<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Objectification, Part Two</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/</link>
	<description>~ sux only in the best of ways ~</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 05:25:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: peau</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18133</link>
		<dc:creator>peau</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:14:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18133</guid>
		<description>this was a really, really great two-parter.

thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this was a really, really great two-parter.</p>
<p>thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cris</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18108</link>
		<dc:creator>Cris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:49:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18108</guid>
		<description>&quot;In contrast, the third viewer seems to believe that the actor is just a thing which needs to be cleaned up by some invisible outside force in order to be personally pleasing to him &quot;

I have to disagree with this.  I think maybe the comment could have been worded better, but I don&#039;t think there&#039;s any &quot;obejectification&quot; going when someone says a certain look or style doesn&#039;t appeal to them, but might under different circumstances.

I don&#039;t like the unshaven &quot;scruffy&quot; look - but I think that Matt McConaughey is hot when he&#039;s clean shaven.  OTOH, maybe that does mean I&#039;m objectifying MM.  I dunno. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In contrast, the third viewer seems to believe that the actor is just a thing which needs to be cleaned up by some invisible outside force in order to be personally pleasing to him &#8221;</p>
<p>I have to disagree with this.  I think maybe the comment could have been worded better, but I don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s any &#8220;obejectification&#8221; going when someone says a certain look or style doesn&#8217;t appeal to them, but might under different circumstances.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t like the unshaven &#8220;scruffy&#8221; look &#8211; but I think that Matt McConaughey is hot when he&#8217;s clean shaven.  OTOH, maybe that does mean I&#8217;m objectifying MM.  I dunno. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aag</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18107</link>
		<dc:creator>aag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:45:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18107</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t agree with your analysis of why *some* feminists don&#039;t like porn. 

As I understand it their main criticisms are: a) the women involved are being coerced and b) men will treat their real-life partners the same way they see women being treated in porn.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t agree with your analysis of why *some* feminists don&#8217;t like porn. </p>
<p>As I understand it their main criticisms are: a) the women involved are being coerced and b) men will treat their real-life partners the same way they see women being treated in porn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MisterPrecedent</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18106</link>
		<dc:creator>MisterPrecedent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:30:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18106</guid>
		<description>He ISN&#039;T objectifying &#039;real people&#039;.  He&#039;s enjoying IMAGES of CHARACTERS on a screen that are created FOR that very purpose. Any performer (woman or man) who willingly makes a porn film and doesn&#039;t want the audience to enjoy it, to use it to masturbate, and/or fantasize about it/them would be an idiot. That&#039;s what they&#039;re being paid for - they&#039;re INVITING, BEGGING you to only notice the sexual parts of them.  Chances are that the image you see on the screen bears little to no resemblance to the &#039;real person&#039; portraying them anyway.

It&#039;s not any more wrong to masturbate to porn stars than it is to drool over Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie in a movie, or to cry while watching Meryl Streep, or to envy Maya Angelou, or to cheer for Lance Armstrong, or to laugh at Will Ferrell (except that he isn&#039;t that funny).  If you don&#039;t do it, they don&#039;t get paid or hired again, and can&#039;t feed their families, or do all the other things that they do when they are being &#039;real people&#039;.  

A lot of the people (especially so-called feminists, IMO) who oppose porn simply feel threatened by it because a) they feel like their own average bodies and skills don&#039;t measure up to the sexy ones on the screen; b) they&#039;re afraid that their partners won&#039;t want THEM in the same way, or c) they&#039;re afraid that their partners WILL want them in the same way.  That ISN&#039;T feminism - it&#039;s fear.  Real feminism is allowing a woman to have the freedom and power to pursue whatever SHE wants, even if you don&#039;t personally agree or approve.  If that means she makes porn, so be it - her body, her choice.  The power to turn a man on and get him off is a wonderful one to have, for a woman who wants it.  Those who don&#039;t can dress and behave accordingly.

