I Am Not a Sexual Object
Saturday, May 26th, 2007 06:56 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
forchancookieHi, my name is For-Chan and I'm a girl. I have a vagina and boobs but, I am not a sexual object. I am a woman and I have sexuality that I can choose to apply in certain situations, but on average, I am not a sexual object.
I take issue with people telling me that I must be a sexual object. I take issue with people telling me "That's just how it is." Ok, so that's how it is, but why does that mean I have to put up with it?
I'm one of those girls who subscribes to the idea that I can do whatever the hell I wanna do. If I wanna rage against the sexism inherent in the system, I'm damn well gonna. And the sexism is inherent in the system.
Let us take these recent outcries from comic book land. Mary Jane with her pearl necklace being a good house wife. Heroes for Hire being strung up and threatened with tentacles. Some of the details in these pictures, taken alone, I can handle. I understand that the Spidey suit probably needs a good hand washing and doesn't do well in the dryer. I understand that MJ wants to be comfy while doing laundry. Hell, I will even forgive her come hither stare. After all, women are allowed to be sexual. What really puts that over the top, for me, is her pearl necklace. A pearl necklace, symbolic of semen, symbolic of claiming. That's what just pushes it over the line. Without that, I would think "Hey, that's ridiculous and porny." With it, I think "Wow, way to convey a skeevy message about a woman's place."
As for the Heroes for Hire cover, again, it's the details that add up to take it over the top. Tying people up is just an old super hero standard. There's no getting away from that. Man or woman, at some point in their career, a hero is destined to be bound and restrained in some way. Being threatened by monsters, is again, an old standard. That's not really my issue here. It's hard to do the hero bit without some peril. I take issue with how they're threatened. Rather than be given some sort of expression of anger or any little spark of fire to portray the kickass girls they are, they are stuck with these stupid helpless drugged up expressions. They are bursting out of their clothes while slimy tentacles ooze on their skin. And how we're not seeing Misty Knight's crotch and pubic hair, I will never know. With pants that low, you're gonna see something right?
If this were a naughty hentai doujinshi, fine, but it's not. If I picked up a hentai doujinshi, I'd expect boobs and tentacles and fluids and "No. Stop. Nnn! Ha! More!" Last time I checked though, I wasn't looking at the cover of doujinshi. I thought I was looking at the cover of a super hero comic. I thought these girls were Heroes for hire, not hookers. The nudity, the passivity, the chaining, the tentacles, the overall sexually charged image just sits wrong. Why must these powerful women be stripped of their dignity? You can have dignity while chained to a pole and threatened by tentacles. A few looks of outrage on their part would help to quell my own.
I am not saying "Women cannot be sexual ever!" I think women can and should be sexual whenever and however they chose. I don't think this sexuality should be thrust upon us. Yes, these women are just drawings. They're characters. They're not real. They are simply pieces of art. But art is an expression of many things. Beauty. Desire. Values. So many things. I have to stop and question what ideas these people are expressing. I have to ask myself "Is this how you see us? Is this what you want us to be?" And then I say "Fuck that!" Because I am not a sexual object.
I'm a woman and I am more than a pair of tits and a vagina. I have feelings and opinions and I'm damn well going to express them. I don't care who likes it or who doesn't. I refuse to sit idly by and be content with "my place". My place is where I chose to put myself, not where other's chose to file me away. I am not going to be satisfied with a few little token freedoms. I want it all. I want to be seen as more than just a women with a big mouth. I want to make more than what they'll let me. I want to be more than what is acceptable. I want to do what I want to do. Because I'm a woman, and we're fucking stubborn like that.
If you're satisfied. Ok. Everyone's different. Everyone's desires are different. But for me, I am not content just to be what I should be. I want to be what I want to be. If I want to be loud and obnoxious and feminist, I'm gonna be. For me, feminism isn't about girl power or reclaiming female sexuality or being a manly feminazi. For me, feminism is just a belief that females are just as good as males and that I am worthy enough to walk as an equal. I am good enough to be more than a sexual object. I am woman, hear me fucking roar.
I take issue with people telling me that I must be a sexual object. I take issue with people telling me "That's just how it is." Ok, so that's how it is, but why does that mean I have to put up with it?
I'm one of those girls who subscribes to the idea that I can do whatever the hell I wanna do. If I wanna rage against the sexism inherent in the system, I'm damn well gonna. And the sexism is inherent in the system.
Let us take these recent outcries from comic book land. Mary Jane with her pearl necklace being a good house wife. Heroes for Hire being strung up and threatened with tentacles. Some of the details in these pictures, taken alone, I can handle. I understand that the Spidey suit probably needs a good hand washing and doesn't do well in the dryer. I understand that MJ wants to be comfy while doing laundry. Hell, I will even forgive her come hither stare. After all, women are allowed to be sexual. What really puts that over the top, for me, is her pearl necklace. A pearl necklace, symbolic of semen, symbolic of claiming. That's what just pushes it over the line. Without that, I would think "Hey, that's ridiculous and porny." With it, I think "Wow, way to convey a skeevy message about a woman's place."
As for the Heroes for Hire cover, again, it's the details that add up to take it over the top. Tying people up is just an old super hero standard. There's no getting away from that. Man or woman, at some point in their career, a hero is destined to be bound and restrained in some way. Being threatened by monsters, is again, an old standard. That's not really my issue here. It's hard to do the hero bit without some peril. I take issue with how they're threatened. Rather than be given some sort of expression of anger or any little spark of fire to portray the kickass girls they are, they are stuck with these stupid helpless drugged up expressions. They are bursting out of their clothes while slimy tentacles ooze on their skin. And how we're not seeing Misty Knight's crotch and pubic hair, I will never know. With pants that low, you're gonna see something right?
If this were a naughty hentai doujinshi, fine, but it's not. If I picked up a hentai doujinshi, I'd expect boobs and tentacles and fluids and "No. Stop. Nnn! Ha! More!" Last time I checked though, I wasn't looking at the cover of doujinshi. I thought I was looking at the cover of a super hero comic. I thought these girls were Heroes for hire, not hookers. The nudity, the passivity, the chaining, the tentacles, the overall sexually charged image just sits wrong. Why must these powerful women be stripped of their dignity? You can have dignity while chained to a pole and threatened by tentacles. A few looks of outrage on their part would help to quell my own.
I am not saying "Women cannot be sexual ever!" I think women can and should be sexual whenever and however they chose. I don't think this sexuality should be thrust upon us. Yes, these women are just drawings. They're characters. They're not real. They are simply pieces of art. But art is an expression of many things. Beauty. Desire. Values. So many things. I have to stop and question what ideas these people are expressing. I have to ask myself "Is this how you see us? Is this what you want us to be?" And then I say "Fuck that!" Because I am not a sexual object.
I'm a woman and I am more than a pair of tits and a vagina. I have feelings and opinions and I'm damn well going to express them. I don't care who likes it or who doesn't. I refuse to sit idly by and be content with "my place". My place is where I chose to put myself, not where other's chose to file me away. I am not going to be satisfied with a few little token freedoms. I want it all. I want to be seen as more than just a women with a big mouth. I want to make more than what they'll let me. I want to be more than what is acceptable. I want to do what I want to do. Because I'm a woman, and we're fucking stubborn like that.
If you're satisfied. Ok. Everyone's different. Everyone's desires are different. But for me, I am not content just to be what I should be. I want to be what I want to be. If I want to be loud and obnoxious and feminist, I'm gonna be. For me, feminism isn't about girl power or reclaiming female sexuality or being a manly feminazi. For me, feminism is just a belief that females are just as good as males and that I am worthy enough to walk as an equal. I am good enough to be more than a sexual object. I am woman, hear me fucking roar.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-26 11:24 am (UTC)I think that things must be placed in their context.
