Is it OK to judge all women on their sexual appeal?

DU often judges public women on their sexual appeal. If you're a musician or an actress than that's to be expected. I find it offensive when politicians or their children are judged like porn stars. These are intelligent women. Strong, capable women. Judge them on their actions, their words.

See this thread to understand my outrage:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=1839375&mesg_id=1839430

just kidding

I'm serious because it's not.

altho' it is getting easier to judge their ability to dish out juicy gossip. (sarcasm off)

We judge men almost exclusively on their ability to pull down cash. Very few noble but broke men get lauded anywhere including here. Judgements are fickle and false. But without them we feel lost...go figure.

Every time a woman complains about sexism, somebody invariably brings up how poor men are so badly mistreated.

What the hell is it going to take for young people to actually accept that women are still dealing with discrimination?

We were doing better with awareness 30 years ago! what the hell is going on?

Kanary

...or just their words? You have every right to express your outrage and to defend your position, but you have no right telling people how to talk or think.

I'm shuddering about how I would feel if it were me.

And you're wrong. I have a right to tell my opinion even if it offends you. If how you post or talk hurts others, then I have an obligation to voice my opinion.

My point was that you have a right to your opinion, and to voice it, but not to control what others think or say.

voice your opinion? I am curious how this works-please enlighten me. Thank you in advance.

You can't fight it.

Human nature dictates we immediately determine the attractiveness of a person right off the bat. It certainly can't be helped and shouldn't be suppressed. Now, if you let that internal ruling stand after you've gotten to know the person, then you have a problem.

Many times a beautiful man or woman can be the ugliest human being on earth. Conversely, a seemingly unattractive person can become much more attractive once you become closer.

Human nature.

Never have they heard a complaint from me.

You flatter yourself.

:crazy:

until I read your post. It is not only men who did that. Women did that as well.

Just like what Catch22Dem said, it is human nature.

It's the bird and the bees.

:puke:

male power trips

:puke:

female power trips

to stop with the putdowns of blacks.

:crazy:

No wonder * is able to hoodwink so many!!!

Kanary

Cate is nice too.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Therefore I'm a freeper and must fuck off. How shallow of you.

And IGNORING someone is MURDER!

Gotta love 'em!

Everyone judges everyone by their attractiveness. No one says "wow, he/she looks really intelligent." It's a fact of life. Intellectual attractiveness comes after meetings. No one can tell me that they don't judge people on how they look whether it be professionally, socially, sexually, or even intellectually. You are more than likely to see someone who is handsome and intelligent in a more positive light as opposed to someone who is unattractive and intelligent.

Around you.

I call it the Hooter-fication of America. It's like every woman has to conform to some plastic beauty standard in order to qualify for a job where looks should have no bearing. But I see things starting to change. First, more women are in positions of power and prestige. Second, there's the 'metro-sexual' male trend. As more men become concerned with their appearance and more powerful women are judging men by their looks, it's starting to even the playing field a bit more. And no, I don't subscribe to the silly notion that two wrongs don't make a right and we shouldn't objectify men. Double standards never change until those who benefit from them have the benefits taken away.

Or do you mean as one of many characteristics that we use to judge people in general ? Seriously. I don't judge any person on any ONE thing. There are many facets to my "judgment' and where women are concerned, sex appeal is defiantly ONE of many things I look at.

So bottom line, its not coming off the list for me or any other male in this universe. However, like I said, its also not an exclusive measure.

MZr7

You know, I almost resent being told that I judge women completely by their looks when I don't. What is it implying about men when someone gets so concerned that their judgement gets so affected by physical attractiveness? Does she think we don't know enough not to let that happen?

I'll add this too though: there's many dimensions where you judge someone. There are much more dimensions where looks aren't good for anything than there are ones where they are.

but if you read my reasons for finding Cate Edwards a beautiful girl, you'll find that it's not just looks. Hell I identify with the gal a little, I think her brother Jack is a year older than my brother, so we both have had the joy of younger by a lot siblings, and I find that nice, plus she's quite smart too and interested in journalism. BTW I really did like her tribute to her mother at the DNC, it's not just looks for me and a lot of girls.

