-16-2011, 09:59 PM)Alpha Six Wrote: I don't think you fully get it.

Sleeping around with multiple people, regardless of gender, is "morally wrong" in the whore-ish sense.

The general public-- not Just Random Idiots In The Minority, the general public, do not see it as morally wrong for men, because as men, it is apparently what we are supposed to do. The more women you sleep with, the "manlier" you are. The more men a woman sleeps with, the "sluttier" she is.

This is how it is in society. I am not talking about minorities that use Rational Thinking-- I am talking about society as a whole.

Male Gaze is based off of society, not the minority. You and I are allowed to think that it is morally wrong for both genders, but that doesn't mean society will. And this is the problem.

I don't really think it's that big of a problem in society, though; maybe I'm out of touch, but generally I get the impression that most people agree that it's not cool to be a whore, regardless of what gender you are. Like I said, the media portrays being a 'whore' as comical, and the general goal and usual end result is a real, lasting relationship.

I fully understand what you're saying, and it definitely WOULD be a problem in the event that it truly dominated public opinion. But I don't really think it does, based on my experience.

(07-16-2011, 10:02 PM)Glukom Wrote: I don't really think it's that big of a problem in society, though; maybe I'm out of touch

You are beyond out of touch if you don't think this is a legitimate problem.

This is not just a problem with how people treat each other IRL; This is a problem that continues to surface and loop itself over in our entertainment.

(07-16-2011, 10:05 PM)Alpha Six Wrote:

(07-16-2011, 10:02 PM)Glukom Wrote: I don't really think it's that big of a problem in society, though; maybe I'm out of touch

You are beyond out of touch if you don't think this is a legitimate problem.

This is not just a problem with how people treat each other IRL; This is a problem that continues to surface and loop itself over in our entertainment.

but this is what i'm saying, the media portrays those people as laughable, not commendable

i don't look at jerry seinfeld (in the show) and think "yeah man, i wish i was him." i think wow, this guy is ridiculous (which is how it's usually played up)

if you can point out specific instances where the sole reason we're supposed to like a character in anything is specifically that they sleep with lots of women and don't give a fuck, then maybe you're right, but generally i've found that most, if not all of the time the sympathy comes from elsewhere (or is non-existant)


edit: And again, I'm not saying sexism ISN'T a problem, because in all cases being sexist is wrong (obviously). But I think some things are being misinterpreted as sexist, when really they're just trying to be funny (because of how wrong it is)

(07-16-2011, 10:10 PM)Glukom Wrote:

(07-16-2011, 10:05 PM)Alpha Six Wrote:

(07-16-2011, 10:02 PM)Glukom Wrote: I don't really think it's that big of a problem in society, though; maybe I'm out of touch

You are beyond out of touch if you don't think this is a legitimate problem.

This is not just a problem with how people treat each other IRL; This is a problem that continues to surface and loop itself over in our entertainment.

but this is what i'm saying, the media portrays those people as laughable, not commendable

i don't look at jerry seinfeld (in the show) and think "yeah man, i wish i was him." i think wow, this guy is ridiculous (which is how it's usually played up)

if you can point out specific instances where the sole reason we're supposed to like a character in anything is specifically that they sleep with lots of women and don't give a fuck, then maybe you're right, but generally i've found that most, if not all of the time the sympathy comes from elsewhere (or is non-existant)

Superheroes.
Helpless princesses.
Female warriors.
Female magicians.
Hell, female protagonists and antagonists in fantasy media in general.

I could go on.


Male Gaze is not something about humor, it is about reflecting a male's sexual desires into a character for the sake of building that character a male audience (based ONLY on looks and actions, and not other things like personalities, characteristics, and other stuff that women have that isn't just tits and ass and sexual desire), and these male gaze-inspired designs are also fundamentally flawed most of the times.

Why are the male warriors decked out in heavy duty armor and the female warrior is wearing nothing at all? :I



Besides that, comparing wanting to be a lunatic like Jerry Seinfeld and wanting to fuck a girl like Mai Shiranui is totally different and irrelevant, since comedy is not really part of the problem. :v

This topic started out about whether or not its wrong to sexualize women in the media. All other sexist issues do not comply.

As far as I'm concerned this is entertainment, we want to see things that entertain us. And while it may be insulting to women, I do not feel this directly affects our views on women as a whole.

Yes there ARE still problems out there, but I don't feel this the biggest issue.

(07-16-2011, 10:21 PM)Koopaul Wrote: And while it may be insulting to women, I do not feel this directly affects our views on women as a whole.

So as long as we don't think women are dirtbags, it's okay to offend them?

lol

Quote:This topic started out about whether or not its wrong to sexualize women in the media. All other sexist issues do not comply.

They're all part of the same thing. You can't take one sexist thing away from sexism as a whole, because it's part of an institutional system.

What you're basically saying, yet again is "I enjoy it, therefore it's okay".

Yeah I lied when I said I'd back out. Welp.

Anyway: I don't deny there are more social barriers for women than men, but making sweeping generalizations and setting up false dichotomies does nothing to remove these barriers (in fact in the long run it strengthens them; there's nothing more harmful to the truth than a bad argument for it, etc.). The concept of "female privilege" bugs me the same way that the concept of "affirmative action" does, in that it's completely artificial "equality" and runs completely contradictory to meritocracy (who gives a shit who are, if you're good you're good) -- also never mind I read that blog again and they're actually complaining about that, my references to that in my last post were really fucking dumb and I needed to pay more attention, sorry. And what I meant with the "male privilege" thing is that it seemed basically discussion-terminating; "if you have a different opinion you don't understand because you're not female," which is the context it seemed to be used in before.

