Why are female artists so sexualised?

[fashion monster 397]

It's all about the way we perceive female sexuality being represented on stage in comparison to male sexuality.

[StrawberryBlond 14,120]

Thanks so much for making this thread. You are so on point with everything. I believe that everyone can have their own brand of feminism and my personal brand works like this: "If men don't have to do it, women shouldn't either." I have never liked how a man can be fully-clothed but still be considered hot and sexy but a woman has to strip off in order to get the same compliments. I have gone about my views on sexuality 'like a man' as it were. There's a certain place men won't go because they think it's too degrading and bad for their masculine image. Well, I take the same line myself. I would never go out almost naked because just like a man, I'd feel vulnerable. I wouldn't be submissive in public (though behind closed doors, it's another story!) because just like a man, I'd feel like it would make people lose respect for me as an intelligent person with free will. If there's one thing I respect men for it's that they know that sexual expression can really change how people view you and that there can be really negative repercussions if you go about it the 'wrong' way. Women, especially in today's society, seem quite blind to those potential downsides. Probably because society's screaming at them through a loudhailer to be sexy sexual sex-havers constantly. Society encourages and allows men to be sexual in a genuinely powerful way. Women are not granted that luxury. Men and women can't be equal if they're being told to go in completely different sexual directions. I think a sad thing is that a lot of women can't seem to realise the difference from being empowered and merely having fun. They're not the same things.

But all this isn't to say that men and women can't express themselves sexually in some gender-specific ways. But I think it's important that these ways are still classy and modest. Clothing is a perfect example of that, obviously. There's no reason for women to give up feminine sexual forms of clothing, just don't go over the top with it. Men and women make themselves attractive in different ways, so we can account for that too. But I just don't like to see women being such blatant sex objects when men don't have to be. If women walked around fully clothed, would men stop being attracted to them? No, they'd learn to adapt and start to find clothed women attractive, just like women have been doing for men for centuries.

11 hours ago, Kayla said:

I agree that when women dress scantily they shouldn't act so offended when people merely look at them, but they have every right to feel objectified when people inappropriately touch them, say crude things to them, and assume that their outfit indicates they want sexual advances. That's objectification, and it's wrong. 

Agreed, no one has any right to touch you without your permission. But I think I'd put crude comments on the same level as leering. Of course, it depends on how crude these comments are. They're kinda like a natural add-on of leering, so I see it as no big deal. It's like a literal mating call. The only time I see crude comments as 100% inappropriate is if they come from someone who isn't single. If a woman doesn't want to get those reactions, she needs to re-think how she's portraying herself, because we send out messages by how we make ourselves look and like it or not, men think certain portrayals of female sexuality welcome a come-on. If I'm wearing something sexual, it's because I want men to be attracted to me. I know it seems surprising for a lot of women to hear this (especially coming from me), but I like being looked and being publicly appraised. It comes from a place of craving validation but it's a genuine feeling nonetheless. If I didn't feel comfortable with the reactions I got, I wouldn't dress like this in the first place. To all these women who say: "I just want to dress sexy for me, I should have the right to dress however I want without some creep leering at me" - could I ask, why do you even need to walk out the door if you just dress sexy for yourself? If you dress sexy for yourself, walking around your house in sexy gear should be enough for you. But no, you want to go outside wearing it, which means you must want certain reactions, consciously or subconsciously. By going outside dressed in such a way, you are sending the message to the world that you want to be appraised for your appearance and that you want validation on some level. There's no shame in that, but just be real about it.

10 hours ago, Kayla said:

Men don't need to use sexual expression to empower themselves because their sexual expression and gratification has not been stripped from them. Men have all the sexual empowerment they need. 

Ever notice how in high school we used to hear all about the GIRLS who slept around but the men who were sleeping with them magically never got called "sluts""?

Whenever stripping or ****ography comes up people also tend to focus on the women- how damaging it is, how they're using their bodies for bad things, etc. etc. So....if **** and stripping are so bad why is it only female strippers and female **** actors who get criticized for what they are doing? People don't see men in these sexual roles and view it as "degrading," but people view women being sexual as "degrading."