I'm not saying that you can't decide who you have fantasies about. To take a candidates' children and make a contest over who is hotter is wrong.

a contest well yeah, I agree it's wrong but it's not wrong to find respectable and likable qualities is it?

and most of the women I am attracted to isn't mere physical attraction, it's a combination of things though I admit since we often see people before we talk to them actually, the attraction is intially physical but once I get to know em it gets better.

an of us find attractive. I find Kerry and Edwards very attractive. Jon Stewart is so hot. The point is that it's just wrong to join in a discussion over who is hotter of candidates daughters. They are not cattle for sale but real human beings.

No excuse I know but sometimes my eyes will misread and thus misintepret.
Yeah I see how it's wrong to lust over candidiates daughters. I get your point now.

suckered into plastic surgery.

Read that thread, then look at the HUGE disconnect here.

Especially read the post by the father.

This is an insane culture, and DU is NO exception.

Kanary

I can't believe that more don't see the horror in comparing how hot two sisters are. These are not pin ups but real human beings.

laugh their heads off when we say "THIS HURTS".

It's hatred, certainly not love, of women that causes this sociopathic nonconcern for any of us of the female persuasion.

Even 30 years ago it wasn't this bad.

I'm so sick of hate I could just scream.

Certainly not something the magical Kerry is going to fix.

Shit.

Kanary

Horror is Iraq. Looking at an attractive woman is human nature.

"It’s the alpha male pathology that drives men to war and motivates them to want to protect their own that "Hijacking Catastrophe" explores most effectively."
-- Ed Gonzalez, SLANT MAGAZINE

Women are repeatedly asking you, here on DU, to stop with the objectification.

Brushing them off so unthinkingly is VIOLENCE.

It's HATRED.

It's just as sociopathologic as the RW.

Same process, same result.

Kanary

If one were to say, this woman is better than this woman because she is better looking, that would be objectifying.

But making a judgement on which one is more attractive to you? Hardly.

about the subject.

You can read, right?

Of course, you'd just rather take your anger and hatred out on those who are asking for common courtesy.

Kanary

You can read, right?

VIOLENCE!

And please tell me what you mean by 'VIOLENCE!' Are you trying to threaten Kanary?

NO I'm not threatening her. YOU need to know more about VIOLENCE, and how it is VIOLENCE to imply that someone on a message board who's already responded to one of your posts doesn't know how to READ!

:eyes:

You will notice that an earlier poster said that objectifying women is violence, but did not say that objectifying men is violence! Saying one thing does not imply the other is false! I understand this clever bit of logic, and I award myself 1 latte point for it. Huzzah to me!

Maybe I'm just another dumb guy. :eyes:

I have no hatred of women, I love women. Why do you feel judging which one of two women is more attractive (not deciding who is a better person or anything like that) is objectifying them?

"Nuance."

This is a message board. I think it is sexist, immature, and inconsiderate when they brush these concerns off, and continue to make such posts, or bluster as if their 1st amendment rights have been cut off at the knees if they are locked. Women are victims of violence all over the world every day, and that is a serious issue. I just wouldn't put comments on a message board in that category, unless someone were to make a direct threat or derogatory comment.

The RW thinks it's laughable that we take umbrage at their lies, too.

"It's only a news show"

Oh shit, what's the use.

You have your opinion, and I have mine.

Flame away.

I really don't give a shit anymore.

Just don't ask me to care about any of 'em.

Kanary

And you didn't even respect me enough to understand my point. Looking at attractive women and men is human nature. Respecting them appears to be not common.

That's the point of all this conflict. This thread is not respecters vs. disrespecters. It's overly-sensitive-diminished-sense-of-degree-and-complexity vs. people-just-trying-to-defend-themselves-against-unfair-accusations. I'm sure you'll find threads about their accomplishments and all that. So someone makes a thread that's not about that, so?

and making disparaging remarks about their looks, as some did in that thread is human nature, too. I think I remember hearing something about our ancestors doing that. :silly:

Give me a break. People make these judgements subconsiously.

