Am I Being A Prude, Or Overly Sensitive?

[Nam]

I come from a different viewpoint. That woman on there isn't real. I don't even need to see it. She was sculpted on a computer screen. When I was in college, I was part of a human drawing class. There were men, women, some young, some old, one was pregnant, one was overweight. When an artist can see the beauty in the organic forms of a real body, that's when the magic appears. That's what makes nudes in art gorgeous. Now, I agree that unless the artist is extremely good at realism, it's their interpretation...and some might stretch that to the photoshopper that did the magazine cover, but until everyone realizes that it's fake, they're being gullible to the propaganda. We like real cheese, we like real art, we like real wood, we like REAL. Why don't we like real women and men?

 

[Hope to Encourage]

I don't think your being a prude. I am overjoyed to hear that there are still people who hold standards in our world. Honesty and modesty are both very important to me :)

 

[scout86]

Interesting topic!

I haven't seen the magazine and probably won't see the magazine. Although I have an interest in a lot of sports, "Sports Illustrated" doesn't seem like a very serious source of good information. Mostly because they seem more interested in soft core porn.

and where it was perfectly acceptable to have a calendar hanging on the wall of nude ladies,

THAT, is something I don't think is EVER perfectly acceptable. If people have an interest in pornography, and want to pursue it in private, that's their deal, Displaying that kind of thing in a public place is distasteful and inappropriate. I guess I feel the same way about prostitution. Not something I could handle as a career, but, if freely chosen, it's a choice.

What bothers me is that behind all this seems to be the assumption that what makes people "special" is the way they look on the outside. And it's sad that so often that's the way people are judged.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

You may feel sad, but please don't hold everyone to your personal standards.

Well this is a bunch of BS!

Example.

I like rape porn. I REALLY like rape porn when it involves an 18 year old woman who looks like she's 15 AND she gets the crap beaten out of her in the process.

Its all perfectly legal. She's in it for the money. He's in it for the money. They're all in it for the money. Nobody ACTUALLY got hurt because it was all consensual.

Now are you going to sit here and argue with me that violent rape porn doesn't affect society in that it will inevitably think that this sort of behavior is ok? Please.

We can go rounds on this "don't hold everyone to your standards" crap.

PS I don't actually like rape porn. I said that as an example.

 

[garden]

Objectification, mysogyny, and dehumanization are symptoms of the sickness in our society. It's an issue that stems from our value system. What if some things simply could not be made into commodities? What if humans were not seen as commodities, and that was a foundational value in the structure of our societies? If no price tag could be placed on the human form, and it was never allowed to be bought, sold, or used as a commodity, would objectification of the human form even exist? Would human trafficking, prostitution, or objectification of the female form even exist if our system of values held no place for it? Humans are notorious for objectifying the female form, so most people can not fathom a paradaigm where it does not exist.

It's not the models fault that she is a commodity. Humans decide what is or is not a commodity, and everything falls into place accordingly...look around...look at history. It's the same as it ever was....

 

[Friday]

I disagree completely.

I think people are beautiful, and sex is human.

It doesn't dehumanize women, or men, to associate them with sex. It dehumanizes them when the assumption is that either there isn't choice involved, or worse, shouldn't be. It dehumanizes people to take away the freedom of choice.

Whether it's art, sex-work, or house-work... Abuse isn't inherantly part of any of them. Abuse comes into play when it's forced upon someone, or someone else believes that's all they're good for. Then it's abuse, or rape, or objectification. Not avocation.

 

[scout86]

Standing ovation for @FridayJones !

Question for the group:
"When does a person become a commodity?"
When they are bought and sold?
When they are bought and sold against their will?
When other people THINK they are being bought and sold against their will?
Something else?

 

[RussH]

I completely disagree. Abusers don't need "permission" to victimize women. If their excuse is that looking at pictures of near-naked women caused them to abuse, they are lying.

When society gives its approval to sexual objectification through publishing and purchasing this kind of material, then it is telling the perverts that it is ok to treat others as sexual objects and not as real humans.

I come from a different viewpoint. That woman on there isn't real.

I saw an interview with her, and other than some very minor touch ups she is very real.

I think people are beautiful, and sex is human.

I agree, but when it is used to sell products such as sports illustrated magazine, then it cheapens the beauty of the human form and the beauty of the act of sex.

 

[Ed Norton]

I believe that rapists and sexual abusers will continue to exist regardless whether or not pornographic images (Sports Illustrated is soft core) are around or not. I'd like to know whether or not there's an actual statistical correalation between such magazines and rape, sexual misconduct etc. I really don't know. If yes, I'd like to know how the data was compiled, as I know two hardcore statisticians, who can pick apart these types of analyses.

I know many guys who can look at sports illustrated and not go out and commit rape.

As an aside a famous porn star, Cytherea, was recently ganged raped in her home, it was a horrible and violent attack at gunpoint. The perpetrators didn't know who she was, she was a random target.

I've seen her films on numerous occasions, and she clearly enjoys her work. Ironically, the feminists
are silent about what happened.

I see a huge difference between the two. As such I also see a huge difference between looking at Sports illustrated and enjoying the women, and going out and committing violence.

In this commercial world, both men and women are 'objectified' because it sells. I don't believe that I'm in anyway causing women to be raped or abused just because I enjoy the magazine. There are no excuses for violence or rape, whatsoever.

 

[somerandomguy]

I'd like to know whether or not there's an actual statistical correalation between such magazines and rape, sexual misconduct etc. I really don't know. If yes, I'd like to know how the data was compiled, as I know two hardcore statisticians, who can pick apart these types of analyses.

There are plenty of scholarly articles about this and almost all of them agree that greater access to pornography does not lead to more rape. In fact, if anything the opposite is implied. Of course, all social science studies should be taken with a grain of salt as peoples' feelings and actions are not necessarily scientifically quantifiable.

 

[somerandomguy]

Its all perfectly legal. She's in it for the money. He's in it for the money. They're all in it for the money. Nobody ACTUALLY got hurt because it was all consensual.

Now are you going to sit here and argue with me that violent rape porn doesn't affect society in that it will inevitably think that this sort of behavior is ok? Please.

I would argue exactly that. Best case scenario: people who are interested in rape porn can find it, and people who aren't interested in it aren't subjected to it, and everyone involved in making it is perfectly willing and handsomely paid. And actually, all the rape porn that I personally know how to find IS this way. It is, indeed, all perfectly legal at this time in the USA.

I'm not naive. I'm sure there is non-consensual rape porn out there someplace on the internet. It is already illegal. So my question is, are you in favor of criminalizing legal porn because there happens to be illegal porn for horrible people out there?

 

[garden]

@scout86
A commodity is anything that can be bought or sold, or that holds a value that can be exchanged for something else of value. For example, if I want to sell my own image in the form of photographs for a publication I may do that, my image is the commodity. If I want to sell my vagina, then my vagina is the commodity, and so forth. These things can be bought and sold, and that's what makes them a commodity, free will has nothing to do with it. It's a commodity whether I agree to sell or not, it can be sold without my consent, and it's still a commodity. Whether it's right or wrong is another issue entirely.