Tachikoma Wrote:Yes, I was explaining that women are subject to a false dichotomy, why are you presenting this as if it is at all contrary to what I was saying?

I read it as you saying they're exclusively trapped in this dichotomy somehow though, and "can't win." The implication here is that apparently they can only choose between those two extremes, with no middle ground; saying the only choice in the majority of cases is between being a "slut" and being a "prude" honestly seems like a gross simplification to me.

Quote:Where did I say or even imply that I think this about men? Please show your work.

I had edited the post to clarify that the only people who would honestly make those kinds of slut/prude generalizations would be the kind of dbags I mentioned. My problem was mainly with your saying "women can't win;" just because a certain minority (at least, in my experience) of males think a certain way doesn't mean that it's suddenly an unwinnable situation for all women.

Quote:I am fully aware of this. When we're talking about the male gaze we're not often talking about real people, at least not in real circumstances. Singularly characterising women as sex objects feeds into and normalises sexist ideals. That's why it's a problem.

The only recent big movies I can think of (off the top of my head, anyway) where women have been characterized solely as sex objects were Michael Bay's Transformers movies (or any movie with Megan Fox in it). Generally, most recent movies with female leads had them do something other than be a damsel in distress or just be there to look pretty, and we've even had some pretty badass ones (e.g. Hanna, Salt, etc.). We've also had movies with objectified/super-idealized male leads as well (e.g. Twilight lol, Nicholas Sparks movie adaptations, etc.). Just because the actress looks pretty or the camera does a few "pan up from back of legs to back of head while she's walking" shots doesn't mean they're being singularly characterized as sex objects, unless that's literally all the camera does and they have almost no narrative purpose other than to fulfill the Broner Quota -- which, of course, brings us back to Michael Bay =P

As for videogames, like I said, Bayonetta is a very (extremely, even) capable female character when placed in the hands of a skilled player, as are most playable female characters in videogames. Here is a video of Chun Li showing some dudebros who's boss.

Quote:Well golly gee here I am asserting myself as a woman and being slapped down by a dudebro for reading too heavily into things. And then being told I need to do more to assure that women assert themselves. Which is, by the way, victim blaming; you're just looking for a reason to silence the Big Mean Feminazi rather than listening to my point. Where, also, is the assumption coming from that I don't look at bigger issues, too?

Okay sorry, that was a bad potshot lol. I just think that the amount of "objectification" happening in movies, videogames, etc. is exaggerated, and I honestly don't see much of a problem unless the characters affected by the "male gaze" exist solely for titillation and serve almost no other purpose within the context of the work. In the context of videogames I also dislike how people talk more about how the game's controversial or offensive to group X than the actual game (the first review of DNF I read spent almost a page talking about the game's "misogynist unfunny humor" and spent maybe 4 or 5 smaller paragraphs talking about how the game actually played), and the same applies with movies (to a lesser degree, since movies aren't going through a "maturity crisis" right now).

(07-16-2011, 10:17 PM)Alpha Six Wrote:

(07-16-2011, 10:10 PM)Glukom Wrote:

(07-16-2011, 10:05 PM)Alpha Six Wrote:

(07-16-2011, 10:02 PM)Glukom Wrote: I don't really think it's that big of a problem in society, though; maybe I'm out of touch

You are beyond out of touch if you don't think this is a legitimate problem.

This is not just a problem with how people treat each other IRL; This is a problem that continues to surface and loop itself over in our entertainment.

but this is what i'm saying, the media portrays those people as laughable, not commendable

i don't look at jerry seinfeld (in the show) and think "yeah man, i wish i was him." i think wow, this guy is ridiculous (which is how it's usually played up)

if you can point out specific instances where the sole reason we're supposed to like a character in anything is specifically that they sleep with lots of women and don't give a fuck, then maybe you're right, but generally i've found that most, if not all of the time the sympathy comes from elsewhere (or is non-existant)

Superheroes.
Helpless princesses.
Female warriors.
Female magicians.
Hell, female protagonists and antagonists in fantasy media in general.

I could go on.


Male Gaze is not something about humor, it is about reflecting a male's sexual desires into a character for the sake of building that character a male audience (based ONLY on looks and actions, and not other things like personalities, characteristics, and other stuff that women have that isn't just tits and ass and sexual desire), and these male gaze-inspired designs are also fundamentally flawed most of the times.

Why are the male warriors decked out in heavy duty armor and the female warrior is wearing nothing at all? :I



Besides that, comparing wanting to be a lunatic like Jerry Seinfeld and wanting to fuck a girl like Mai Shiranui is totally different and irrelevant, since comedy is not really part of the problem. :v

I was talking specifically about the manwhore idea, not necessarily all of Male Gaze. The examples you gave don't apply there (superheroes aren't manwhores?)

I don't think some of you give enough credit to society. Do you legitimately know that the majority of people agree that being a manwhore is a perfectly fine thing?

(07-16-2011, 10:27 PM)Glukom Wrote: I don't think some of you give enough credit to society. Do you legitimately know that the majority of people agree that being a manwhore is a perfectly fine thing?

Yes, because I live in a place where I witness these things happening daily, I watch TV that supports it frequently, and I personally know people all over the world that think it's totally okay.

I don't think you give enough credit to the people that are actually a part of the "larger" society. Just because you and your friends think it's wrong doesn't mean you're suddenly part of a giant majority that thinks it's wrong.

---

PS: Of course manwhoring is going to be used in a comedy sense-- it's funny to us, after all! And not disgusting or demeaning at all! As long as somebody's laughing, it's perfectly okay!