As you judge me.

Post what you believe. Please describe the 'we'. I'd like to know who exactly you are posting for.

I guess when women stop wearing lipstick that harkens back to the days when courtesans gave blow-jobs, stop wearing high-heels that accentuate the calf muscle (for gripping during coitus) and that any podiatrist will tell them is unhealthy, wearing padded brassieres and getting implants, wearing clothes that are specifically intended to accentuate a narrow waist and prominent butt, ... and so on.

My point is obvious, I think. :shrug:

So if women wear fashionable clothing then they should only be judged on sexual appeal? I don't dispute that much of fashion is designed to be sexy, but please explain how that means that all women are to be judged only on sexual appeal. Please click on the thread. Is it really OK to talk about a candidates' children based upon how hot they are?

And if they wouldn't dress so provocatively, they also wouldn't get raped, right?

SHIT.

Take responsibility for your own shit.

Kanary

That's important, too! It's a lot of work, after all. And the right genes don't hurt, either. </sarcasm>

This is an issue that never goes anywhere, because it's very hard to get some people to understand that there is a difference between looking at someone and finding them attractive, and drooling about them in public, as if that were an attribute above all others. You'll get painted as a prude, nanny, uptight, etc. And, besides, you judge, too! All women care about is money! Because that is a natural response for women, just like finding peple attractive! Men like attractive people. Women are superficial! See, that makes it alright!

I'm fed up. I don't bother anymore.

And I'm a guy. I remember seeing a movie with some female friends, and when some guy's clothes started to come off, they devolved into hooting and hollering and it was really quite embarrassing. I paused the movie and asked them how they would feel if, in the middle of a movie we were all watching, a woman started to take off her clothes and I just started to let out a stream of objectifying remarks. They would be rightfully horrified. Some women don't get it either.

And as you said, there's nothing wrong with finding someone attractive, but turning it into some sort of public discourse creates the illusion (on purpose or not) that it actually matters.

And this "it's only natural urges" argument is beyond bullshit. That's the same excuse so many men use for having affairs. It's bullshit then, and it's bullshit now. Babies get over their "natural urges" to pee in their pants; men AND women can get over their natural urges to put others on display based on their physical appearance.

The responses to you and a few others here have been very ugly. I'm sorry for that.

I appreciate it.

"Nuance."

I'd like to think that we appreciate women for their insight, their intelligence, and what they have to say instead of their tits and asses.

Wugh

and silly, especially when, as you point out, we are talking about accomplished, intelligent people.

If the totality of the discussion is dominated by that trivialization, it just shows how shallow the commentators are.


I don't think it is inappropriate to comment how attractive someone is though, especially when they are prominent people living in the media spotlight.

humans. They are not cattle for sale. We don't need to compare them as if we're buying them.

They are attractive in so many ways.

are three of the most important criteria that define "attractive" to me.

Acknowledging that someone is attractive to you? No, not wrong.

Basing your entire evaluation, estimation and conclusion about a person on physical appeal alone? Shallow, to put it gently. But there is a difference.

I feel asking people, male or female, to feel shame about seeing other people as attractive is inappropriate.

to rate three public women on their attractiveness? I do. I guess if they were models it may be OK. Candidates' daughters? No way.

..but I also feel its a grey area, where occasionally in our rush to absolutes we oversimplify reality. I restate that I think it is inappropriate to make men or women feel bad about acknowledging the attractiveness of someone else. I don't consider physical beauty to be something that is shameful or should be taboo. But I'll concede that there is a fine line between a healthy and reasonable acknowledgment of appeal and gross objectification.

Where that line is drawn is largely a personal matter.

(and for the record I don't personally find any of them to my taste.) :)

It's helped immensely to know which ones to put on my ignore list, and have a few less annoyances in the futre.

Clearly, the women's movement is dead.

Kanary

But it could use a swift kick in the butt, that's for sure.

They're so used to it being completely acceptable (and rewarding) that they pretty much have blinders on when it comes to these issues. Don't give up though!