Men can literally go on stage in their undergarments and not have people calling them strippers, but a woman wears a leotard and all of a sudden she's compared to one. (no shade to strippers)

They can get all oiled up for photos, videos, and performances, but when women do people question whether or not they are setting our gender back a few decades by sexualizing ourselves. 

Now I would say women show their bodies WAY more and there's a certain inequality and underlying sexualization there (my movie stats posted in another comment, for example) that I think needs to be addressed and I DO think women need to think "Do I want to contribute to this statistic, and if so, how do I want it to be interpreted?" when doing things like this, but MORE importantly we need to help society agree that women are ALLOWED to be sexual beings. 

See, this is an argument that I've never understood. This idea that women aren't allowed to be sexual. All very well if you're speaking as someone living in the middle east but considering that most women taking part in such discussions are from first world, democratic, western countries, this argument makes no sense. On my 26 years on this planet, I can't remember a time when women were discouraged from being sexual or disallowed from expressing themselves sexually. If anything, it's the opposite. Women are over-encouraged to be sexual, to a de-humanising degree. This is why a lot of women feel worthless if they don't look perfect. So, when I hear this argument, I feel like I've been living in a different dimension all this time.

But for the record, as someone who's against p*rn, I don't approve of men doing it either and I acknowledge how it's damaging to all. But as for stripping, I don't view that as degrading for men as it is for women, because, like my earlier argument, men strip in a way that is powerful (even if the female audience is laughing, but that's another story) and for the most part, they don't strip completely naked or get physically intimate with the women. Female strippers are in a very different, sleazy place, a place that men simply do not occupy. So, for a man, I'd be more like: "Ugh, that's so tacky," but for a woman, I'd be like: "That's so sad."

Your argument about how men can be sexual without being compared to strippers or being accused of setting their gender back also follows pretty much the same logic. When men are sexual in media, it's in an undoubtedly powerful way. They are rarely completely naked, they flex, their facial expressions look dominant, they may even be surrounded by a woman in a submissive position. It's completely different aesthetics when a woman does it. She can be completely naked, she does submissive poses, her facial expressions resemble blow-up dolls and bimbos, she never has a more submissive male with her to make her look powerful in comparison. Hence, she gets criticised for being submissive. She gets accused of putting women back because women have had to do this for years and times should have changed now to a point where they are respected enough to be discouraged from doing these things. Women can project a powerful sexuality like men but society so rarely lets them do it. I think that needs to be addressed more than anything else.

[RadioIsOurs 13,835]

4 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Thanks so much for making this thread. You are so on point with everything. I believe that everyone can have their own brand of feminism and my personal brand works like this: "If men don't have to do it, women shouldn't either." I have never liked how a man can be fully-clothed but still be considered hot and sexy but a woman has to strip off in order to get the same compliments. I have gone about my views on sexuality 'like a man' as it were. There's a certain place men won't go because they think it's too degrading and bad for their masculine image. Well, I take the same line myself. I would never go out almost naked because just like a man, I'd feel vulnerable. I wouldn't be submissive in public (though behind closed doors, it's another story!) because just like a man, I'd feel like it would make people lose respect for me as an intelligent person with free will. If there's one thing I respect men for it's that they know that sexual expression can really change how people view you and that there can be really negative repercussions if you go about it the 'wrong' way. Women, especially in today's society, seem quite blind to those potential downsides. Probably because society's screaming at them through a loudhailer to be sexy sexual sex-havers constantly. Society encourages and allows men to be sexual in a genuinely powerful way. Women are not granted that luxury. Men and women can't be equal if they're being told to go in completely different sexual directions. I think a sad thing is that a lot of women can't seem to realise the difference from being empowered and merely having fun. They're not the same things.

