objectificationofwomen

posts about #objectificationofwomen more →
Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
John McCain Will Pimp Cindy For Your Vote
"Vanity Fair" Cover Has Blogger Seeing (Blood) Red

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

ellaesther
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
What.the.hell.is.WRONG.with.people?!?!

Sweet baby Moses in the bullrushes. I would caterwaul, but I'm afraid I can't reach the decibels that this deserves.
Reply

ellaesther was starred ellaesther was unstarred

par3
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
but if this were a man surrounded by stilettos and hair clips we would be celebrating?
Reply

par3 was starred par3 was unstarred

NellMood
02/20/09

@par3: What makes you think this?
Reply

NellMood was starred NellMood was unstarred

Ant Girl
02/20/09

@par3:

As Jean Kilbourne in her Killing us Softly presentations has said about the more recent portrayal of men in advertising as mere body parts: This is not the type of equality I've been advocating for.

Ditto with this.
Reply

Ant Girl was starred Ant Girl was unstarred

HuckleberryFriend
02/20/09

@par3: No, I somehow don't think I would celebrate this, despite the amusing imagery.
Reply

HuckleberryFriend was starred

PrettyPrettyPrincess
02/20/09

@par3: Only if it's a scrunchie, and in Cosmo, cause that kind of ironic selfawareness on their part would be amusing :)

(kidding)

I vote NO for all forms of objectification today. Rough week on the interwebz
Reply

PrettyPrettyPrincess
02/20/09

@Ant Girl: Excellent reference. I will be friending you now, thanks :)
Reply

Slumdog_Mamabear
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
For some reason this brings to mind the new trend of people using naked women as plates for sushi. That seems

1) unsanitary

2)awkward (do we talk to our living flatware?)

3) SO NOT COOL!

I will however, confess to using my baby as exercise equipment in the past, but he seemed to enjoy it.
Reply

Slumdog_Mamabear was starred Slumdog_Mamabear was unstarred

femputer
02/20/09

@Slumdog_Mamabear: Tell me about it.. Who came up with that? And why sushi in particular?

Slumdog, I say we throw a chili cookoff on the bellies of the Details editors.

(may have just grossed myself out a little there)
Reply

femputer was starred femputer was unstarred

femputer
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
should we be relieved that it is straight-forward? We always see ads for things that have little or nothing to do with a woman's body using one, but here they aren't trying to even be clever: here look at our products...it's okay (i.e. masculine) to look at men's fashion accessories - they are draped over a faceless woman on her knees!

And that "gem" from last time? I don't even know where to start. It is beyond creepy.
Reply

femputer was starred femputer was unstarred

theysaidwhat
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
It seems as though it's time to write to the companies whose products are 'featured' in this picture, doesn't it???
Reply

theysaidwhat was starred theysaidwhat was unstarred

theysaidwhat
02/20/09

@theysaidwhat: Oh Look!!! They conveniently give you all the company names!

[men.style.com]
Reply

theysaidwhat was starred theysaidwhat was unstarred

LaFemme
02/20/09

@theysaidwhat: Companies that give their products to magazines don't have a say in how their products are depicted. So why would you write the companies?
Reply

LaFemme was starred LaFemme was unstarred

southernbelle
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
It's really unfortunate that my high heels won't stay standing on my husband's ass. I mean, we've tried, and he's getting really sick of the Krazy Glue.
Reply

southernbelle was starred southernbelle was unstarred

PrairieGirl
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
I know models get paid to pose how they are asked to pose and if they ask questions or complain they probably don't work anymore, but at what point can a model say, "um I don't think so, that's kinda degrading."? Or what about the stylists, assistants and all the other people who work on photo shoots? When I see images like this I always think about how many people were involved in the making of it and wonder who, if anyone, raised the point that it's not only crass but offensive? I mean, there are a lot of people who had to sign off on that before it was published. Did none of them think that maybe that's not the shot they should have gone with?
Reply

PrairieGirl was starred PrairieGirl was unstarred

nellicat
02/20/09

@PrairieGirl: I raised the exact same question. The models know that if they say no, they can be replaced in a split second. But you know? You have to live with integrity and I find it hard to sympathize with someone who will pose for something as degrading to women as this and call it a legitimate career choice. The modeling industry in itself is problematic (I think every model should wonder, and care, if teenagers are using her image as "thinspiration), but esp. so when women choose to go along with shit like this.
Reply

nellicat was starred nellicat was unstarred

PrairieGirl
02/20/09

@nellicat: I took so long to compose my comment I didn't get to see yours first! Anyway, we appear to be of a similar opinion on this. I agree that models should take some responsibility for the images they participate in creating. If they defend their participation in an image such as this with something like "I know it's bad but I'm still establishing my career", or "If I complain I'll never work again" then they need to ask themselves just what kind of profession is modeling anyway? If this particular model had no opinions about the pose or thought it was a OK, then I guess she's as vapid as models are often thought to be. (Not by me.)

