General Discussion

nomorenomore08

(13,324 posts)

251. "T&A" isn't really the problem. It's making that the centerpiece, to the exclusion of all else.

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 08:12 PM

Feb 2014

If it were one magazine, no one would give a shit. And if it were merely a matter of individual desire, no one would give a shit either. It's about how one particular standard of beauty is enforced upon all of society, to the detriment of the majority who will never live up to that image in a million years.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

260 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue : 50 Years of Women's Objectification [View all] redqueen Feb 2014 OP

I never understood the point of the SI swimsuit issue. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #1

As was explained to me last night Scootaloo Feb 2014 #9

no sports ? how about the olympics ? JI7 Feb 2014 #13

Um.. Yeh.. Because the olympics happen every year, right? opiate69 Feb 2014 #35

it happened this year JI7 Feb 2014 #36

And, SI is covering them as well... opiate69 Feb 2014 #43

are you having trouble following the conversation ? JI7 Feb 2014 #47

Yes.. And.. It may seem complicated, but I think you can follow... opiate69 Feb 2014 #56

none of the 4 majors had anything in February -- except the NBA and the NHL fishwax Feb 2014 #236

Are you twelve? MattBaggins Feb 2014 #194

Where do we NOT hear about the Olympics? It is everywhere...I hear a lot about it on my CTyankee Feb 2014 #45

back in the day many seasons were shorter than they are now dsc Feb 2014 #31

My understanding of sports may be limited... Scootaloo Feb 2014 #38

How could there possibly be no sports to report on? Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #39

I know, right? Scootaloo Feb 2014 #42

then, that doesn't really explain it, does it? CTyankee Feb 2014 #41

No sports to cover?? Here is the list of ultrarunning events 1/1/2014 to 2/16/2014... DreamGypsy Feb 2014 #148

Oh, I know Scootaloo Feb 2014 #153

I figured that out... DreamGypsy Feb 2014 #159

I'm not a sports person! Scootaloo Feb 2014 #165

More like if it does not have a ball it is not a sport Drahthaardogs Feb 2014 #175

Somehow I think coverage of ultrarunning would sell fewer magazines than bikini-clad Doctor_J Feb 2014 #176

Sports people care about... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #201

Someone asked the same question last night. redqueen Feb 2014 #15

I understand both your points and LeftymMom's points in that subthread. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #44

I understood the point when I was 14.... awoke_in_2003 Feb 2014 #27

I guess Playgirl objectifies the men yeoman6987 Feb 2014 #40

Well, yes. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #85

Playgirl's subscribers are mostly men, though. redqueen Feb 2014 #88

This man wouldn't mind subscribing to it. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #89

Well at least somebody does, for once treestar Feb 2014 #208

but some men do think women are sport... Whisp Feb 2014 #81

Ugh. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #86

Wow. You just said a mouthful, woman. redqueen Feb 2014 #87

And visa versa AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #128

No, there is not a vice versa. n/t Whisp Feb 2014 #133

OF course not AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #137

false equivalence noiretextatique Feb 2014 #232

Right AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #233

Cash. nt ZombieHorde Feb 2014 #119

It was used as a big subscription driver pre-internet.` Renew Deal Feb 2014 #130

when this started 50 years ago there wasn't between the end of football (around Jan 1) Doctor_J Feb 2014 #163

except for the NBA, the NHL, college basketball ... and, for the record, the Super Bowl was fishwax Feb 2014 #237

It's pretty simple AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #177

make that, Sex as defined by the white, straight men that fill the boardrooms. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #242

It is about the coming of Spring and Summer after a hard Winter. I understood that as bluestate10 Feb 2014 #181

it's porn-lite, that's all. nt TheFrenchRazor Feb 2014 #243

How wonderful it would be if that cover of models would, instead, feature some of our incredible hlthe2b Feb 2014 #2

Yes, that would be a sign of progress. redqueen Feb 2014 #3

This is the power and strength of a woman athelete. sheshe2 Feb 2014 #50

To be fair, when they (occasionally) show female athletes on the cover, redqueen Feb 2014 #53

Thank you me b zola Feb 2014 #8

How wonderful it would be if I was a multimillionnaire cosmicone Feb 2014 #195

rude.... hlthe2b Feb 2014 #199

See? The problem isn't that the issue is flame bait, it's that you want to pick which flames to bait lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #4

That's not a great argument Scootaloo Feb 2014 #12

I suspect that Kate Upton's definition of "damn near died!" isn't the same as mine. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #16

she was suffering eyesight and hearing loss and her body was shutting down, that is beyond just JI7 Feb 2014 #21

I'd like to see a doctor's note to that effect. n/t lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #24

why ? JI7 Feb 2014 #25

The rest of the Today show quote might be illuminating. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #29

how does any of that change anything ? i'm sure china sweatshop workers are happy to get what they JI7 Feb 2014 #32

"The 21 year old model has an estimated net worth of $4 million" lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #62

once again that does not change anything, you seem resentful of the money she has JI7 Feb 2014 #66

Envy? The class warfare card? Seriously? lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #68

why ? when you consider where she was why is it so hard to believe ? JI7 Feb 2014 #70

Because common sense. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #71

Oh my god.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Feb 2014 #78

Oh yeah, I'm sure she's just being hysterical; you know how women can be! Scootaloo Feb 2014 #33

I've had hypothermia. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #48

I suspect your suspicions are based more on the inconveniance this causes for your position Scootaloo Feb 2014 #73

My position? lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #76

Your position that she's a liar about the impact that shoot had on her health Scootaloo Feb 2014 #93

Thank you - nice reply n/t drmeow Feb 2014 #77

Seriously? Soundman Feb 2014 #204

I suspect poor decision-making on her part Scootaloo Feb 2014 #231

actually, i'm not sure she did get paid that much , i think they look to get on the cover JI7 Feb 2014 #14

I wonder if Kate is ever going to disown her teabagger uncle and declare her love Doctor_J Feb 2014 #166

Thanks for the link with all the hot SI covers! flvegan Feb 2014 #5

You do realize your comment is entirely transparent, I hope. Porn is all over the net. redqueen Feb 2014 #6

Sarcasm has always been in my wheelhouse, thanks. flvegan Feb 2014 #7

And yet you characterize objection to the annual celebration of objectification redqueen Feb 2014 #11

Here? Yes, I absolutely do. flvegan Feb 2014 #17

So what now? yeoman6987 Feb 2014 #46

It would be nice to think that Texasgal Feb 2014 #52

Nothing yeoman6987 Feb 2014 #54

Many don't "feel" women are objectified. They ARE and they HAVE BEEN, yes, even 50 years ago. redqueen Feb 2014 #58

Like yeoman6987 Feb 2014 #60

No problem. Texasgal Feb 2014 #63

Interesting that you characterize my criticism of objectification as "getting upset". redqueen Feb 2014 #55

Well my wording might be exaggerated yeoman6987 Feb 2014 #59

I do appreciate your sarcastic post upthread, redqueen Feb 2014 #61

the point is it s sexist garbage and does not belong on a progressive board creating a hostile seabeyond Feb 2014 #57

It's awful to create a hostile environment for fellow members: RiffRandell Feb 2014 #64

Give it rest. Texasgal Feb 2014 #65

Hostile environment? Like when you persisted in using sexist language towards me, laughed about it, msanthrope Feb 2014 #91

K&R me b zola Feb 2014 #10

Kate doesn't sound frigid or bitter in her interview. RiffRandell Feb 2014 #18

LOL... "frigid" and "bitter"? My but you sure have the lingo down pat. redqueen Feb 2014 #19

Totally welcome! nt RiffRandell Feb 2014 #22

wowser. bah hhahaha. probably all i will say in this thread also. but, ya. seabeyond Feb 2014 #26

Yep. redqueen Feb 2014 #28

laughing out loud, really. nt seabeyond Feb 2014 #30

And they have no idea they are doing it! Squinch Feb 2014 #37

Link? nt RiffRandell Feb 2014 #34

Oh, I wouldn't bet on that. RiffRandell Feb 2014 #51

Flashback to 2012, DU Sports Group. Ptah Feb 2014 #20

If you have a point to make it would be nice if you could just please make it. redqueen Feb 2014 #23

yeah...WAITING.... CTyankee Feb 2014 #49

I guess it was just a dig at trumad after all. It's nice to be reminded of examples of people redqueen Feb 2014 #67

An honest view, IMO. We simply have to have a LOUD bullhorn to get our message across... CTyankee Feb 2014 #69

Everywhere, really. redqueen Feb 2014 #72

I've called it out in the past. Ptah Feb 2014 #84

Did you do it yesterday in the flamebait OP? redqueen Feb 2014 #96

No, I did not. Ptah Feb 2014 #97

+ a gazillion. nt Mojorabbit Feb 2014 #254

As long as we're digging around in the past pintobean Feb 2014 #75

Oh...the pictures redqueen posted of herself and men she found attractive? Interesting. nt msanthrope Feb 2014 #101

Wanting construction workers to be topless pintobean Feb 2014 #104

Some people have open minds and change over time. Others have closed minds and remain stagnant. n/t seaglass Feb 2014 #144

And some just have double standards. pintobean Feb 2014 #152

Open mind = being open to ideas other than your own. Try it. n/t seaglass Feb 2014 #154

Oh, like hof. pintobean Feb 2014 #157

Yes there are ideas worth exploring in HoF. n/t seaglass Feb 2014 #162

Perhaps for the limited group of posters who aren't banned. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #223

Well I looked through who is banned and of the names I recognize, I also recognize their hostility seaglass Feb 2014 #246

I remember those pics Doctor_J Feb 2014 #167

Heh. +1 n/t lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #224

^^^ This ^^^ Soundman Feb 2014 #205

Drooling over David Beckham? Whoa..that's an eye opener.. Upton Feb 2014 #212

Oh, looky.. yet ANOTHER random blogger, with indeterminate credentials.. opiate69 Feb 2014 #74

Don't disparage their medical credentials in "almost-getting-frostbite-opathy". lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #79

snork!!! opiate69 Feb 2014 #80

You've made a similar comment in several threads now. MadrasT Feb 2014 #197

Intersting thesis. One I would consider plausible were it not for... opiate69 Feb 2014 #229

Troll much? n/t MrModerate Feb 2014 #82

Only on days that end in "y" opiate69 Feb 2014 #90

Why are you referring to this OP -which offers a progressive feminist take on this issue - trolling? redqueen Feb 2014 #92

I dispute that there is any value in the way you raised this issue . . . MrModerate Feb 2014 #156

so you have no problem with objectification, ergo, raising the issue in any form would be a fail for seabeyond Feb 2014 #161

No, and it's disingenuous of you to suggest that I said anything like that MrModerate Feb 2014 #168

a couple things. seabeyond Feb 2014 #171

Whoops. Misread the ID. Sorry. MrModerate Feb 2014 #172

Right on! Puzzledtraveller Feb 2014 #247

"The vast majority of feminists criticize the objectification of women." Major Nikon Feb 2014 #179

How many identify as liberals? sufrommich Feb 2014 #203

Hardly Major Nikon Feb 2014 #218

Project much? nt laundry_queen Feb 2014 #99

That's not fair Renew Deal Feb 2014 #134

That's as may be . . . MrModerate Feb 2014 #158

Their purpose is to look pleasant to sell magazines... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #83

No, it isn't sex that sells, that's a myth. And yes, objectifying women is very wrong. redqueen Feb 2014 #98

No.. the "myth" is... opiate69 Feb 2014 #106

In the age of the internet shaayecanaan Feb 2014 #121

Certainly debatable... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #146

I suspect that once you've eaten pineapple shaayecanaan Feb 2014 #187

Objectification: cliffordu Feb 2014 #94

Um, no. Denigrating one half the human race by portraying them as sex objects has nothing to do redqueen Feb 2014 #95

Denigrating in your opinion cliffordu Feb 2014 #108

LOL. So in your opinion, objectification is great, redqueen Feb 2014 #114

The pejoratives you employ on my behalf cliffordu Feb 2014 #147

some folks who are males noiretextatique Feb 2014 #234

Thank you! JDPriestly Feb 2014 #100

My pleasure, I assure you! redqueen Feb 2014 #103

And it has nothing to do with sports or illustrating sports. undeterred Feb 2014 #102

No, it doesn't, and that's why it's such a powerful statement. redqueen Feb 2014 #105

Don't like it, don't look at it. NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #107

or... dont like it, speak out. ok... cool. will do. see how easy it is. nt seabeyond Feb 2014 #109

Is it also okay for someone who likes it to say so? NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #117

you/others use sin, religion to again, shame and shut women up. it is bullshit. again, speaking out. seabeyond Feb 2014 #120

Where did I attempt to use religion to shame anyone? NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #135

I don't consider it a sin to look at these pictures seabeyond Feb 2014 #141

Again, you have every right to speak out. NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #151

A gross misrepresentation of the opposing argument. Nice try. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #111

Did I call anyone a prude? NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #115

The most effective kind of oppression conceals its mechanisms and intent. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #118

of course. as when he brings in the snide comment of it being a "sin". well, duh. pretty damn seabeyond Feb 2014 #125

I didn't know you were so adept at reading minds. NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #138

"I don't think it's wrong to look at women (or men) whom one finds attractive." nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #249

No complaints here Android3.14 Feb 2014 #110

are you 4th, android? seabeyond Feb 2014 #112

Eh? Android3.14 Feb 2014 #122

uh hu seabeyond Feb 2014 #126

Well that certainly clears things up Android3.14 Feb 2014 #132

She's accusing you of being a sockpuppet. name not needed Feb 2014 #136

I sent Android a link pintobean Feb 2014 #143

Thanks to the kind folks who explained it to me Android3.14 Feb 2014 #150

Ah, yes, the counter argument. There's always something more important to talk about. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #113

It's the outrage of the day, apparently. NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #140

"...complaining about pictures of pretty girls." Gee, another strawman... nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #250

Thank you for this, Redqueen! n/t PasadenaTrudy Feb 2014 #116

It has never been about 'fashion' AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #123

yes. thank you for agreeing. objectifying women is entirely normal in our world to entertain men. seabeyond Feb 2014 #127

Yes, it is AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #129

LOL, wow, are you entertaining. nt Logical Feb 2014 #183

You realize "normal" and "morally upright" are not synonyms, right? Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #131

OK AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #139

To attempt an argument confusing the two is bad form. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #142

There is nothing unethical about a woman in a bikini in a magazine AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #145

The absolutist rhetoric you espouse is an attempt to disambiguate a complex subject... Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #149

It is a simple subject AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #155

Power relations and human sexuality are mind bogglingly complex. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #160

You will never accept that sexuality AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #169

That's what you've deduced from my argument? That sexuality is inherently wrong? Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #170

You seem to believe that lust is dirty AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #174

No, I think you haven't actually considered my argument at all. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #189

What is the source? nt rrneck Feb 2014 #186

The patriarchy. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #188

You're trying to refute an argument that hasn't even been made. We call that a strawman. nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #252

"T&A" isn't really the problem. It's making that the centerpiece, to the exclusion of all else. nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #251

If there were more Asian, South-Asian, or Native women on the cover The2ndWheel Feb 2014 #124

I wondered that, too. And whether Kate Upton and the other models... WorseBeforeBetter Feb 2014 #185

Works for me. oldhippie Feb 2014 #164

Whatever floats your boat. edbermac Feb 2014 #180

As Chief Joseph of the Nez Pierce tribe once said Vinnie From Indy Feb 2014 #173

Art is, by its nature, somewhat objectifying. nt Demo_Chris Feb 2014 #178

Regarding objectification in art, you should really watch all four parts of this. redqueen Feb 2014 #225

Thank you for this, RedQ! cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #182

My pleasure! redqueen Feb 2014 #222

Males and females AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #184

"Fairly and respectfully indulged" is the kicker though. And holding all women to a narrow standard nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #253

Sexuality is a biological drive, not a social construct designed by the patriarchy davidn3600 Feb 2014 #190

If anything the patriarchy has been about repressing sexuality Major Nikon Feb 2014 #191

There's a good reason why the modern feminist movement is rejecting 3rd wave feminism. n/t MadrasT Feb 2014 #193

From everything I've read, sex-positive feminism IS the mainstream davidn3600 Feb 2014 #196

Sports Illustrated isn't a sex-positive feminist publication... Hippo_Tron Feb 2014 #230

I wasnt saying that it was davidn3600 Feb 2014 #239

I'll make sure I send those three ladies tweets to shame them for their evil ways The Straight Story Feb 2014 #192

Time for a good old fashioned book burn- I mean, magazine burning! quinnox Feb 2014 #198

Except nobody is calling for books to be burned. sufrommich Feb 2014 #202

The SI is like an abortion.. sendero Feb 2014 #200

Wow. Are you fucking seriously comparing a medical procedure that women actually need access to redqueen Feb 2014 #206

I'm saying your desire to abridge the rights of others.. sendero Feb 2014 #235

Do they even at least do a beefcake cover once a year treestar Feb 2014 #207

No, why should they? They can fall back on MRA talking points - e.g. that men are objectified redqueen Feb 2014 #209

Why would they need to make that claim? Android3.14 Feb 2014 #210

Gay men don't like sports? Really? Or wait, is it just that nobody by white straight men matters? redqueen Feb 2014 #211

Lost cause RedQueen ismnotwasm Feb 2014 #214

Of course they do...but it's a matter of readership numbers. Lizzie Poppet Feb 2014 #215

So that's what the ignore button is for... Android3.14 Feb 2014 #217

Women don't like sports? treestar Feb 2014 #240

SI subscribers can opt out of the Swimsuit edition.. Upton Feb 2014 #241

Equal treatment? Upton Feb 2014 #213

I thought that's what all the other SI issues were? nt kjones Feb 2014 #238

These discussions always go the same way. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #216

There are also a handful of women cheering them on, redqueen Feb 2014 #221

yep... BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #244

As if a request for courtesy or discretion is somehow trampling on *their rights*... nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #255

bigtime. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #256

I can't think of an easy answer, really. There's so much ambiguity, so much "plausible deniability" nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #257

I agree. the malicious behavior is so blatant. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #258

Like the kid who gets bullied, and then gets in trouble for responding to the bully. nomorenomore08 Feb 2014 #260

Kick & recommended. William769 Feb 2014 #219

Thank you. redqueen Feb 2014 #226

It was brought to my attention that some intellectual dishonesty was being directed at me personally redqueen Feb 2014 #220

Trust me when I say "such blatantly rightwing tactics are not just directed at you. William769 Feb 2014 #227

Oh yes, you're exactly right. redqueen Feb 2014 #228

I saw the posts. dredge up someone's past behaviors as if it would smear them. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #245

................... Puzzledtraveller Feb 2014 #248

It's 50 years of marketing success. scarletwoman Feb 2014 #259