But all this isn't to say that men and women can't express themselves sexually in some gender-specific ways. But I think it's important that these ways are still classy and modest. Clothing is a perfect example of that, obviously. There's no reason for women to give up feminine sexual forms of clothing, just don't go over the top with it. Men and women make themselves attractive in different ways, so we can account for that too. But I just don't like to see women being such blatant sex objects when men don't have to be. If women walked around fully clothed, would men stop being attracted to them? No, they'd learn to adapt and start to find clothed women attractive, just like women have been doing for men for centuries.

Agreed, no one has any right to touch you without your permission. But I think I'd put crude comments on the same level as leering. Of course, it depends on how crude these comments are. They're kinda like a natural add-on of leering, so I see it as no big deal. It's like a literal mating call. The only time I see crude comments as 100% inappropriate is if they come from someone who isn't single. If a woman doesn't want to get those reactions, she needs to re-think how she's portraying herself, because we send out messages by how we make ourselves look and like it or not, men think certain portrayals of female sexuality welcome a come-on. If I'm wearing something sexual, it's because I want men to be attracted to me. I know it seems surprising for a lot of women to hear this (especially coming from me), but I like being looked and being publicly appraised. It comes from a place of craving validation but it's a genuine feeling nonetheless. If I didn't feel comfortable with the reactions I got, I wouldn't dress like this in the first place. To all these women who say: "I just want to dress sexy for me, I should have the right to dress however I want without some creep leering at me" - could I ask, why do you even need to walk out the door if you just dress sexy for yourself? If you dress sexy for yourself, walking around your house in sexy gear should be enough for you. But no, you want to go outside wearing it, which means you must want certain reactions, consciously or subconsciously. By going outside dressed in such a way, you are sending the message to the world that you want to be appraised for your appearance and that you want validation on some level. There's no shame in that, but just be real about it.

See, this is an argument that I've never understood. This idea that women aren't allowed to be sexual. All very well if you're speaking as someone living in the middle east but considering that most women taking part in such discussions are from first world, democratic, western countries, this argument makes no sense. On my 26 years on this planet, I can't remember a time when women were discouraged from being sexual or disallowed from expressing themselves sexually. If anything, it's the opposite. Women are over-encouraged to be sexual, to a de-humanising degree. This is why a lot of women feel worthless if they don't look perfect. So, when I hear this argument, I feel like I've been living in a different dimension all this time.

But for the record, as someone who's against p*rn, I don't approve of men doing it either and I acknowledge how it's damaging to all. But as for stripping, I don't view that as degrading for men as it is for women, because, like my earlier argument, men strip in a way that is powerful (even if the female audience is laughing, but that's another story) and for the most part, they don't strip completely naked or get physically intimate with the women. Female strippers are in a very different, sleazy place, a place that men simply do not occupy. So, for a man, I'd be more like: "Ugh, that's so tacky," but for a woman, I'd be like: "That's so sad."

Your argument about how men can be sexual without being compared to strippers or being accused of setting their gender back also follows pretty much the same logic. When men are sexual in media, it's in an undoubtedly powerful way. They are rarely completely naked, they flex, their facial expressions look dominant, they may even be surrounded by a woman in a submissive position. It's completely different aesthetics when a woman does it. She can be completely naked, she does submissive poses, her facial expressions resemble blow-up dolls and bimbos, she never has a more submissive male with her to make her look powerful in comparison. Hence, she gets criticised for being submissive. She gets accused of putting women back because women have had to do this for years and times should have changed now to a point where they are respected enough to be discouraged from doing these things. Women can project a powerful sexuality like men but society so rarely lets them do it. I think that needs to be addressed more than anything else.

Bravo...

[sillynate 6,170]

I'm really curious to know how the GP would react to a male artist skimping around in tight undies shaking his butt talking about how much he likes to have sex. I'm dead serious I really wanna know. I'm waiting for it to happen 

[BuzzcutSeason 3,307]

yeah, i understand being sexual. And i didn't exactly hate it but it was lowkey raunchy how sexual everything was this year. Britney being sexual was expected, and shorter outfits, etc. but in general it felt so over sexualized (thats not a word). I don't know what or even how a VMA year with Beyonce, Britney, and Rihanna left such a bad taste in my mouth. Its like if it wasn't the hosts, it was the camera angles, and its just a chain of things messed up.

[dopega 3,695]

21 hours ago, Misaki said:

They need to take a lesson

 

This is what is scream Slay at

[mmm 879]

because of ideologies like feminism that taught women that they need to be naked to express themselves and feel powerful 

[Redstreak 6,653]

20 hours ago, PotatoBanks said:

I completely agree with @RainbowBlonde, and I could write a 500 page thesis on why almost everyone else here is soon wrong.

but just some of my thoughts:

Gaga's sexuality and beyonce's sexuality are ENTIRELY different. This is because it is clear gaga is sexy for herself, this is seen when half the time she dresses like it's halloween and isn't afraid to appear 'ugly' or 'weird'. When gaga does a sexy concept I see it as more sincere.

However for the vast majority of other female pop singers, I don't see any difference between them and the 'sexy' twerking backup dancers in many rapper's (or male singers as a whole) music videos. 

It really irritates me when other pop women claim to be doing it for empowerment, because honestly it seems like it's what their career depends on rather than a stylist choice over which they have fun control. The way I see it, beyonce (sorry for picking on her but it comes to mind :Emma:) is just as famous (if not more so) for her body and curves and ass, than she is for her singing, which just screams 'objectification' to me. 

but I'm interested if @RainbowBlonde agrees with me on the gaga thing or not

? Just because Beyonce's choice of sexuality reminds you of "sexy twerking back up dances" bears little meaning when you take into account the context of their different performances. Beyonce is dancing as herself, for herself, and within her own created mode of self expression, the 'backup dancers' are stereotypically used as sexual props to bolster the male lead's image. They're two completely different scenarios.

[weed 71,262]

I feel like so many of you are missing the point........ Like.... Name an "ugly" yet super successful and respected female celebrity, period! Doesn't exist! While Benedict Cumberbatch, Ed Sheeran, Jonah Hill, Steve Buscemi, etc etc etc are all still massive and adored! They're not required to be sexy!

[RadioIsOurs 13,835]

1 hour ago, Redstreak said:

? Just because Beyonce's choice of sexuality reminds you of "sexy twerking back up dances" bears little meaning when you take into account the context of their different performances. Beyonce is dancing as herself, for herself, and within her own created mode of self expression, the 'backup dancers' are stereotypically used as sexual props to bolster the male lead's image. They're two completely different scenarios.

And yet that rarely happens with female artists! Instead, they themselves become the 'sexy twerking back up dancer' along with several other female dancers. They somehow never feel the need to have their own human 'sexual props' opposite to them like men do. Therefore it isn't equal.

But even men can't become a 'sexual prop' and dance around sexually either. This guy did it and it killed his whole ****ing career:

All the double standards...

[KURUSHITOVSKA 20,442]

There's two parts: them neing sexualized and them sexualizing themselves like Riri or Nicki so...

[Ricky Bee 2]

sex sells apparently all though it is getting really old quick

[Kayla 7,595]

On 8/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

Probably because society's screaming at them through a loudhailer to be sexy sexual sex-havers constantly. Society encourages and allows men to be sexual in a genuinely powerful way. Women are not granted that luxury.

Very true.

Men are taught, as you said, to be powerful and ultimately dominant about it. This leads to some men approaching women, leering, making crude comments, etc. 
Women are taught to be submissive, to do things to attract. This leads to some women dressing provocative for attention, the male gaze, etc. 

One thing I've noticed though is that a lot of women (myself included at times) will dress not for other men, but for other women. And not on a sexual level, but in a social sort of way.
I dress for myself, but I also want to fit the occasion or place, so I base what I pull out of my closet on what the other women will be wearing.
This doesn't mean I'm not dressing for myself, just that I don't want to show up to the opening of an art studio wearing the same thing I wore to a BDSM dance party.
 

