It is objectification whenever a women is depicted in a manner focusing on her physical attractiveness. Feminists consider this unfair and sexist because they don't ( or refuse to ) understand the basic principles of sexual reproduction.
Woha, my line breaks vanished. I'll try that again:
Let's establish some biologic facts. All life's primary purpose is to reproduce. All our emotions and desires are optimized for our survival and reproduction. Men and women reproduce very differently. A women is only fertile for a relatively short period of time, and invests far more in the offspring, biologically speaking. Men are fertile their entire life, and invest very little. Sperm is a lot cheaper than eggs. Women need to be more selective with whom they copulate with, men don't, so the genders behave very differently.
This imbalance of sexual value is the reason why sexual reproduction is so effective. It wouldn't work if men and women behaved the same way! Now we've established that men and women reproduce with vastly different parameters, and can say that a difference in behavior when it comes to copulation is to be expected.
We observe that women tend to be more attracted to personality. Humor, social skills, leadership qualities, social status, popularity etc. Men are attracted to features that correlate with fertility. What makes a woman sexy is very different from what makes a man sexy. Feminism contends that this difference is the result of societal constructs, and needs to be fixed by injecting their ideology into our culture, when in fact it's the result of being a sexually reproducing species, and can't be "fixed" by altering peoples attitudes.
This is why they cling to the outdated and thoroughly disproved idea of tabula rasa, the blank slate, under which everything can be "fixed". I get the impression that to be attracted to a woman's body alone, IE wanting to sleep with a woman just because she looks good, is considered wrong and objectification. By extension behaving as a heterosexual male is wrong, and needs to be "fixed".
Let's establish some biologic facts.
All life's primary purpose is to reproduce. All our emotions and desires are optimized for our survival and reproduction.
Men and women reproduce very differently. A women is only fertile for a relatively short period of time, and invests far more in the offspring, biologically speaking.
Men are fertile their entire life, and invest very little. Sperm is a lot cheaper than eggs.
Women need to be more selective with whom they copulate with, men don't, so the genders behave very differently. This imbalance of sexual value is the reason why sexual reproduction is so effective. It wouldn't work if men and women behaved the same way!
Now we've established that men and women reproduce with vastly different parameters, and can say that a difference in behavior when it comes to copulation is to be expected.
We observe that women tend to be more attracted to personality. Humor, social skills, leadership qualities, social status, popularity etc.
Men are attracted to features that correlate with fertility. What makes a woman sexy is very different from what makes a man sexy. Feminism contends that this difference is the result of societal constructs, and needs to be fixed by injecting their ideology into our culture, when in fact it's the result of being a sexually reproducing species, and can't be "fixed" by altering peoples attitudes. This is why they cling to the outdated and thoroughly disproved idea of tabula rasa, the blank slate, under which everything can be "fixed".
I get the impression that to be attracted to a woman's body alone, IE wanting to sleep with a woman just because she looks good, is considered wrong and objectification. By extension behaving as a heterosexual male is wrong, and needs to be "fixed".
Slashdot Mirror
It is objectification whenever a women is depicted in a manner focusing on her physical attractiveness. Feminists consider this unfair and sexist because they don't ( or refuse to ) understand the basic principles of sexual reproduction.
Woha, my line breaks vanished. I'll try that again:
Let's establish some biologic facts. All life's primary purpose is to reproduce. All our emotions and desires are optimized for our survival and reproduction. Men and women reproduce very differently. A women is only fertile for a relatively short period of time, and invests far more in the offspring, biologically speaking. Men are fertile their entire life, and invest very little. Sperm is a lot cheaper than eggs. Women need to be more selective with whom they copulate with, men don't, so the genders behave very differently.
This imbalance of sexual value is the reason why sexual reproduction is so effective. It wouldn't work if men and women behaved the same way! Now we've established that men and women reproduce with vastly different parameters, and can say that a difference in behavior when it comes to copulation is to be expected.
We observe that women tend to be more attracted to personality. Humor, social skills, leadership qualities, social status, popularity etc. Men are attracted to features that correlate with fertility. What makes a woman sexy is very different from what makes a man sexy. Feminism contends that this difference is the result of societal constructs, and needs to be fixed by injecting their ideology into our culture, when in fact it's the result of being a sexually reproducing species, and can't be "fixed" by altering peoples attitudes.
This is why they cling to the outdated and thoroughly disproved idea of tabula rasa, the blank slate, under which everything can be "fixed". I get the impression that to be attracted to a woman's body alone, IE wanting to sleep with a woman just because she looks good, is considered wrong and objectification. By extension behaving as a heterosexual male is wrong, and needs to be "fixed".
Let's establish some biologic facts. All life's primary purpose is to reproduce. All our emotions and desires are optimized for our survival and reproduction. Men and women reproduce very differently. A women is only fertile for a relatively short period of time, and invests far more in the offspring, biologically speaking. Men are fertile their entire life, and invest very little. Sperm is a lot cheaper than eggs. Women need to be more selective with whom they copulate with, men don't, so the genders behave very differently. This imbalance of sexual value is the reason why sexual reproduction is so effective. It wouldn't work if men and women behaved the same way! Now we've established that men and women reproduce with vastly different parameters, and can say that a difference in behavior when it comes to copulation is to be expected. We observe that women tend to be more attracted to personality. Humor, social skills, leadership qualities, social status, popularity etc. Men are attracted to features that correlate with fertility. What makes a woman sexy is very different from what makes a man sexy. Feminism contends that this difference is the result of societal constructs, and needs to be fixed by injecting their ideology into our culture, when in fact it's the result of being a sexually reproducing species, and can't be "fixed" by altering peoples attitudes. This is why they cling to the outdated and thoroughly disproved idea of tabula rasa, the blank slate, under which everything can be "fixed". I get the impression that to be attracted to a woman's body alone, IE wanting to sleep with a woman just because she looks good, is considered wrong and objectification. By extension behaving as a heterosexual male is wrong, and needs to be "fixed".