But it's not just the model who created this photo. There are a lot of other people involved and they are all just as responsible for this tripe. I always wonder about all the people involved when I see an ad that's so ill-advised as to be laughable. Did they all think, "well, that's so awful that no one will pick that one!" or did they all really not see anything wrong? And if they did have an objection did they say anything or let it go?
Reply

PrairieGirl was starred PrairieGirl was unstarred

nellicat
02/20/09

@PrairieGirl: Yeppers. And not EVERY single person involved in the shoot and choosing the photo layout had to be a woman-hating man, right? Someone, male or female, had to know how wrong this was and chosen not to take a stand. How do we get beyond that?
Reply

nellicat was starred nellicat was unstarred

pear.shaped.Sara
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
You guuuuuuuuuys, just relaaaaaaaaax!

ugh
Reply

pear.shaped.Sara was starred pear.shaped.Sara was unstarred

femputer
02/20/09

@xuatastic: "women in their world are essentially useless"?! Please tell us you're being sarcastic. If not, no, it is not okay for a gay man to objectify a woman any more than it is for a straight man. It's like Isaac Mizrahi (sp?) man-handling Scarlett Johansson's (again - sp?) boobs on a live red-carpet feed (can't remember what the event was, but I know my heart went out to her because it was appalling). To say a gay man can objectify/grab a woman b/c he isn't turned on by it leads to this thought: I can objectify/grab kids because I am not a pedophile and it doesn't turn me on.

Doesn't sound right, does it?
Reply

femputer was starred femputer was unstarred

nellicat
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
Could we discuss the woman who chooses to pose for this because she, you know, likes money? Or is that off limits?
Reply

nellicat was starred nellicat was unstarred

tscheese
02/20/09

@nellicat: Y'know, this is a kind of interesting point. There was a post a few months back about some really exclusive hoity-toity...calendar photoshoot? Thing? That featured models who had bugs on their faces, who were waist-deep in brackish water, etc, and a lot of people wondered why on earth a model would stoop to that. It looked uncomfortable and miserable and misogynistic--why would anyone think it was okay to depict beautiful women in such icky situations?

Turned out there was a lot of prestige and name-recognition involved in doing a shoot like that. The models were compensated and given recognition for participating in that shoot. Some supposedly "highbrow" thing.

Is this so much worse because it's for a more low-key, mass media audience? Was the bugs-and-mud shoot OK because it involved prestige and high art, but this is not okay because it reinforces misogyny to the majority?

It's a hard question. I actually don't have a single answer.
Reply

tscheese was starred tscheese was unstarred

nellicat
02/20/09

@tscheese: Personally, I don't think either was okay. I think models, like everyone else, have to make decisions based on their own sense of integrity and if they are promoting misogyny and the objectification of women, they have to decide if the $$ is worth it. Kind of like being an attorney for the cigarette manufacturers, I guess.
Reply

nellicat was starred nellicat was unstarred

clevernamehere
02/20/09

@nellicat: I think in the moment things can seem very different than they appear on film. They must have shot dozens of different arrangements which were less creepy. The halfway through the photog asks for this pose and she doesn't even realize how messed up it is. She's after all the model, not the one looking through the lense.

The fault lies with the people who picked this photo, not the model who posed for it,
Reply

clevernamehere was starred clevernamehere was unstarred

nellicat
02/20/09

@clevernamehere: Really? YOu're naked, on all fours, and someone places a shoe on your head, another on your ass, your head down, and stuff draped all over you, and you don't know how it's going to look? I think there is plenty of fault to go around.
Reply

nellicat was starred nellicat was unstarred

clevernamehere
02/20/09

@nellicat: People And the model is most likely under 22, possibly foriegn and therefore not as able to advocate for herself. Blaming her just take blame off the older, more powerful staff of Details.

And yes, I think lots of things can seem like a good idea in the moment but obviously be bad ideas the next day.
Reply

clevernamehere was starred clevernamehere was unstarred

nanner36
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
This doesn't say furniture to me; it says accessory. She's not just a place to put these bags and shoes, she's one of them. She is a status symbol, just like the expensive bags, shoes and watches. So my conclusion, just like people have already said, is that Details doth protest too much--why try to balance your purple croc bag with a naked chick? Just accept your gay following and come on out of the closet. Or don't and continue to produce spreads like these that baffle both readers and advertiser and seal your fate as the latest in the string of magazine failures that is Conde Nast.
Reply

nanner36 was starred nanner36 was unstarred

saintbernadette
02/20/09

@nanner36: Yes; especially since the title of the "story" is "Girl Not Included." Oh, those clever guys.
Reply

saintbernadette was starred saintbernadette was unstarred

msAnthrope
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
i'd love to hear tatiana's take on modeling assignments like this one.
Reply

msAnthrope was starred msAnthrope was unstarred

gold_gato
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
I wish I could stick my foot up this magazine's ass. But that would be a waste of a perfectly good shoe.
Reply

gold_gato was starred gold_gato was unstarred

saintbernadette
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
In all the other pictures, it just looks like she's masturbating with suitcases and belts.
Reply

saintbernadette was starred saintbernadette was unstarred

Grim Reaper of the Forest
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
Actually, I was using a clothed lady as my coffee table / hat rack, but she kept on getting dusty. The naked chick stays cleaner and wicks away moisture.
Reply

andromache
02/20/09

In reply to Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture
this reminds me of A Clockwork Orange. or am I just hallucinating?
Reply

andromache was starred andromache was unstarred

chritter is a nocturnal feminist mancatfish
02/20/09

@andromache dreams in Clive Owenvision: That's what I thought, too. Swiped from the Korova Accessories Bar?
Reply

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#objectificationofwomen

Jezebel

SUBSCRIBE TO Jezebel

Men's Magazine Treats Women Like Garbage, Furniture

John McCain Will Pimp Cindy For Your Vote

"Vanity Fair" Cover Has Blogger Seeing (Blood) Red

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment