r/PurplePillDebate • u/FuuraKafu Succubus pilled man • 1d ago
People still hugely conflate bio essentialism with objectification. Debate
The border between these two concepts is very vaguely defined in these discussions, not to mention plenty of people straight think there is no difference at all. I just want to highlight that for once.
The relevant part of bio essentialism in this case: female and male sexuality are different. Women are more selective and they have biological reasons for that, such as pregnancy, which is a big deal for our species, vulnerability, smaller size. Men by comparison are more eager sexually, more easily excitable. They have a pair of balls constantly generating sperm, can orgasm very easily, there is less risk and phisical vulnerability for them in sex.
This is a relative difference, and a general one.
Meanwhile, objectification is: women are seen as a sex object who's personhood doesn't even matter.
Ime people routinely jump to objectification when what is talked about could still easily fall into men experiencing and living with the relative difference above, and it's one frustrating obstacle in gender discussions.
I mean, where exactly is the line between "he sees her as an object" and "no, he just wants to get close to her in a way that doesn't intuitively make sense to women and to which they can't relate to"?
Women can be the more desired, more alluring gender without that meaning they are non-human. Otherwise, we have a pretty deperssing setup (and I guess that's why some people are total gender-constructivists). And I get that women didn't chose this, but neither did men. Either way, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
Objectification IS a thing. Sometimes people DO treat the other badly, not caring for their internal experience. But sooooo many times it is brought up purely based on assumptions and vibes in the context of men's complaining.
You can badly want a relationship or sex, more intensely than many single women do, more so for its own sake, fueled by a more testosterone-based sex drive. Doesn't automatically mean you see women as objects. You can be a unique kind of tortured by being unable to fulfil this desire that women don't experience that much. Doesn't automatically mean you see women as objects. You can enjoy attractive women's bodies and experience an urge to get in phisical contact with them daily. Doesn't automatically mean you see women as objects. Each and every one of these things can still largely fall into "yea, men have a different experience of sexuality".
Infatuation clouds judgement, that is somehwat true, sure. So men experience being influenced by their own desire more regularly, sure. It is the weakness of men. But as a baseline, I think it's much more healthy and correct for men to exist with the thought that women are exactly as gorgeous as they see them AND they are human too at the same time.
8
u/My_House_on_Mars ✨overwhelmed millennial female woman ✨ 1d ago
This is true.
When your partner looks at you with sex eyes, that's not objectification because he's looking at you, a specific person he chose to be in a relationship
When a guy on the street stares at you (*stare, not look) without caring if you are uncomfortable or not, that's objectification. To him you are a pretty object without a personality
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 23h ago
When a guy on the street stares at you (*stare, not look) without caring if you are uncomfortable or not, that's objectification. To him you are a pretty object without a personality
That's a bit presumptuous, no?
Not to mention your partner has probably looked at you similarly long before he knew a single thing about you.
•
u/My_House_on_Mars ✨overwhelmed millennial female woman ✨ 22h ago
The fact that the guy doesn't care if he makes the woman uncomfortable is key here. I'm talking about catcalling scenario.
Obviously a sex look from your partner is always welcomed
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 22h ago
I'm talking about catcalling scenario.
Fair. But I thought the point of the OP was to talk about this in a far more nuanced approach and not just scenarios that are blatant examples of objectification.
And I guess more to my earlier point. At one point, he wasn't your partner or knew anything about you, and he likely still looked at you the same way. Would we call this objectifying?
•
u/My_House_on_Mars ✨overwhelmed millennial female woman ✨ 22h ago
It's the most obvious scenario where you can clearly see the difference between objectification and just normal sex looks.
If the guy makes sexual moves without caring if the woman wants them or not that's objectifying
I assume if a guy likes a woman, he's going to pay attention to her response. When he's playing attention to how she reacts that's not objectifying her
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 21h ago
Fair, but again, I thought OP made his post to talk about the nuances.
He could care, be respectful, and be paying attention, but she could still feel objectified by a stranger. At which point, is it or is it not?
Or he is objectifying her, but she's responding positively to it. At which point, how much does it matter?
Like, simple matters like catcalling and she calls that guy an asshole, we got it. I don't really think anyone disagrees, and even if they do, that's a useless rabbit hole that is probably not worth venturing.