Am I saying that those pictures naughty pieces are not there to arouse a male audience? No, I'm not.
But indulging in someone fantasies don't mean offending/undervaluating the sex of the character that is the subject of that fantasy.
Are the most of covers (please, note: not ACTUAL COMIC ISSUES but COVERS) performing female characters in smexy situations? No, they aren't.
Are female characters usually treatened as sexual objects? I bet that they aren't.
Those are just two pieces (external collaborations by guest artists) and people is talking as if Spiderman turned into a Playboy issue.
If as an artist I would be told to make a cover for a comic issue I won't draw a female character like that, but as an artist I'm free to interprete a character how I want.
I'm not complaining about girls place in the society: I'm complaining of the fact that an artist can't do what he wants because people could be "offended" by it.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-26 11:44 am (UTC)I don't know Dae, I think you're kind of letting them off the hook. Yeah, it could be in good fun, but it's kinda skeevy. MJ, I can dismiss, but not the tentacle one.
You know there's always going to be someone out there offended by everything. There's no getting around it. Look at our hobby, that's offensive to a lot of people. Are we gonna stop? No. Will other people continue to complain? Yeah. Same situation really. Can't make everybody happy all of the time. Might as well not even try.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-26 11:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-26 12:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-26 03:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-26 04:37 pm (UTC)Comic books are about the boys, ya know. Forget the girl readers.
though, i dare say i find wilykat to be exceptionally hottt in this arc.no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 09:45 pm (UTC)"And how we're not seeing Misty Knight's crotch and pubic hair, I will never know. With pants that low, you're gonna see something right?"
Her pants aren't that low--they're torn off.
It's like a layer cake of ick.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 11:34 pm (UTC)Then again, recent attention to male nether regions (http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/1084083.html) shows that guys are scared of their own lower bits. Funny how much they freak out at the mere idea of other males having even a hint of sexuality. Oh fanboys, take a shower and grow up.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 11:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 11:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-29 06:42 pm (UTC)I’m not sure you’re understanding the concept of “fantasy.” While it is true that many guys are going to have sexist fantasies, it not true that most or even many of those guy would like those to be fulfilled. Just as the romance novelists and buyers of romance novels appear to have fantasies about being kidnapped by pirates but they don’t really want that to happen in real life, so too might some guys think the tentacle thing is sexy, but they certainly wouldn’t want women to be raped by octopi from outer space. Seriously, do the guys you know seem like they want to have women raped by aliens? If so, may I suggest that you hang out with different guys?
Also, you might want to note that while you are not an object, the ink on the page is. While you are making the case that men are objectifying women, I think it might be closer to the truth to say that you are personifying objects.
Finally, please note that there is no connection between erotica/porn and an increase the number or rapes. You can see the overwhelming evidence here:
http://www.porn-report.com/403-porn-social-and-behavioral-science-research.htm
no subject
Date: 2007-05-29 11:32 pm (UTC)Honestly how can someone write such an introspective, well-thought out, well argued reply to a post and so completely MISS THE FUCKING POINT BY THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE SUN AND PLUTO!
it's nice that you have a point of view... it's even nicer that you have research to back it up... but in the context of WHO'S journal this is and what was actually said... your comment really is so far off base that it's really pitiful...
and telling someone like Cookie that you think she doesn't understand the concept of fantasy??? really?? do you have a few extra CHROMOSOMES!?!? talk about not knowing the context...
as a general rule, before posting on someone's journal who isn't your friend, consider reading more than one post before you jump to well written but ill-formed conclusions
just to be clear... while nothing you said (other than your personal comment about Cookie and fantasy which can't help but lead me to believe that you rode the short bus) is necessarily wrong, it just has nothing to do with this post... if your DNA was off by this much, you'd be a jellyfish...
please get back on base before you get tagged out...
