Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Objectification?

Greebo

Greebo

'scuse me, Mrs May, can I have my country back?
R.I.P.
Although objectification is frowned upon, what if an individual willingly and knowingly goes out of their way to objectify themself, using a medium (the internet) where you could be almost anything you chose?

If you choose to interract with that self-objectifying individual, does it logically follow that your only possible motivation is sex?

Inspired by a sporadic and halfhearted discussion earlier today.
 
If I understood the 'question' correctly: it's inversely proportional to the level of 'objectification' at the other end... :D If the babe is "for real"... :D :D :D

But we needn't have had internet invented for it: I mean, imagine a scenario where we both created a very different picture of ourselves and then... just before sex... wig comes off at his end, her denture is found in the bathroom, right next to a large cucumber he placed 'safely' behind a towel (as Tom Jones' ex-lay told everyone via TV :D ), then, her bra comes off and boobs significantly change shape and/or size and so on and on... We all do it: from Ancient Greece and its theatre ("persona" = mask used), onwards - we (try to) project a certain image of ourselves... Caveat emptor is there since there's culture and civilisation, at least! :D

I suppose it is safe to say that some are better than others at it but we all do it to a degree - those who do not are usually deemed "unhinged" or so... :D Whatever the level, from a very poor liar :D to a radically successful sociopath leading a (see the film entitled) corporation/bank/investment institution/etc. - this is inevitably a part of our experience.

If one experiences this:


...weeeeeelllll... BORING!!! :D What a disappointment! :D Suddenly, she feels "let down", there's nothing more to "discover"... :rolleyes:

Usually more-or-less decent, 'honest' men bitch about the myth of a woman's "emotional intelligence", i.e. capacity to choose a man, not seeing through his projected image. In fact, this world is full of such myths, on both sides of the dating-game. Incredible amounts of even marital relationship break-ups testify to it significantly! Just how much do we put into really getting to know each other, before we start projecting a future together or...??

The real problem, the way I see it, would be how to bring your kids up, teaching them what exactly? They must understand this part of our world, so one must make an effort in enabling your kids to understand it and see through it, the best you and they can, but on the other hand would you teach them to behave in such a manner and to what degree? Because our world rests on what we teach them...
 
Last edited:
The person who was the subject of the discussion is male, and seen only on one thread, on which he goes out of his way to remain a cypher - does that make it any better or worse?

I'd very much hope that he's more than his persona here, but what really did it was the other discusser's assumption (joking or not) that the only credible motivation to meet the man (or indeed other urbanites of the opposite sex) in person is sex. Er, no. Maybe I'm just nosy, but I'm far more interested in motivation than in a more obvious body part. Good enough copies of that are available on most high streets.

BTW gorski, you seem to assume that everybody has, or will have, children. I had hoped you knew better than that.
 
Greebo said:
The person who was the subject of the discussion is male, and seen only on one thread, on which he goes out of his way to remain a cypher - does that make it any better or worse?

I'd very much hope that he's more than his persona here, but what really did it was the other discusser's assumption (joking or not) that the only credible motivation to meet the man (or indeed other urbanites of the opposite sex) in person is sex. Er, no. Maybe I'm just nosy, but I'm far more interested in motivation than in a more obvious body part. Good enough copies of that are available on most high streets.

BTW gorski, you seem to assume that everybody has, or will have, children. I had hoped you knew better than that.
Click to expand...
Does he only post on that thread? I've wondered about that before. If so, maybe he posts under a different name elsewhere and just posts there incognito for getting his kicks/admiration.
 
Erm, no, I do not think that everybody has/will have kids, Greebo. :) Obviously, some can't, some won't, some might not be lucky enough... :(

Nevertheless, this world rests on that which we teach to our kids, the values that we attempt to inculcate into them.

Hence my question at the end of the post...

Clarification: while living in the UK (17 years!), since I have 'socialised' in Ex-YU (I got to the UK as a 29 year old) - I had serious difficulties in "reading" Brits. Indeed, when I got to the UK it was a culture shock! At many levels! One of them was the rather guarded manner at which Brits communicate with one another and especially "foreigners". But then, when I started dating in the UK, having divorced my first wife, my UK dates and acquaintances all complained regarding the very same thing! "Why do you think we are so unsuccessful in dating/relationships", they would tell me. Indeed, lots of marriages in the UK fail, loads of them within a year of marriage. And these are just the recorded relationships, hence we have the stats.

A question, given the above: why would you try to read that much from maybe several posts in one thread on a forum? It seems a fertile ground for serious "over-thinking", reading into the man and his character, temperament, values etc.

In addition: I would add the dating across cultures on top of that "little" problem. If you can imagine just how much has to be worked on, in order to avoid the millions of everyday 'misunderstandings', constantly misreading one another's intentions, reading into them what we were brought up with, whilst the 'other' had nothing to do with such thoughts/needs...

