I didn't have a chance to objectify my wife this evening....

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. According to the definition you provided the SI cover would not constitute objectification

assuming ALL the criteria had to be met. Anyone who could meet all those criteria simultaneously would be better known as a rapist. However, I do believe objectification can occur before it progresses to such a horrific level.

The SI cover could lend itself -- only lend -- to instrumentality and fungibility but it's a far cry from a viewer thinking they had the ability to own or damage the models. A more likely scenario would be a cretin meeting up with the models and saying, "Hey cupcake, wanna hook-up?" but that assumes the autonomy and subjectivity of the model to say, "Go pound sand, jackass."

If instrumentality and fungibility are sufficient to qualify as objectification then anyone engaging in a one-night hook-up is engaging in objectification, in which case spring break is a big no-no.

Of course, the SI controversy assumes all men at all times observing the swimsuit issue are stricken by sexual yearnings to the extent that they become blinded to the humanity of the models and the women around them. That would be such a gross over-simplification as to become itself a statement that denies the autonomy and subjectivity of the group (all men) it accuses.

If, however, we say some men will objectify women but other men will not than the issue isn't the SI cover; it's some men who objectify. It would seem more fitting to confront those persons as each case arises rather than making broad-brush indictments that bring more division and resentment than actual social progress.