Conrod Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 When have Katie Price and Kelly Brook ever whinged about being portrayed as a 'sex object'? But you can't extrapolate from women who choose that career path and extend it to every other woman. False reasoning, sorry.My bold. Attractive women tend not to whinge about being attractive - other women do that for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Whoa its not a stance, to be honest I dont care one way or another,Im just adding my two pennorth,show me its wrong and explain why and I may have second thoughts but it seems as though even in your own sex you are in the minority. I think that a lot of women (and men) confuse the objection to female sexual objectification with a denial that heterosexual find the female form sexually desirable. This is a complete fallacy. We do not wish to deny men sexual pleasure nor create some kind of environment where sexual banter and flirting are not permitted. This kind of image (a semi-naked woman with bunny ears) is inappropriate in any kind of work enivironment (apart from say a Playboy club:roll:). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think that a lot of women (and men) confuse the objection to female sexual objectification with a denial that heterosexual find the female form sexually desirable. This is a complete fallacy. We do not wish to deny men sexual pleasure nor create some kind of environment where sexual banter and flirting are not permitted. This kind of image (a semi-naked woman with bunny ears) is inappropriate in any kind of work enivironment (apart from say a Playboy club:roll:). Its an advertisement,not an object for sexual gratification, I doubt the majority of men would look twice at it and the majority of women would make a joke of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think that a lot of women (and men) confuse the objection to female sexual objectification with a denial that heterosexual find the female form sexually desirable. This is a complete fallacy. We do not wish to deny men sexual pleasure nor create some kind of environment where sexual banter and flirting are not permitted. This kind of image (a semi-naked woman with bunny ears) is inappropriate in any kind of work enivironment (apart from say a Playboy club:roll:). thats ok then as we are talking about a pub not a work environment:D How do you know its a woman? Is it better if its a cartoon of a transexual in bunny ears? What defines a woman anyway? This cartoon has no sexual organs and cannot give birth etc it is surely asexual therefore how can it be anything to do with sexism? Anyhoo it seems that most of the population isn't oversensitive, and I am not a masculine freak with lezzer friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 thats ok then as we are talking about a pub not a work environment:D No, not at all as it's a bar within the House of Commons, so it could be regarded as an extension of the work environment. Besides, it is also work environment for the people who work in the bar. Unless it's some kind of sex joint or retro place when such things were never challenged, then they need to be careful about the images that they use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 No, not at all as it's a bar within the House of Commons, so it could be regarded as an extension of the work environment. Besides, it is also work environment for the people who work in the bar. Unless it's some kind of sex joint or retro place when such things were never challenged, then they need to be careful about the images that they use. if it serves beer then it isn't a place of work.....unless its work for a beer taster! How would you feel if it was just a pub rather than a (cough) place of work (cough) pub. Does it no longer objectify women then? just read the end. Most advertisements use sex in some form. Would you ban all lingerie adverts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Its an advertisement,not an object for sexual gratification, I doubt the majority of men would look twice at it and the majority of women would make a joke of it. So adverts can't objectify women then? You might not find it offensive, lots of men and women may not find it so but some will and do, which is why it was removed. Will it be detrimental to the drinking and socialising experience there? I doubt it. It's been dealt with and was done so swiftly which is the only positive thing to come out of this affair. The ensuing backlash has been quite an eye opener for me as well as a stark reminder abhout how much misogyny there still is out there and how it never, ever pays to be complacent about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 So adverts can't objectify women then? You might not find it offensive, lots of men and women may not find it so but some will and do, which is why it was removed. Will it be detrimental to the drinking and socialising experience there? I doubt it. It's been dealt with and was done so swiftly which is the only positive thing to come out of this affair. The ensuing backlash has been quite an eye opener for me as well as a stark reminder abhout how much misogyny there still is out there and how it never, ever pays to be complacent about this. I reckon the top totty market will have gone up quite a bit! What has come out of this for me is that as is often the case the minority rules-that definitely deserves a:roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 if it serves beer then it isn't a place of work.....unless its work for a beer taster! How would you feel if it was just a pub rather than a (cough) place of work (cough) pub. Does it no longer objectify women then? just read the end. Most advertisements use sex in some form. Would you ban all lingerie adverts? I thought that I said, unless it's a sex joint, it's inappropriate. As for the second question, I can't believe you have asked that. It's all about context and of course I would not ban lingerie adverts. This is such an absurd conclusion to make based on my argument thus far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 I thought that I said, unless it's a sex joint, it's inappropriate. As for the second question, I can't believe you have asked that. It's all about context and of course I would not ban lingerie adverts. This is such an absurd conclusion to make based on my argument thus far. sex sells, lingerie was just the most obvious one, where is your line though? What about ads for singles nights, what about bars? My problem is that this woman and people like you are doing and saying things effectively in my name that I totally and completely disagree with. It angers me, and when you take into account that you do seem to be in the minority that makes it worse! I originally asked because I thought maybe I was in the monority along with all my friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.