On 8/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

But I think I'd put crude comments on the same level as leering. Of course, it depends on how crude these comments are. They're kinda like a natural add-on of leering, so I see it as no big deal.

I've had men strike up a conversation with me and tell me I have a beautiful smile, which is fine.
But I've also had a group of men stand directly behind me while I was laying down on a beach chair (I was on my stomach reading a book) and loudly talk about my ass, I've had a guy, who I sortof knew already, ask me "So, Kayla, when we gonna ****?", etc. I would say those are inappropriate. 
I've also had men do things like "Oh, DAMN!" when I walk by, and while it's not insulting or anything, what happens is they exclaim loudly so then everyone in the vicinity looks to see what they are apparently excited about and you have half a block of people staring at you. It feels awkward, and all of a sudden my walk to the bus stop is quite uncomfortable. 
 

On 8/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

If a woman doesn't want to get those reactions, she needs to re-think how she's portraying herself, because we send out messages by how we make ourselves look and like it or not, men think certain portrayals of female sexuality welcome a come-on.

You say if women want men to approach them differently they should dress differently, I say if men think the way a woman looks is an excuse to make assumptions about her they can buy a ****ing sex doll and stay at home. 

By telling women not to dress a certain way if she doesn't want certain attention you're encouraging her to modify her decisions because of men. We should be making decisions for ourselves, not based on how men will react.

What I look cutest in is my modest little black dress. It looks innocent as ****, but I look cute as **** in it, and if I wanted to pick someone up I'd wear that.
^My point being, not all women wear promiscuous things when they're looking to find someone for sex. I know I actually feel uncomfortable in super revealing things or super tight things, so I wouldn't wear them if I wanted to approach someone I was attracted to.

You know what men need to do? Stop assuming our clothes speak for us. Instead of seeing a girl in a mini-dress and assuming she wants to ****, they need to find a girl they like, talk to her like a ****ing human, and go from there. I'm sexual as hell and can often be found with no make-up and jeans - my clothes don't determine how DTF I am, my mind does. 
 

On 8/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

 

On 8/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

See, this is an argument that I've never understood. This idea that women aren't allowed to be sexual.

Compare Taylor Swift and John Mayer. (I don't like either of them, so I'ma neutral party) Both are known for dating a lot, jumping from spouse to spouse, etc.
But John Mayer is known as an attractive "heartbreaker" and Taylor gets negative criticism.
Men are allowed to date around, but when a woman does there must be something wrong with her (why else wouldn't she be able to hold down a man?), she's slutty, etc. etc. 
(I know my comparison is watered down by the usage of Taylor, who we know is a sketchy person, but please just take the concept itself from my example)

Or ever notice how women get called "sluts" or "whores" for sleeping around but men don't?
Is there even a male version of the word "*****"? Oh, yeah, "man-*****," because the default word refers to sexually promiscuous women. 

On the radio the other day some commercial came on saying: "Ever thought about doing two girls at the same time? How about FIFTEEN girls at the same time?!" Imagine a woman talking about banging 15 guys at the same time, let alone just 2 - they wouldn't play that commercial on the radio. 

We get the idea that women aren't allowed to be sexual when we have conversations about **** and stripping - we always focus on the women and how degrading it is for them - never the men. Because to society it's not degrading when men are having sex, but it's degrading when a woman is. 

There are plenty more examples, but this is where the "idea" comes from. 
 

On 8/29/2016 at 5:59 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

Women are over-encouraged to be sexual, to a de-humanising degree. This is why a lot of women feel worthless if they don't look perfect.

I also agree intensely with this. Today at the store I was contemplating buying highlighter to give parts of my face a pretty glow, but then I was like "**** that" and I walked my plain-ass face right outta the makeup section. 

It's a constant battle being a woman, honestly.

It's like living in a beauty pageant you never signed up for. 

I alternate between wearing no makeup because I don't want to and wearing makeup because I want to, but it's seriously an effort to sit down and go "Okay, what kind of setting am I going to be in and what do *I* want to look like?"

We are pressured to be a certain way, look a certain way, fit a certain mold, etc. so much that it can be difficult to figure out who we are underneath it all. That's why I think certain expressions of sexuality are deemed "empowering" because it's the woman saying "I'm not doing this because I'm supposed to, I'm doing this because I want to."

Because at the end of the day, that's what it's about - allowing women do do what they WANT, not what we think they should do. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,120]

16 hours ago, Kayla said:

Very true.

Men are taught, as you said, to be powerful and ultimately dominant about it. This leads to some men approaching women, leering, making crude comments, etc. 
Women are taught to be submissive, to do things to attract. This leads to some women dressing provocative for attention, the male gaze, etc. 

One thing I've noticed though is that a lot of women (myself included at times) will dress not for other men, but for other women. And not on a sexual level, but in a social sort of way.
I dress for myself, but I also want to fit the occasion or place, so I base what I pull out of my closet on what the other women will be wearing.
This doesn't mean I'm not dressing for myself, just that I don't want to show up to the opening of an art studio wearing the same thing I wore to a BDSM dance party.
 

I've had men strike up a conversation with me and tell me I have a beautiful smile, which is fine.
But I've also had a group of men stand directly behind me while I was laying down on a beach chair (I was on my stomach reading a book) and loudly talk about my ass, I've had a guy, who I sortof knew already, ask me "So, Kayla, when we gonna ****?", etc. I would say those are inappropriate. 
I've also had men do things like "Oh, DAMN!" when I walk by, and while it's not insulting or anything, what happens is they exclaim loudly so then everyone in the vicinity looks to see what they are apparently excited about and you have half a block of people staring at you. It feels awkward, and all of a sudden my walk to the bus stop is quite uncomfortable. 
 

You say if women want men to approach them differently they should dress differently, I say if men think the way a woman looks is an excuse to make assumptions about her they can buy a ****ing sex doll and stay at home. 

By telling women not to dress a certain way if she doesn't want certain attention you're encouraging her to modify her decisions because of men. We should be making decisions for ourselves, not based on how men will react.

What I look cutest in is my modest little black dress. It looks innocent as ****, but I look cute as **** in it, and if I wanted to pick someone up I'd wear that.
^My point being, not all women wear promiscuous things when they're looking to find someone for sex. I know I actually feel uncomfortable in super revealing things or super tight things, so I wouldn't wear them if I wanted to approach someone I was attracted to.

You know what men need to do? Stop assuming our clothes speak for us. Instead of seeing a girl in a mini-dress and assuming she wants to ****, they need to find a girl they like, talk to her like a ****ing human, and go from there. I'm sexual as hell and can often be found with no make-up and jeans - my clothes don't determine how DTF I am, my mind does. 
 

Compare Taylor Swift and John Mayer. (I don't like either of them, so I'ma neutral party) Both are known for dating a lot, jumping from spouse to spouse, etc.
But John Mayer is known as an attractive "heartbreaker" and Taylor gets negative criticism.
Men are allowed to date around, but when a woman does there must be something wrong with her (why else wouldn't she be able to hold down a man?), she's slutty, etc. etc. 
(I know my comparison is watered down by the usage of Taylor, who we know is a sketchy person, but please just take the concept itself from my example)

Or ever notice how women get called "sluts" or "whores" for sleeping around but men don't?
Is there even a male version of the word "*****"? Oh, yeah, "man-*****," because the default word refers to sexually promiscuous women. 

On the radio the other day some commercial came on saying: "Ever thought about doing two girls at the same time? How about FIFTEEN girls at the same time?!" Imagine a woman talking about banging 15 guys at the same time, let alone just 2 - they wouldn't play that commercial on the radio. 

We get the idea that women aren't allowed to be sexual when we have conversations about **** and stripping - we always focus on the women and how degrading it is for them - never the men. Because to society it's not degrading when men are having sex, but it's degrading when a woman is. 

There are plenty more examples, but this is where the "idea" comes from. 
 

I also agree intensely with this. Today at the store I was contemplating buying highlighter to give parts of my face a pretty glow, but then I was like "**** that" and I walked my plain-ass face right outta the makeup section. 

It's a constant battle being a woman, honestly.

It's like living in a beauty pageant you never signed up for. 

I alternate between wearing no makeup because I don't want to and wearing makeup because I want to, but it's seriously an effort to sit down and go "Okay, what kind of setting am I going to be in and what do *I* want to look like?"

We are pressured to be a certain way, look a certain way, fit a certain mold, etc. so much that it can be difficult to figure out who we are underneath it all. That's why I think certain expressions of sexuality are deemed "empowering" because it's the woman saying "I'm not doing this because I'm supposed to, I'm doing this because I want to."

Because at the end of the day, that's what it's about - allowing women do do what they WANT, not what we think they should do. 

Yes, women do certainly dress for other women. I know when I dress, I'm partly considering how other women will percieve me in it. I know men usually don't notice but a woman will certainly notice if I've worn the same outfit on and off for a couple of weeks. And she might start to think I don't have much clothes or money. A lot of us admit that we want other women to think we look good. We want women to wish they had our style, our chic-ness, our ability to make anything look amazing. I remember my cousin once said to her mum about how well-dressed my mum and I look: "Mum, why is it that Rachel and Aunty Isabelle always look so sophisticated and you and me always look like a couple of tramps?" So, yeah, it's on a lot of women's minds. I know I've been fussing about what I'm going to wear to a hen (bachelorette) party on Saturday and fear I'll be too over-dressed. Men don't have this issue!

Yeah, I understand that not all women like that kind of attention. And men certainly shouldn't pretend like they know which women like it or not. And definitely, flat-out asking someone crude things is out of line. And I totally understand why you suddenly become aware that other people are looking at you now because a comment has been shouted. This whole concept is brilliantly talked about in Everyday Sexism by Laura Bates, the section entitled "Women in public spaces." I sure felt guilty after reading all of it and like I was trivialising something that some women find offensive and even terrifying. And I'm not downplaying those women's experiences. All I'm simply saying is that I don't see certain little comments as that bad, personally. Admittedly, it all comes down to lack of acceptance from men throughout my life. To have reached my age without any romance, it makes me hold on to any kind of compliment I can get, it gives me hope that one day, something will happen. So, it means that essentially, I'm desperate to be seen sexually because no one seems to view me that way. I see it happen for all different women, why not me? Honestly, in all my life, I've never been cat-called. All I've had is two overheard comments about me when I was 15 (which I still look on fondly all these years later) and other than that, it's just occasional looks. This is despite me looking feminine with long hair, clear skin, a little waist, long legs, DD breasts and a rear end big enough to the point that I was once accused of deliberately sticking it out. I should be the poster girl for the catcalling phenomenon but it never happens. Yet, I hear other women suffer from it constantly and they don't all look like me. So, I start thinking no man wants me. I know this is all kinda missing the point and that there's more to a man's interest in you than shouting remarks but when it's drummed into you so much that catcalling is a way of life for so many women and it's nothing to do with how hot you are and so on, I start wondering why it never happens to me. You know how older women sometimes say: "Be grateful for your youth, you'll miss it when you're older and men no longer give you a second glance"? Well, it feels like I'm already going through that period. I feel like I've missed on the great experience of being young when everyone's hormonal and boys can't keep their eyes off you. I feel old before my time, so how am I going to feel like when I'm actually older? Of course I have no intention of getting involved with someone who catcalls. But if it happened, it would give me that reassurance that men do find me attractive, they are interested in me sexually, that I'm not invisible. Yes, I obviously want to be valued for more than my appearance, but physical attraction is where more relationships start, so if I can't even get so much as an acknowledgement of that, what hope does that give? This is partly the reason why I don't support The Free The Nipple campaign. I feel like it wants to take away the attraction for a body part that makes me feel feminine, something about me that I know men like. Maybe catcalling is tiresome for women who have no problem getting a man. For those of us who can't, we crave it. I gather this all sounds very sad. I'm feeling very sad writing it.