As many DUers have been expressing, it's hard living in a country where such a large percentage of the people have so totally lost their ability to THINK about what is really happening to our nation, and react to every bit of fear-mongering that comes down the pike.

It's SHIT living with that crap, knowing that so many people you see anywhere you go are into such a sick mindset.

BUT... what really hurts is seeing so graphically that the people who *supposedly* see the world in the same terems as you do, don't give a flying fuck about a large segment of *this* group. They just don't give one fuck, and think they're so funny, and so cute to flip our their hatred.

Ever since I joined DU, I've seen post after post calling the RW sociopathic, and narcissistic, and assorted other diagosis that are quite on target, yet they can't and WON'T look at their own sociopathology.

There is no hope that this shitty, hateful society will *ever* get it's collective heads together, and the rest of the world sees that. The hateful stuff posted right here shows just how sick the whole mess of us are. Hardly anybody can hear another person, even those they supposedly "agree" with, and just flip out the same kind of "it's all your fault" projection sort of thing the RW does to us.

Shit.

Yes, I give up.

Everyone can keep throwing out the same old, same old. While we continue to circle the drain.

Fuck it all.

Kanary

Nah, we just disagree with you. Like most people who aren't so extreme.

damned good thing there are many I can't read.

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Also good that harassment is frowned on.

:evilgrin:

...than to have one of your posts deleted for breaking the rules!

:hi:

because I depend upon your voice.

except in a court of law? No. But it happens and not taking every incident as a personal attack against one's own esteem would be a mature endeavour to undertake.

It's going to happen--we all judge everyone who passes our line of vision in the course of the day whether we're cognizant of it or not. Some of those who pass by are pleasing to us, some are not. We are all entitled to our own preferences. Some express their opinions when perhaps others wished they wouldn't, but you might as well take an ice pick and gouge out men's eyes if you can't abide them judging and opining on women in general. You can't take it personally.

Is it fair to drag a candidate's wife and children into the fray? No, but this country demands a parade of the candidate's family at least once during the campaign process for us all to assess their viability in representing them. Being a candidate/politician is a public endeavor/service and the family has to decide if they want the public spotlight focused on them. If not then the candidate should not run. But you can't legislate that men not judge the 'hawtness' of a female member of a candidate's family. It may be vulgar, but it's not illegal.

It's also legal to voice an opinion.

You said :But you can't legislate that men not judge the 'hotness' of a female member of a candidate's family.

I may have misunderstood, but it appeared your point was "You can't legislate what men think". And I'm saying I do not think that was anyone's point.

And, I'm nobody's son.

Just kidding!

I think it's not worth raging against on an online forum. I rage against outright insult or disrespect to women, but the "boyz will be boyz" stuff you have to ignore on a medium like this.

Just my opinion.... :)

YOU MANIACS. YOU BLEW IT UP. DAMN YOU. GOD DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL.

She'll wonder why this little sub-thread keeps going on and on.

It's was like dissing someone for liking food.

If all you want a women for is sex then yes judging them on sex appeal would be a good critera. Good luck with that though.

That being said I obviously dont judge politicans based on thier looks, however there is a large ammount of people in our society that do just that.

?

any stardard you want. People will do this, no matter what anyone thinks. The not OK part is acting like your opinion represents reality.
The true definition of a jerk (and probably the only real sin) is assuming that your opinion of anything is the truth.

Opinions and judgements are just that-and they have nothing to do with experience or reality.

:yourock:

Then, in my opinion, you're a jerk. See how that works? That was easy! And if you give me your opinion that you think I'm wrong, and present it as reality, then you're a double jerk.

Seriously though, before anyone alerts, if that is a definition of jerk, then I'll take the jerks any day. Feh on those who won't stand up for themselves or what they believe. Hell, I'll wear my label of Jerk proudly, thank you.

To the original poster: Cally, you're a wonderful Jerk. Keep up the good work! :yourock:

Please stop this violence.

I was about to say that I don't understand but it's more accurate to say that you don't understand.

reason:
It's a continuation of a flamewar