YLYL Thread Sexism Discussion (split from Gay Teen thread).

[photon]

Ok I split this into its own thread, if only because the other thread really doesn't deserve the derailing.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by photon

Ok I split this into its own thread, if only because the other thread really doesn't deserve the derailing.

So is flameswin the moderator?

[photon]

[FanIn80]

Looking at a woman posing half-naked in a bikini equates to objectification? They're posing. Half-naked. In a bikini. Should we be talking about their ability to play chess, instead?

If it was a thread full of everyday pictures of women going about their days, minding their own business, dressed in their normal, everyday attire, and guys were all commenting on their looks and talking about their asses, then absolutely... that kind of behaviour should be throatpunched asap. Go to town on that sh*t, and I'd back you up 100%.

However, for the most part, we're talking about a thread full of pictures of women posing in next-to-nothing, with the specific intent of being looked at in a sexualized manner. My point isn't that it's not objectification. Of course it's objectification. It's meant to be objectification. That's the point of those kinds of pictures.

Discussing misogyny is fine. Actual misogyny should be uncovered and beaten over the head with a frozen trout. I just think sometimes we also need a thread for discussing the word context.

[Tinordi]

That thread should be closed imo.

Many pictures are almost pornographic and it provides a release valve for the uglier male animal spirits.

It's sexist to have a dedicated little corner to objectify and discuss the objectification of women.

[pylon]

Is there some questionable comments in that thread? Yes.

Should the thread be shut down? No.

Once you start saying it is bad to look at pictures of beautiful women, because they are just that, you have pretty much crossed a line you can't come back from. There is nothing wrong whatsoever about pictures of beautiful women, or chiseled sculptured men being looked at if the photographs are consensual by all parties. It is the human condition to want to look at the best physical specimens of our species. The only people that truly could have a problem with it, are those that envy people with physical gifts, they do not have. Sorry, but that's life. I wish I looked like Channing Tatum, but unfortunately I was blessed closer to the Billy Mays side of the scale. But that doesn't mean I don't want the women I date from looking at a shirtless picture of a chiseled Brad Pitt.

What is a better option? Post pictures of Miyam Bialiks math test scores? Melissa Mcarthy's needle point? I am sure they are both beautiful people on the inside. But pretty much any red blooded male, does not fantasize about those women, nor does a woman fantasize about Jonah Hill or Ernest Borgnine.

There is nothing wrong about admiring the human form. And most of us choose to admire people who have the ideal version of it. I am all for being politically correct to a certain degree, but shutting down that thread is pushing it way to far. Maybe curb the comments, and get rid of the borderline pictures. But anything beyond that, is going into some pretty extremist Disney'esque territory.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by pylon

There is nothing wrong about admiring the human form. And most of us choose to admire people who have the ideal version of it. I am all for being politically correct to a certain degree, but shutting down that thread is pushing it way to far. Maybe curb the comments, and get rid of the borderline pictures. But anything beyond that, is going into some pretty extremist Disney'esque territory.

I would agree with the bold. I think the changes to that thread that would benefit it (aside from closing it down) would be to watch the comments, stop the posting of ridiculous jerk-off material (hey look! A pair of bouncy breasts!) and have it be more open to whomever someone finds attractive.

A simple "You Love You Lose" thread could be fun. But it's not much fun if it excludes an entire sex and doesn't allow for people to post pictures of whomever they find attractive (even if those people aren't wearing make-up or aren't in a bikini).

I've seen threads like that which work, but they only work if they're inclusive and light hearted. It may not change the most common types of images posted or the main contributors, but it certainly wouldn't hurt it.

Originally Posted by FanIn80

If it was a thread full of everyday pictures of women going about their days, minding their own business, dressed in their normal, everyday attire, and guys were all commenting on their looks and talking about their asses, then absolutely... that kind of behaviour should be throatpunched asap. Go to town on that sh*t, and I'd back you up 100%

What about two girls just standing in a pool, would it be appropriate to make a comment alluding to their affinity for money and shopping?

I think the thing is, that everything you just described could probably be tossed out no matter what picture is posted, whether they be in business attire or a bikini. If that behaviour is bad enough for a throat punch when a woman is in normal attire minding her business, it's probably not best thing to be doing at any time.

[driveway]

I think having the thread on this site presents an unwelcoming environment for women, and particularly young women who are just starting out as hockey fans.

I wish it was shut down.

I also have looked at it and posted in it, so, I guess I'm a big fat hypocrite.

[Thor]

I'd love to get into the science behind this for us guys and how we view and desire women. I've read fascinating things about the waist/hip ratio, the evolutionary pull for mate selection. I reached out to a neuroscientist friend of mine whom I hope has some thoughts on the issue if there is anything recent in the scientific literature.

My feeling has been for a long time that we play a game of what is ok and what isn't when it comes to sexuality, I've long been a really liberal man in how I treat it, its fun, its arousing and I love to see beautiful women, and I'm torn because I don't want women to feel bad seeing a thread like that on this forum nor that it should make them feel that this is adding to Misogyny.

We can't deny this very primal evolutionary pull towards visual stimuli, and I always feel that trying to deny our primal nature is bad, but in modern society does that mean we just do our best to keep it out of public forums and hide in our computer room staring at boobies?

Just because I look at a bikini clad woman, or some hot cosplay, does not mean I think lesser of a woman in any way, its objectifying, no doubt there but that pulls at men´s very primal mating instinct, or is it a lot to do with environment as well.

[Thor]

As an example of MRI tracking sexual stimuli, men react much more to visual than women, which has been a long standing idea in this field.

http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/...ll/nn1208.html

Men are generally more interested in and responsive to visual sexually arousing stimuli than are women. Here we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the amygdala and hypothalamus are more strongly activated in men than in women when viewing identical sexual stimuli. This was true even when women reported greater arousal. Sex differences were specific to the sexual nature of the stimuli, were restricted primarily to limbic regions, and were larger in the left amygdala than the right amygdala. Men and women showed similar activation patterns across multiple brain regions, including ventral striatal regions involved in reward. Our findings indicate that the amygdala mediates sex differences in responsiveness to appetitive and biologically salient stimuli; the human amygdala may also mediate the reportedly greater role of visual stimuli in male sexual behavior, paralleling prior animal findings.

Sexual fantasies and the differences between men and women:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...9#.VAWeGvl_seE

The nature and frequency of men's and women's sexual fantasies were investigated by surveying 307 students (182 females, 125 males) at a California state university or junior college via a paper‐and‐pencil questionnaire. The questionnnaire was inspired by modern evolutionary theory and was designed to investigate sex differences in sexual fantasies. Substantial sex differences were found in the salience of visual images, touching, context, personalization, emotion, partner variety, partner response, fantasizer response, and inward versus outward focus. These data, the scientific literature on sexual fantasy, the historically‐stable contrasts between male‐oriented pornography and female‐oriented romance novels, the ethnographic record of human sexuality, and the ineluctable implications of an evolutionary perspective on our species, taken together, imply the existence of profound sex differences in sexual psychologies.

Also this article was interesting, based on an original book discussing what internet searches teaches us about male sexuality, recommend both readings. The original book is linked in this article below (A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the World’s Largest Experiment Reveals About Human Desire)

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...-sexual-desire

Through millions of anonymous Internet searches, men have repeatedly divulged some rather curious sexual interests. Exploring at length this most bountiful subject of human sexual desire, I’ve already discussed several of them. In this particular post, I’d like to focus on certain erotic predilections that most people would agree slip into the realm of the forbidden. And rightly or wrongly, such preferences are likely to be seen not as erotic but pornographic.
As in most things, there’s clearly a continuum operating here. Males’ most common X-rated computer searches are for youth. And although this preference may be a bit disconcerting, it hardly warrants being seen as perverted (as I’ve sought to explain earlier). Nor does men’s secondary, but substantial, interest in fifty-year-old women (which I’ve also attempted, rationally, to account for). But as we move farther out on the continuum — as we did in my last post, discussing heterosexual men’s attraction to transsexual porn — more eyes can be expected to roll ... or eyebrows to rise.

[rubecube]

I guess the one reason I would question the existence of the thread is that the internet has no shortage of places where you can look at and objectify women as much as you want. Is it really necessary to have that type of thread on a forum that strives to be inclusive to people of all walks of life?

[Thor]

Yeah rube, agreed, if it makes our female members uncomfortable I am all for removing it.

[Hockey_Ninja]

I'm kinda shocked the women of CP haven't made a male version of that thread yet.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I guess the one reason I would question the existence of the thread is that the internet has no shortage of places where you can look at and objectify women as much as you want. Is it really necessary to have that type of thread on a forum that strives to be inclusive to people of all walks of life?

Wanted to ask you about objectification. If this is hard wired to be visually stimulated as males, do you suggest we try to oppress it, or do you perhaps disagree that we are not creatures of our evolution but rather that this is a learned or environmental thing?

I see 2 distinct definitions here, one being that there are men who see women as objects, a misogynistic view. The other that objectification is the evolutionary trigger for mating, or mate selection.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

I'm kinda shocked the women of CP haven't made a male version of that thread yet.

Probably because they know it would be full of comments from the same guys shouting them down in the YLYL thread.

I don't have a problem with the thread in question existing, but it's not my cup of tea. I've checked it out a few times, including just now, and it's full of a single body type, all barely clothed. I'd actually like to contribute to a celebration of women, but I'm attracted to smart and/or geeky women who don't always have big boobs and wear bikinis. Sounds like they wouldn't be welcome there.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

Probably because they know it would be full of comments from the same guys shouting them down in the YLYL thread.

I don't have a problem with the thread in question existing, but it's not my cup of tea. I've checked it out a few times, including just now, and it's full of a single body type, all barely clothed. I'd actually like to contribute to a celebration of women, but I'm attracted to smart and/or geeky women who don't always have big boobs and wear bikinis. Sounds like they wouldn't be welcome there.

That's the thing, you don't know that. That thread is populated by 2 or 3 posters that post things regularly, including White Tiger who I haven't even seen post in a single other thread. Most people feel bad posting pictures in that thread because they don't want to contribute to it, yet many have admitted to looking at it, myself included. I think if people just posted pictures of what they found attractive they might find a lot of support from similar minded individuals.

Either way, the fact that there's a thread like that isn't that concerning to me. I find much more objectionable subjects that are just discussion topics. However, if the female population on this site asked for it to be removed I would happily oblige. It just doesn't seem necessary.

And as for this topic in general, I don't see that much actual misogyny on this site, but I do see people finding misogyny as they see it a lot of places it either doesn't exist, or it wasn't intended. If it's unintentional the comments are usually met with an apology and curbing of the behavior. If it's not even there it blows up into a giant debate that derails things. There are a couple of posters that decide to make everything into a giant sociopolitical issue regardless, so that could stop as well as the actual misogynystic comments and pictures please.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

That's the thing, you don't know that.

I don't know that for sure, but seeing guys complaining after someone dared to post photos of his "mediocre" wife, it makes me skeptical that they'll accept a women who has a PhD instead of double D's. So as someone who doesn't need to come to a hockey board to see hot women I'd rather not participate.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

That thread should be closed imo.

Many pictures are almost pornographic and it provides a release valve for the uglier male animal spirits.

It's sexist to have a dedicated little corner to objectify and discuss the objectification of women.

Man you would hate Europe.

[GGG]

One of the probkems the lack of names. The most basic detail of a person is left out. Unlike Henrik Lundquist who can be evaluated on a much larger basis.

Its definately objectification. Where that crosses into misoginy I dont know.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

I don't know that for sure, but seeing guys complaining after someone dared to post photos of his "mediocre" wife, it makes me skeptical that they'll accept a women who has a PhD instead of double D's. So as someone who doesn't need to come to a hockey board to see hot women I'd rather not participate.

It was one guy who responded that way. Everyone else appreciated the photo and said so. They also got on that one poster for his comments. I really hate when people generalize, and you're doing so with this situation. I honestly believe you're wrong about this.