If Xavier&#039;s expecting or demanding that his wife or daughters, or any other woman, behave like the images on the porn screen - OR trying to control what they do with their own bodies (when they are of legal age) - THEN he&#039;s a pig with a problem.  Sounds to me like he&#039;s just parroting SOMEONE ELSE who thinks he SHOULD feel guilty for watching porn - to ease SOMEONE ELSE&#039;S troubled mind.  My guess is that he came here knowing exactly what you (and we) would say, so you/we would write a good retort for him.  

Be sure to give credit where it&#039;s due, Xavier.  Using someone else&#039;s images with permission or acknowledgment isn&#039;t wrong.  Using someone else&#039;s words without it IS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He ISN&#8217;T objectifying &#8216;real people&#8217;.  He&#8217;s enjoying IMAGES of CHARACTERS on a screen that are created FOR that very purpose. Any performer (woman or man) who willingly makes a porn film and doesn&#8217;t want the audience to enjoy it, to use it to masturbate, and/or fantasize about it/them would be an idiot. That&#8217;s what they&#8217;re being paid for &#8211; they&#8217;re INVITING, BEGGING you to only notice the sexual parts of them.  Chances are that the image you see on the screen bears little to no resemblance to the &#8216;real person&#8217; portraying them anyway.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not any more wrong to masturbate to porn stars than it is to drool over Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie in a movie, or to cry while watching Meryl Streep, or to envy Maya Angelou, or to cheer for Lance Armstrong, or to laugh at Will Ferrell (except that he isn&#8217;t that funny).  If you don&#8217;t do it, they don&#8217;t get paid or hired again, and can&#8217;t feed their families, or do all the other things that they do when they are being &#8216;real people&#8217;.  </p>
<p>A lot of the people (especially so-called feminists, IMO) who oppose porn simply feel threatened by it because a) they feel like their own average bodies and skills don&#8217;t measure up to the sexy ones on the screen; b) they&#8217;re afraid that their partners won&#8217;t want THEM in the same way, or c) they&#8217;re afraid that their partners WILL want them in the same way.  That ISN&#8217;T feminism &#8211; it&#8217;s fear.  Real feminism is allowing a woman to have the freedom and power to pursue whatever SHE wants, even if you don&#8217;t personally agree or approve.  If that means she makes porn, so be it &#8211; her body, her choice.  The power to turn a man on and get him off is a wonderful one to have, for a woman who wants it.  Those who don&#8217;t can dress and behave accordingly.</p>
<p>If Xavier&#8217;s expecting or demanding that his wife or daughters, or any other woman, behave like the images on the porn screen &#8211; OR trying to control what they do with their own bodies (when they are of legal age) &#8211; THEN he&#8217;s a pig with a problem.  Sounds to me like he&#8217;s just parroting SOMEONE ELSE who thinks he SHOULD feel guilty for watching porn &#8211; to ease SOMEONE ELSE&#8217;S troubled mind.  My guess is that he came here knowing exactly what you (and we) would say, so you/we would write a good retort for him.  </p>
<p>Be sure to give credit where it&#8217;s due, Xavier.  Using someone else&#8217;s images with permission or acknowledgment isn&#8217;t wrong.  Using someone else&#8217;s words without it IS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aag</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18101</link>
		<dc:creator>aag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18101</guid>
		<description>&quot;Rather saucy&quot;

Ha!

You made my day, Damian.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Rather saucy&#8221;</p>
<p>Ha!</p>
<p>You made my day, Damian.  :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Damian</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18100</link>
		<dc:creator>Damian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18100</guid>
		<description>I find it interesting, and a little sad, that Xavier feels all this guilt about the pornograpy that he views, but still continues to view it. If his feelings were really that strong, surely his first instinct would be to stop viewing it. Instead he views it, then comes here, to a rather saucy blog, to talk about viewing it. 

I wonder if the discussion is part of the overall erotic experience for him - as if discussing the pornography after viewing it is somehow extending the high. 

It also reminds me of those &quot;family values&quot; politicians who are later found out to be engaging in the activities that they publicly condemn. 

