Objectification: An Analysis

By Shaheen the Anarcap


Everyone cringes when the loudmouth feminist cries and yell about the objectification of women by men in the media. They claim that men, and therefore society because “muh patriarchy”, objectify women to only care about their looks and not about who they truly are.

Like most positions leftist progressives take, it seems logical, but only on the surface.

 

Before we go any further, I’d like to elaborate on the two different ways feminists claim objectification happens.

The first way, is the one more believable, which is society has unrealistic beauty expectations for women, as shown in movies, video games and TV shows.

The second way, almost exclusive to the radical feminists, is the belief that all or almost all men only care about sex with women and see them as sex objects.

Objectification of Women in Entertainment

First, we will attack the first belief. Why are women portrayed so beautifully in entertainment? Why did we have Michelle Pfeiffer playing Catwoman and not someone that looks like Rosie O’Donnell?

via GIPHY

Why do people go crazy for Megan Fox, or Rosie Huntington-Whitely but not for Tess Holiday, the plus sized model? It’s not because society is brainwashing people.

It’s not because of the patriarchy, it’s because of demand.

Men are simply more attracted to, and therefore more likely to purchase products and/or services featuring attractive women. The reason for this attraction is completely biological; we will touch up on this a bit later.

Aside from a logical reason behind media’s portrayal of women, there is abundant hypocrisy. As I stated before, feminists will be angry about the unrealistic beauty expectations and bodies of models in entertainment. However, this exact thing happens to men.

Look at all the male leads in blockbuster movies: All handsome beefcakes. Brad Pitt, Chris Evans, Henry Cavill.

Not only are handsome men more prevalent in entertainment as well, but their unrealistic level is way over 9000.

Look at Batman. He’s a billionaire, owner and leader of a large company, as buff as they come, master of martial arts, handsome, confident, and to top it all off, drives a fucking Lamborghini. Are these realistic expectations?

Difference is, while feminists will get angry that some fictional character like Barbie has a figure which is too hard for their lazy asses to attain, I see someone like Batman as an inspiration. I know I’ll most likely never be at the level of success that he is at, but I enjoy watching him be a badass anyway.

To top it all off, all of the attractive women in entertainment willingly put themselves there. They understood that their beauty was in demand and therefore valuable, so they got dressed up, acted and modeled, and got a nice paycheck for it. (Oh, and female supermodels make much, MUCH more than their male counterparts.)

Objectification of Women as Sex Objects by Average Men

This slightly more crazy belief is usually held by the radical feminists, you know, the same ones that believe gender is a social construct and that for a woman to get married and have children is her being an oppressed slave. This is a little tricky to answer, it has a yes and no explanation.

The yes part has to do with the fact that men naturally are attracted to females. What men find attractive in women is femininity. Long hair, high pitched voice, delicateness, small waist, slimness (depends on the man, but a huge majority don’t want a land whale) and of course, boobs, all of which count towards her overall physical beauty. When a man wants to have a relationship with a woman, her physical beauty is a major factor, as it is an indication that she is fertile, which due to evolution, is what men find the most attractive, as it would increase the likelihood of the survival of their children.

So in this regard, yes, men do objectivize women, as it is their biological reproduction strategy and guess what? Women do it too. Most (real) men know that women are attracted to a man who is a confident leader, has social status and value, a high earning job, an overall interesting life and can provide her with security.

Why is that?

Same as it was for men.

In the past, it increased the chance of the survival of her and their children. This shows another part of feminist hypocrisy. Women objectify men and men objectify women. The only difference is how they objectify.

However, physical attractiveness is only one factor for men when it comes to choosing a partners. Men usually want women who are smart, kind, caring, fun to be around and have interesting hobbies, to name a few. Why do you think some guys love it when they see an adventurous girl who’s into cars and video games?

Despite this, feminists will point at the small minority of men who do view women as nothing but sex objects. And to that there is only one answer. So what? It’s not initiating force against anyone. A man might have come out of a few nasty divorces, been burnt by a few too many girlfriends or he just might be some basement dwelling nerd who can’t get with girls and he doesn’t want to anymore.

SO WHAT!?

There are lots of women that do this to men as well. Those who view men as nothing but utilities. Everyone knows at least one gold digger. How can anyone deny that gold diggers aren’t objectifying men as ATM machines, or as a central bank that prints off loads of cash for her to spend? At least if an objectifying man wants to have sex, he still provides something of value to the woman he plans on nailing, be it cash for a prostitute, dinner and good company for the girl his dating, or even the sex that he provides for the wild party girl. A gold digger on the other hand, leads the clueless man on, where he spends and spends and gets nothing in return.

What is it Really About?

It seems obvious that feminists don’t actually care about fairness. If so, they would have realized at least of the points made above. This is why we mentally sane people say that feminists hate men. This is the nature of their whole movement. One has to understand that feminism is nothing but gender Marxism. Since men are seen as more powerful in society (probably has something to do with hard work, not the evil patriarchy), they are the bourgeoisie. Feminism doesn’t want equal rights between men and women, it wants pure equality, and since men are the more “privileged” class, they constantly attack men in order to bring men down and bring women up, equalizing them in their opinion.

In the end, everyone is allowed to have their opinion. Whether you’re a man who thinks of women as nothing other than sex objects, a feminist who thinks men are raping women by just looking at them, or the gold digger who uses men (If you get nothing else of value from this article, just remember not to accommodate your local gold digger, as they provide nothing of value for you).

The problem only starts, when one group tries to sensor and ban, using the law, what they believe does harm, or objectifies, a certain group of people.


For the history you didn’t learn in school, check out Liberty Classroom:

Get the equivalent of a Ph.D. in libertarian thought and free-market economics online for just 24 cents a day….

One Reply to “Objectification: An Analysis”

Leave a Reply