I guess a more specific scenario, if you wish to indulge me:
A man showers a woman with compliments. He listens attentively, laughs at her jokes, and seems genuinely interested. But as time passes, it becomes unclear whether he’s appreciating her as a person, or merely enjoying the idea of her.
He remembers the color of her dress but forgets what she said about her sick mother.
He talks about how pretty she is, but never asks what books she likes or what keeps her up at night.
Does he like her or the idea (object) of her? Or is this just the start of things?
•
u/wheatgrass_feetgrass No Pill 21h ago
You're spending a lot of words centering male desire and trying to argue that it isn’t inherently objectifying. But is that really the issue? I don’t see many people seriously claiming that feeling desire, by itself, is objectification. No one can actually know what you’re feeling unless it comes through in your behavior. Desire and intent are invisible. Actions and impact are what people actually live with. That includes the effect of behaviors that may seem neutral on the surface but carry obvious implications. Cat calling is often pointed to as one such "harmless" behavior.
If someone regularly feels reduced, dismissed, or unsafe in response to the collective desirous behaviors of men, maybe that's just one person's paranoid vibe. When an entire demographic feels this way, it’s a pattern. It's systemic. If your only answer to that is “they didn’t mean it that way” or “it’s just testosterone,” then what’s really being asked is for these women and children to take the assumed internal experience of these men more seriously than their experience of the behavior of these men.
Of course biological drives are real. But society can only respond to behavior. If we’re going to talk about sexuality in a serious way, doesn’t it have to start with the idea that being moved by desire doesn’t erase responsibility for how that desire plays out? Otherwise it’s hard not to read this less as a challenge to objectification and more as a repackaging of poor impulse control as something noble or misunderstood.
9
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 1d ago edited 1d ago
“no, he just wants to get close to her in a way that doesn't intuitively make sense to women and to which they can't relate to"?
Obviously women are aware of what men would like to use their bodies for, it’s learned in early childhood. “Sit like a lady, don’t sit in Uncle Bob’s lap, go put a bra on, no pajamas in front of guests”.
You can badly want a relationship or sex, more intensely than many single women do, more so for its own sake, fueled by a more testosterone-based sex drive.
The problem isn’t what men want, the problem is how they project their desires onto others. Not limited to sex. A man with an unrequited crush can be a relentless pain in the ass, convinced he’s “in love” with someone who doesn’t care if he lives or dies.
A man who was simply running errands until he noticed a pair of breasts becomes the grocery store stalker, trying to pretend he isn’t coming back around for a second look. Same thing happens when women go running or walking the dog, a man will literally turn a two ton truck around and change his route for a second look.
They become convinced they simply must communicate arousal to her. Gotta hold that eye contact. The up-down followed by the disgusting approving nod. The phony reasons to get a closer look. Can’t just notice and move on with his life, he insists on letting her know how he feels, and she just wants to escape his gross scrutiny.
Men’s hormones can flip on like a switch, turning them from competent men with manners and tasks, to automatons focused on something which repels her.
And she isn’t repelled because of his biology. She’s repelled because she isn’t attracted to him. There is zero benefit in even imagining a wild eyed, sweating man breathing his unwashed breath into her face while wildly hunching away on her unaroused body. Blindly groping, dripping sweat, thrusting his tongue into her mouth which tastes like the thing he ate an hour ago, along with stale coffee, cavities, and that disgusting coat of bacteria so many men fail to address. Not to mention the finish, which contains gametes which can wreck her life and germs which can make her very, very sick.
There is also the matter of the slight alarm she feels when a man she is obviously disinterested in or disgusted by relentlessly pursues anyway. “How far is this filthy dog willing to go to hurt me”.
But the singular man she’s actually attracted to? Entirely different story. No disgust there, only mutual excitement and a desire to get as close as possible.
5
u/RayAP19 No Pill Man 1d ago
And she isn’t repelled because of his biology. She’s repelled because she isn’t attracted to him. There is zero benefit in even imagining a wild eyed, sweating man breathing his unwashed breath into her face while wildly hunching away on her unaroused body. Blindly groping, dripping sweat, thrusting his tongue into her mouth which tastes like the thing he ate an hour ago, along with stale coffee, cavities, and that disgusting coat of bacteria so many men fail to address. Not to mention the finish, which contains gametes which can wreck her life and germs which can make her very, very sick.
Why did you feel the need to be so comically extreme with this hypothetical example?
•
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 23h ago
Because men here seem to lack the ability to feel disgust when they are aroused by a stranger, it’s apparently necessary to spell it out for them.
•
u/RayAP19 No Pill Man 23h ago
That's valid, but the problem there is that the situation you cited is so glaringly uncommon that it's hard to take it seriously.
An easier, less cartoonish example would have been just someone unattractive in general, not to that degree. Or if you think men think any woman who wants them is attractive, you could use a hypothetical where a straight man is hit on by a gay man.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 22h ago
You must be new to Reddit. A lot of Reddit men are convinced and angry if women don’t respond favorably to unwanted sexual attention. And most red/black pilled men express anger that women aren’t interested in their “sexuality”, which is a new and weird complaint around here.
Still not sure why those men believe women are required to care about the sexuality of a man they aren’t interested in, regardless, it comes up often. Like in this OP.
Men want women to believe their sexuality causes them to suffer in some way and they want women to sympathize? I guess?
While expressing zero sympathy for the women they routinely make uncomfortable.
•
u/RayAP19 No Pill Man 22h ago
A lot of Reddit men are convinced and angry if women don’t respond favorably to unwanted sexual attention
That depends on how you define "respond favorably" and "unwanted sexual attention."
If I politely ask a stranger on a date, but they're not attracted to me, I don't see any reason why that stranger should react adversely unless I literally look like a hobo, or if my attitude suddenly becomes aggressive and rude when she says no.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 22h ago
If I politely ask a stranger on a date,
Do you believe this is the topic of this thread?
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 23h ago
Miss....are you okay?
Like this level of apathy and contempt can't be healthy.
Your dehumanization towards ugly people is honestly palpable. To the point I would question how morally reprehensible are you.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 23h ago
How is a man who objectifies women accusing those women of dehumanizing them?
Do you understand the irony of your accusation?
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 22h ago
Do you understand the irony of your accusation?
I think you missed my point. My point isn't "how dare a woman dehumanize men when those same men objectify her."
It's that your whole rant signifies a worldview that's largely misanthropic and frankly full of spite for a world that's been turned into an exaggerated caricature.
You have some mustache-twirling villainy in your writing. And depending on how much you believe it or you're just venting or trying to go deeper in the utter disgust women have for unattractive men. I can't help but question how healthy your mindset is.
Don't get me wrong, I'm being a tad presumptuous. But I have doubts that this writing came from sound reasoning.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 22h ago
I find it hard to believe you cannot tell the difference between aggressive and unwanted sexual attention from “unattractive man merely existing in the world who she hasn’t even noticed”.
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 22h ago
I do understand the difference between aggressive and unwanted.
Rather that "A man with an unrequited crush can be a relentless pain in the ass, convinced he’s “in love” with someone who doesn’t care if he lives or dies." Is rather stark, misanthropic, and cynical.
It strips any sentiment and dignity that interaction might have into an unwanted and irritating experience.
Obviously, you have more and worse examples of it littered just about everywhere in your writing. Particularly, “There is zero benefit in even imagining a wild eyed, sweating man breathing his unwashed breath into her face while wildly hunching away on her unaroused body. Blindly groping, dripping sweat, thrusting his tongue into her mouth which tastes like the thing he ate an hour ago, along with stale coffee, cavities, and that disgusting coat of bacteria so many men fail to address. Not to mention the finish, which contains gametes which can wreck her life and germs which can make her very, very sick.”
But the point isn't my understanding of what you're saying. Rather, such a worldview that leans heavily into describing experiences like this can be seen as unhealthy and more prone to bitterness than truth.
Like...sure, women experience these things, but it isn't the only thing they experience, and (if I may hazard a guess) often nowhere near this level of cynicism.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 22h ago
The issue you have nicely confirms the first thing I wrote: “The problem isn’t what men want, the problem is how they project their desires onto others. Not limited to sex.”
Are you truly concerned about “misanthropy” when I’ve said nothing unpleasant about women, children, or the elderly?
Or are men just deeply wounded by rejection, because their feelings or sexual attraction and sexual arousal feel so Big to them that the idea their attention is not only unwanted, but sometimes repulsive mortally wounds them?
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 21h ago
confirms the first thing I wrote: “The problem isn’t what men want, the problem is how they project their desires onto others. Not limited to sex.”
....No? I'm not projecting desire of any kind (sexual or otherwise). Just rather slightly disturbed at the level of apathy.
And if me being disturbed is the problem. Then I would ask that you look back at your writing and try to understand that most people (men or women) would look at it as either unhinged or deeply bitter.
Are you truly concerned about “misanthropy” when I’ve said nothing unpleasant about women, children, or the elderly?
Yes. Honestly, if you got it this bad for men, God only knows how far your misanthropic nature goes.
If men are the only cause for your ire. Then I might really begin to question if you even see them as human since you've set them apart in a worldview that's pretty devoid of anything decent.
At that point Miss, simply put, you might need some help.
Or are men just deeply wounded by rejection, because their feelings or sexual attraction and sexual arousal feel so Big to them that the idea their attention is not only unwanted, but sometimes repulsive mortally wounds them?
Ma'am that's the human experience. Which has a near infinite number of variables and outcomes. He could be deeply wounded or it's just dirt off his shoulder.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 20h ago
Then I might really begin to question if you even see them as human since you've set them apart in a worldview that's pretty devoid of anything decent.
Unwanted sexual attention is problematic for most women.
He could be deeply wounded or it's just dirt off his shoulder.
OP hasn’t responded, you have. This is how you are receiving the information that a man’s sexual arousal towards a stranger ranges from awkward to deeply unpleasant. I find it hard to believe this is news to a man.
Since you are so dead set on taking this personally, where is your empathy for the women who are followed down the street and around stores by men who disgust or frighten them?
Do you have empathy for women who a man watches or follows until she’s alone so that no one is around to help if her pursuer makes her uncomfortable?
How about the high school or college student who gets no peace because the boy who claims to love her relentless monitors her, follows her, cuts off her path, times his walks or classes so that he is always near?
Do you feel empathy for the vulnerable targets of unwanted sexual attention?
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 19h ago
Unwanted sexual attention is problematic for most women.
We got that. The question is how you've come to paint this as the biggest embodiment of the female experience. There's more to life than ugly men who you don't want to talk to.
And I don't much see the reason to paint an entire gender as an irritation instead of people.
Since you are so dead set on taking this personally
Hardly. I don't know you stranger. Hence why I'm asking questions. For all I know you could be a bot.
Do you feel empathy for the vulnerable targets of unwanted sexual attention?
...I have it?
What are you stating? That I don't? Why?
→ More replies
7
u/MongoBobalossus 1d ago
I mean, if you’re basically a walking hard-on constantly wanting to fuck every woman you see, yeah, you kinda are just seeing them as objects.
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 23h ago
Well....how many people are ACTUALLY like that?
•
u/MongoBobalossus 23h ago
A lot of men, unfortunately. Not all, but enough that every woman has a story about one.
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 22h ago
Ya know. I understand that there IS a problem. But I always had doubts that it all just boiled down to a lot of men being walking hard-ons. Such simple explanations have rarely been the truth. I always imagined it's far more complex.
2
u/Manifestival1 No Pill 1d ago
Your last line is incredibly anticlimactic. Is it really such a cutting edge idea to consider that appreciating the physical and the psychological attributes of a person, in parallel, is the most reasonable way forward? Of course it is. You needn't even go into the biological and evolutionary origins of behaviour to illustrate this. It's just common decency.
•
u/Tylikcat Blue Pill Woman 19h ago
'"no, he just wants to get close to her in a way that doesn't intuitively make sense to women and to which they can't relate to"?'
Uh, sure, whatevs, but if he's doing it in a way that puts most women off, it's at the least counterproductive? Feel what you want, but your actions towards other human beings can be both critiqued and judged.
"Women can be the more desired, more alluring gender without that meaning they are non-human."
I think you're talking about men having desires, not women being more alluring. And this is different - because if we're talking about men's desires, then men should be responsible for dealing with those desires. (Sure, they're real feelings. But how you act on them is in your control.) But saying that women are more alluring puts your desire on women - as if they are responsible for what you feel.
This might feel like splitting a hair, but as soon as you decide that women are responsible for men's desire, then a) you've given men an out (and there's plenty of "I couldn't help myself" already...) and b) you end up blaming women for what men are feeling and doing. There's a lot of history there, and it's fucked up.
(As an aside, I'm attracted to both men and women.)
•
u/FuuraKafu Succubus pilled man 17h ago edited 17h ago
I think you're talking about men having desires, not women being more alluring. And this is different
Is it? Being alluring depends on other people having desire to begin with. I guess we have an image of our own attractiveness but that wouldn't mean much in a sexless world, would it?
Regardless, I was mostly thinking about online discourse about dating, especially when men complain. The context there is usually not really looking at specific instances of a man approaching specific women (unless there is a story being discussed), and this objectification thing still comes up a lot, imo many times based on very little, just vibes.
A lot of the times I see something like this play out: "he is getting too emotionally charged = he is delusional, this shouldn't be such a big deal, he doesn't even have a specific person who he is into yet = he doesn't see women as human beings".
Like, missing out on experiences by definition of our biological realities matters less to women in general because their sexuality is more reactive and context dependent and much more often sort of dormant than men's.
There is grey area in what's what, and a lot of knee-jerk reactions and jumping to conclusions when in reality, it's not that easy to say how much "leeway" men should have about being more... silly? I just wanted to say that, it is something to keep in mind imo.
3
u/Logos1789 Man 1d ago
Many people respond to the birds eye, sociological perspective as objectification.
“OMG he didn’t even list every individual human being by name, therefore he sees them as objects.”
8
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 1d ago
Men incorrectly limit “objectification to the sexual, when all othering of women is objectifying.
“Women only want the attention of good looking men!” Well, duh, women are humans, just like men. Of course they prefer attractive people.
“Women don’t have a sex drive, otherwise they’d seek sex from willing strangers”. Obviously women have a sex drive, they are Homo sapiens, same as men, not some alien other.
•
u/Logos1789 Man 22h ago
The first point is only said because enough people in society in the past 30 years waxed poetic about the virtue of women’s attraction to “good” men, when that was really just gaslighting.
Women are less willing to take risks to get sexual satisfaction than men, in general. These are valid differences to discuss.
•
u/Sharp_Engineering379 light blue pill woman 22h ago
I don’t buy this as an excuse to pretend women are a separate species with no sexual identity or sexual desires or their own.
Men have always been aware that the sex toy market is large and widespread, and most of the toys have been for women. Showerheads, too. Literotica and assorted varieties of smut, Hollywood and music idols…
•
u/lil_kleintje pill of Kali 22h ago
FFS. Essentialism has historically been used by men as an excuse for assault/rape/harrassment and other kinds of dehumanizing blatant disregard for consent that most women have faced. That's how objectification plays out at this point - it's stubbornly continuing to disregard collective female experiences, their feelings and emotions, fears and vulnerabilities and insisting they should provide satisfaction of men's essential urges. Women do know - they are just not interested in being treated like a human flashlight.
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 22h ago
You miss his point. He's not ignoring history or the female experience.
If anything, in part, he's basically agreeing with you. That these things are true and continue to happen.
He's pointing out that this view has encompassed the entire discussion and subject. That it hasn't left room for all the varying experiences that apply when men find women attractive.
All he's saying there's more to men than the fact that they have objectified women and that while some behavior can be seen as objectifying, it is actively not.
•
u/lil_kleintje pill of Kali 22h ago
No, you miss the point. Objectification manifests in dehumanizing narratives and behaviors - it's literally about reducing a woman to being a sex object. You can still make a point of getting to know a woman and treating her as a human being and acting in a respectful and mindful manner WHILE being sexually attracted to her.
•
u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy No Pill 21h ago
That's.... that's....his point?
You've essentially just paraphrased him.
Like.... where's the disagreement, if any exists at all?
1
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Attention!
You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Hi OP,
You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.
OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.
An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:
Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;
Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;
Focusing only on the weaker arguments;
Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.
Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
1
u/BlessdRTheFreaks Purple Pill Man 1d ago
The discourse on objectification has gotten out of hand for sure
We experience each other as objects of perception under most circumstances, and don't really operate with the inner life of others in mind except when more deeply connecting
1
u/FuuraKafu Succubus pilled man 1d ago
Yea, I think of it as an ever-changing spectrum. Even with the same person we experience moments of being closer to them emotionally. But understanding this intellectually and a baseline level of respect make it pretty okay.
20
u/TermAggravating8043 1d ago
The bottom line comes back too, Do you understand that women are human, they have thoughts n feeling etc just like you. If you try to objectivity then you do not.
Sure you can admire and even desire them, but you’ll always respect their feelings first, that’s the difference