I'm not just talking about how men make assumptions based on what women are wearing. I'm talking about this throughout our entire culture. It's a natural human reaction to make judgements based on what a person is wearing. I saw this in a feminist book, actually. Our clothing tells people certain things about us, how much money we have, if we belong to an organisation, if we are an authority figure, who we are and who we are not. For better or worse, certain clothing garners certain responses so we should be aware of the messages we may be sending out. It's not just a woman thing, it's something we all have a responsibility to do to protect ourselves and to make sure we feel comfortable in certain company.

I'm actually going to disagree a lot on the Taylor and John comparison. Not that he gets talked about in my country, but from what I can gather online, he frequently gets called a man w***e, a womaniser and women are discouraged from going near him. Taylor used to have a section on her Wiki that detailed the people she'd dated - that bit was permanently removed recently and there is no mention of her dating history on her page anymore. John does have a section on his relationships on his Wiki and there's stuff about how he'd talked about previous girlfriends under the controversy section. If anything, I've only seen more and more defence of women who date a lot recently and see the tables turning as regards men. Even Leonardo DiCaprio is finally getting a bit of backlash for all the many casual dates he's had with countless models over the years. There's generally a out-pouring of "stay away, he's been with hundreds of women" comments online when a famous woman hooks up with a man who's known to be a player. But yeah, I wish there was a better word for a promiscuous man that hadn't been turned into a badge of honour. I tend to call them arrogant p****s but maybe that's just me. Yes, that radio ad certainly is very shocking but I find the outrage comes from the sexist nature of it in the sense that it's seen as ok to talk about women in such a disgusting way on national radio during primetime. The last thing I'm thinking of is "Why can't women say this about men?" No one should be saying that about anyone! And when it comes to p**n and stripping, well, we focus on how degrading it is for women partly because sex can literally hurt women (and in p**n, it most certainly does, frequently) and tend to suffer physically due to being in p**n. Men don't have those problems. Women are also far more likely to be sex trafficked and sexually abused in the industry, and in life. So, we feel for them a lot more. Does a bit of good old-fashioned sexist thinking come into it? Totally. But it's unfair to generalise the whole concern as just being about preserving female modesty.

I take exactly the same line with make up as well. It's such a hassle to put on, so I save it for when its absolutely crucial. Most days, all I want to wear is some kind of lip product anyway. I'm lucky that I have the confidence to think I don't require make up (I know, surprisingly after everything I said earlier - I sometimes think my confidence just doesn't resonate with others) because a lot of women don't feel that way. I despair when I saw my cousin putting on a ton of makeup, including liquid foundation over her eyelids, just to go down to the local member's club where there aren't even people her age. My aunt once asked me seriously why I was wearing make up one day because I 'never' wear it...and then proceeded to ask why I hadn't bothered with mascara. And that I should wear make up more because it'll make me feel good. And that the time and effort it takes is just part of being a girl. I felt like we were being filmed for a prank tv show. I couldn't believe I was hearing this in this day and age, where women are being praised for going against the norm and are finding confidence to be natural. So, I'm with you on all those counts. But I think make up is slightly different from actual expressions of sexuality. Unless you're writing "F**k me" across your forehead in lipstick!

[Whispering 18,865]

On August 29, 2016 at 11:21 PM, natesARTPOP said:

I'm really curious to know how the GP would react to a male artist skimping around in tight undies shaking his butt talking about how much he likes to have sex. I'm dead serious I really wanna know. I'm waiting for it to happen 

They majority of girls and women wouldn't find this appealing, not in real life or in entertainment. That's why you don't see it. The majority of males would find it unappealing, as well.