I wish I had any other "insight" into this, other than "Whatever is really worthwhile - costs a huge effort, lots of time, honesty, good will, willingness [and capacity] to dropping the walls"! And that is rare - anywhere in the world. But I would say, in particular in North-West of EU, and in particular, more so in predominantly Protestant countries (see Weber), the US included.

Having lived in Ex-YU, UK, Sweden, Luxembourg and now Italy, having spent quite a bit of time in Brazil, having dated women from half the world (kinda :D ), having married a Brazilian woman (second time round), having travelled a lot and lived quite a bit, even in "interesting times", these things seem "obvious" to me.

But I bet there will be completely opposite thoughts on the subject... :)
 
I think communication is really complicated and when it comes right down to it, it's as much about how you feel towards whoever you're communicating with as anything else. What I mean is, it's not simply about words.
 
Greebo said:
To clarify, this isn't about dating, or do you only ever meet people to fuck them?
Click to expand...
I think because it's a possibility then there's always a chance that at least one of the parties thinks there's something more to it. It's a shame, as it can end up fundamentally changing existing relationships, or even ending them.

If person A thinks they're meeting for dating/sex, and person B doesn't, then there's a subtext which B isn't aware of. And then when becoming aware, they might have to distance themselves to put the message across.
 
That's not quite what I said. I always choose to see people for what they present themselves as, and the person in question presents themself as an erect penis only. Given the context of any suggestion of meeting, I would also think his motivations are related to that erect penis too. That's all fine.

Your own motivations to meet are your own personal business, but what you realistically know about him is that he has a massive erect cock and wants to use it.

It follows that you would want to meet somebody based on what you know about them... no? :D
 
Greebo said:
To clarify, this isn't about dating, or do you only ever meet people to fuck them?
Click to expand...

Yeah I got that. You're saying that someone ascribed sexual motives to you engaging with this person because this person seemed to be portraying a sexual identity? But just because they were portraying this persona it doesn't follow that your motives are purely sexual?

If that's right, I suppose you are saying that despite them being all about a sexual angle, there's something else that you find interesting.
 
keithy said:
That's not quite what I said. I always choose to see people for what they present themselves as, <snip>
It follows that you would want to meet somebody based on what you know about them... no? :D
Click to expand...
We're not the same person - I prefer to meet people for what they I don't know about them, not what I do know. Maybe that's weird?
 
No, not weird at all, Greebo!

We meet people for all sorts of reasons and my posts were certainly not reducing us to sexual relationships, although that complicates things significantly... :D

We need friends, colleagues, acquaintances, just being neighbourly and so on. And why not just talking to strangers?

But my point is that in some countries this is a much more difficult business, I think...

Hence, I would also try to meet ASAP, so I get a much better idea...

No complications, if possible, just to meet and have a chat...

KISS strategy, I was taught, at a course... :D
 
perhaps to be subjectified is worse than being objectified, as there is a dialectal relationship between subject and object, the female object, which is the gaze of the male subject, as well as objectifying the female as an object of sex, also subjectifies the male as the one who objectifies the other, as kind of self objectifying, as well as a counter objectification by the oppressed subject (made into an object). this can be called subjectification, related to 'being subjected' a 'subject' of the crown, being 'subjected to' etc. we may look at the neo nazi, who in his subjectivity, hates the other, or an other, ie jews, blacks,muslims, catholics, lgbt, etc. however, by doing so, he is subjectified by the opposing gaze, the oppressed other's subjectivity, as a 'anti-semite, racist, bigot, homophobe. there are no anti-fascists without there first being a fascist to fight against. - pointyhead
 
The objectifying character sounds interesting from a psychological point of view, especially so if they also consider that anyone approaching them is only interested in sex, however, the meeting would be best conducted in some kind of assessment centre.
 
Greebo said:
We're not the same person - I prefer to meet people for what they I don't know about them, not what I do know. Maybe that's weird?
Click to expand...

Does what you already know about them influence whether you want to meet them?
 
There's more and more "equality" in "objectifying" on a - "traditionally" speaking - "objectified side", i.e. women nowadays "objectify" men in earnest etc. etc. etc.

On the other hand, a "grand request" for "equal numbers of CEO positions for women" is laughable by my standards! How many men ever get to be CEOs?

To my mind, the point would be to eliminate the conditions in which the phenomenon (seeing others as means to en end), as we know it, exists.

If we are speaking in terms of "Subject - Object" relationship: only an inter-subjective type of relationship means anything to me, today!

The shift is given some prominence by Habermas and co. (Hanna Arendt is barely mentioned when "credits" are written, at the end).

This "paradigm shift", however, seems to be fairly meaningless, if Capitalism is the only game in town, not to be challenged itself!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom