wavyarms | (no subject)

(no subject)

Feminist link of the day.

The part that gets me the most is the headline of the article reporting the study. "New Discoveries Suggest That Sexual Objectification Is More Damaging to Women Than You Might Think." Thanks for the assumption that most of us don't automatically think it's all that damaging. Also, I find it hard to explain why, but I really feel that it is implied that the "you" in the headline is male. Maybe b/c otherwise it would have said "more damaging to us?" "to some of us?" "than men might think?"

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

but I really feel that it is implied that the "you" in the headline is male.

That was my first thought too. Because "than you might think" implies that you don't think it's (very) damaging (perhaps because you're the one doing it?). Also we are almost always the other, not the implied "you", if it was towards women it would say "more damaging to women than they think".

"Being Objectified Damages You - Now There's Proof."

There are lots of scientific studies that appear to prove obvious things, but they're important because a) sometimes what is "obvious" is actually wrong, and b) scientific proof is a good method of persuasion for those who are on the fence. (And clearly it's not obvious to everyone, since it's still going on.)

Not defending the article, just the study.

I skimmed some parts of the article. I'm pretty amused more than anything else, there are several levels of wtf-ism and hilarity.

I think the idea about a "split perspective of the self" is really interesting.

The actual experiment sounds totally icky. I hope they paid their subjects well to go through that! And thoroughly and clearly debriefed them.

Well, the article does start "Guys, here’s something to consider...", so it's hardly implied.

(I could say more, but I'm not fond of the taste of shoe-leather.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only