It&#039;s all a little sad and hypocritical, to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find it interesting, and a little sad, that Xavier feels all this guilt about the pornograpy that he views, but still continues to view it. If his feelings were really that strong, surely his first instinct would be to stop viewing it. Instead he views it, then comes here, to a rather saucy blog, to talk about viewing it. </p>
<p>I wonder if the discussion is part of the overall erotic experience for him &#8211; as if discussing the pornography after viewing it is somehow extending the high. </p>
<p>It also reminds me of those &#8220;family values&#8221; politicians who are later found out to be engaging in the activities that they publicly condemn. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s all a little sad and hypocritical, to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lilly2</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18099</link>
		<dc:creator>Lilly2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18099</guid>
		<description>&quot;It would only be a problem if the entire relationship was based on some type of objectifying construct.&quot;
And even then there are pleased, consenting couples living in situations where this is a basis for a relationship (See 24 hour BDSM lifestylers, Hugh Hefner).

The biggest thing here (and you hit it on the head) is consent!  There is pornography being made with dubious or nonexistent consent; upskirt, girls gone drunk, other illegal porn, but those categories are definitely avoidable.

I think what Xavier is having trouble with, what is causing him guilt, is that he is conceptualizing women as essentially non-sexual creatures who would find being viewed sexually problematic. I think we can (and will) fairly effectively refute this notion that women are non-sexual beings.  He is also tying porn performers&#039; experience up with his wife and daughter&#039;s experience which is also a fine source of guilt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;It would only be a problem if the entire relationship was based on some type of objectifying construct.&#8221;<br />
And even then there are pleased, consenting couples living in situations where this is a basis for a relationship (See 24 hour BDSM lifestylers, Hugh Hefner).</p>
<p>The biggest thing here (and you hit it on the head) is consent!  There is pornography being made with dubious or nonexistent consent; upskirt, girls gone drunk, other illegal porn, but those categories are definitely avoidable.</p>
<p>I think what Xavier is having trouble with, what is causing him guilt, is that he is conceptualizing women as essentially non-sexual creatures who would find being viewed sexually problematic. I think we can (and will) fairly effectively refute this notion that women are non-sexual beings.  He is also tying porn performers&#8217; experience up with his wife and daughter&#8217;s experience which is also a fine source of guilt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lilblackdress</title>
		<link>http://aagblog.com/2009/07/08/objectification-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-18098</link>
		<dc:creator>lilblackdress</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:19:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aagblog.com/?p=4345#comment-18098</guid>
		<description>I used to have a lot of hang-ups about porn and sex. I think part of that is cultural background and learned shame. It&#039;s taken me years to &quot;get over&quot; it, reading about sexuality and gender, and going through periods of experimentation and evolution.

I&#039;m in my earlyish thirties and I&#039;m so glad that I&#039;ve taken a journey of self-discovery about my own sexuality and gender issues. It&#039;s made me more confident, a stronger person. I&#039;m more aware of the situations where I find objectification of myself acceptable versus situations where it is unacceptable, and, in turn, the situations when it is ok for me to objectify others.

I know that my lover enjoys it when I use him for my own satisfaction. He has told this to me *multiple* times. I objectify him, to use him as my sexual plaything, and he enjoys &quot;being of service&quot;. However, it&#039;s just one small part of our relationship, part of the variety of encounters we have (physical, emotional, intellectual) that keeps our relationship pleasurable, stimulating, satisfying, and both of us tremendously happy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to have a lot of hang-ups about porn and sex. I think part of that is cultural background and learned shame. It&#8217;s taken me years to &#8220;get over&#8221; it, reading about sexuality and gender, and going through periods of experimentation and evolution.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m in my earlyish thirties and I&#8217;m so glad that I&#8217;ve taken a journey of self-discovery about my own sexuality and gender issues. It&#8217;s made me more confident, a stronger person. I&#8217;m more aware of the situations where I find objectification of myself acceptable versus situations where it is unacceptable, and, in turn, the situations when it is ok for me to objectify others.</p>
<p>I know that my lover enjoys it when I use him for my own satisfaction. He has told this to me *multiple* times. I objectify him, to use him as my sexual plaything, and he enjoys &#8220;being of service&#8221;. However, it&#8217;s just one small part of our relationship, part of the variety of encounters we have (physical, emotional, intellectual) that keeps our relationship pleasurable, stimulating, satisfying, and both of us tremendously happy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
