Another nude sports figure pointlessly objectified on a magazine cover

[Squinch]

173. Not sure how you found snark in my post, because there was none. But let me repeat my points:

First, covers like this, with a naked man and a clothed woman, are quite rare. Actually I can't think of a single other one I have seen. We both know that magazine covers that show naked or nearly naked women are numbingly common, even when naked women have nothing to do with the subject of the magazine.

Yes, of course he is being objectified. He is on the cover because of his body. He isn't a fashion guy, and the photo says nothing about him except that he is something pretty on her arm.

I don't like that for anyone, male or female, but I see it rarely happen with men, and routinely happen with women. The rarity with which it happens to men may be why you are so sanguine about it.

If every bus you sat on, every street you walked down, every magazine you picked up included many images in which naked or nearly naked men were there for no apparent reason other than to sell product, if the main and overwhelming message that media gave to you about the value of your gender was that it is supposed to provide sexual gratification or decorativeness to the world, if you watched while boys in your life who you love absorbed the unmistakable message that titillation is really all that men are good for, I am certain you would feel differently. I am sure there are many who will find much to nudge each other about and make fun of in this statement, but if you really think about it, I am sure you will see the sadness in the truth of my point.

And though I was not snarking, you certainly were dismissing and twisting the message of those with whom you disagree when you said, "since he and I are both victims, after all."