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 03:53 am (UTC)What I thought she was saying is that those images were evidence of what guys wanted her to be or how they saw her. I would suggest that those are just fantasies. Cookie may be a great person, but if she thinks that guys actually want her to be raped, well, she has a very low opinion of them.
If she doesn't think that, I'm not sure what this meant:
"I have to ask myself "Is this how you see us? Is this what you want us to be?" And then I say "Fuck that!" Because I am not a sexual object.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 04:08 am (UTC)"I have to ask myself "Is this how you see us? Is this what you want us to be?" And then I say "Fuck that!" Because I am not a sexual object."
it is not about men seeing her as a sexual object... it is about men seeing her, and by extension, all women, as sexual objects and only as such. yes it is a fantasy. yes it is only a drawing. yes we know all that because we aren't stupid. Cookie said she would have had no problem with the art had it been part of a hentai doujin. It wasn't. It was part of a main stream comic publication. It isn't the art that bothers her at all. It is the context in which the art is placed and that it is being marketed to the mass comic audience rather than as niche comic porn. It is entirely about context. I know from personal experience that Cookie has no problem with comic porn, and if you had bothered to read ANY of this journal before posting aside from this entry, you would have figured that out. You missed the point.
let me say this simply. Men. Don't. Get. It. I don't expect you to take that kindly. And I don't care.
[i am in no way speaking for Cookie, please do not assume that my words are her's]
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 04:12 am (UTC)This was the part you missed in your moronic masculine rush to judgment... context matters.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 11:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 12:37 pm (UTC)as for for the section you pulled out... there is nothing in that section about rape: "I have to ask myself "Is this how you see us? Is this what you want us to be?" And then I say "Fuck that!" Because I am not a sexual object."
YOU put rape into that quote. There is NO RAPE in that quote. It doesn't say anywhere that men what her to be raped. It doesn't suggest that anywhere else in the rest of the post. No other commenter got that out of this, and since it doesn't exist in the text, it must exist ONLY in your head. The quote is about objectification ONLY and she admits that much. The quote is about her wondering, not believing, whether or not men (in general) see women only as sexual objects, and then refuting that at a personal level because she will not be seen that way.
Simple... straight forward... get your head out of your ass and stop seeing rape accusations where none were made
no subject
Date: 2007-05-31 11:19 am (UTC)I never stated that these images would lead to raping anyone. I don't feel that men look at me and think of raping me. Hell, mostly I don't feel that men look at me period let alone with the intent of sexual activities. I'm not ragging on men. I'm taking issue with these comic book images that have been presented and what messages they deliver.
I feel that there is a time and place for these sexually charged fantasy images and I don't feel that the cover of a comic book with an ages 9 and up rating is the appropriate place. Certainly, porn comes from all things. I expect to see this kind of image and worse in other places, but the fact that it is an official picture is what I find take issue with. Victimizing these heroes on the cover of their own comic is just pushing it. As I said, you can capture and tie up a hero and leave them some dignity, these ladies aren't really left with much.
I understand that men fantasize and I'd have to be dead to say that I didn't do the same. What I take issue with is that females can be cast aside as merely a sexual object. Granted, these are merely characters on paper, but it is also a reflection of someone's image of these women.
Do I think this blatant sexuality is going to lead to an outbreak of gang bangs or something? No. Do I think the treatment of comic book women will have a negative effect on their audiences' treatment of women? Hell yeah I do. Those women on the page might be mere comic book characters, but to some people they're more real than you and I.
As for the "I have to ask myself "Is this how you see us? Is this what you want us to be?" And then I say "Fuck that!" Because I am not a sexual object."
I suppose I should clarify that this statement is mostly directed at the comic book reading public, specifically the target audience of these stupid images. Does the typical comic reader expect to be gratified with such images? If even these kick ass super heroes aren't safe from this blatant objectification, who is? And so I protest, I'm a human being, please see me as such.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 01:53 am (UTC)