Are Women Coerced to be Sexual Objects?
Part 1: Well, yeah!
Most importantly, women are beautiful (oh yeah!). As a healthy heterosexual male I realize I’m inherently programmed to like all aspects of a woman’s physique. Again, women are beautiful! However, I don’t like being manipulated to direct my attention to a woman’s “sexuality” when “sex” has absolutely nothing to do with: (1) my immediate interest; or (2) the specific topic or issue being presented has absolutely nothing to do with sex. The overwhelming majority of men are respectful of women, they (we) don’t want or need to constantly be sexually teased or manipulated; and without regard to the #METOO movement, the overwhelming majority of men are not convicted felons, or currently incarcerated, or awaiting trial for allegedly engaging in sexual harassment and/or acts of sexual perversion against women (and children); and the overwhelming majority of men have always been able to decide the appropriateness of when and where to get an erection. Are women being coerced or forced into wearing clothing that intentionally promotes their sexuality?
Of course, there’s a big difference between acceptable fashion in “Hollywood,” which is designed to intentionally grab attention and/or challenge moral standards versus acceptable fashion in mainstream (working class) America; and yes, fashion and cultural values do change. Nevertheless, why is there a need to show so much skin to the general public,which includes showing so much skin to children? Why? Why? Why?
2000 GRAMMYJENNIFER LOPEZ
JIMMY FALON 12-28-18JENNIFER LOPEZ
2017 LATIN GRAMMYJENNIFER LOPEZ
ITS ALWAYS DEEP CLEAVAGE OR PHAT ASS
Unlike Billie Holiday, Judy Garland, Ella Fitzgerald, Doris Day and so many other smart and very talented women, JLO will never be remembered for her "outstanding" vocal ability - because she doesn't have an outstanding vocal ability. However, JLO's clearly built a career defined primarily by her flashy clothing, deep cleavage, and her phat ass!
Male athletes in track & field wear compression singlets and compression shorts that cover the entire thigh.
Conversely, why is the bikini ("underwear") the "default uniform" for female athletes in track & field?
ARE WOMEN BEING COERCED TO DRESS LIKE THIS? TO CONSTANTLY FIDGET WITH THEIR BUTT CRACK?
So, men (and women) are supposed to ignore women constantly and publicly pulling and tugging and fidgeting at clingy clothing stuck in their butt-crack and vagina, right? Given ongoing concerns about the lack of positive role models for girls and young women, and the need to educate boys and young men NOT to perceive women as only “sexual objects,” shouldn't women give more thought before wearing clothing fixated to showcase, to direct attention to a woman's tits, ass, and vagina? Well??
So why does the NCAA and USATF knowingly
allow and promote the sexual exploitation of women?
That's right, as represented by the above photo, one of the joys of technology is being able to blow-up a skinny woman's ass to more effectively objectify women.
QUESTION: So, why do so many women wear tattoos above their butt cracks, wear blouses with deep, deep cleavage going all the way down to or below their navel, while also wearing skimpy and clingy bikinis, panties, or skirts that seemingly raise a woman’s ass up to her neck?
RESPONSE: Because with some womens athletic events, there are actually two sports: (1) the game itself, which is not really all that important; and (2) the sexual objectification of women, which has much greater importance (and advertiser support). For example, as pictured at right and below, volleyball (both indoor and beach volleyball) primarily exists as spectator sports to objectify women. Let's face it, it's every lusty man's dream to watch a woman reach for her curvaceous ass crack and well . . . you know, pull at it . . . and, oh yeah, this is getting kinda creepy right. Again, shouldn't women give more thought before wearing clothing fixated to showcase, to direct attention to a woman's tits, ass, and vagina? Well??
Conversely, women and men who play high school, collegiate, and professional basketball do not wear clothing intentionally designed to showcase . . . sexuality.
Volleyball = The overtly intentional sexual objectification of women! LEGENDS FOOTBALL LEAGUE
FOUNDED IN 2009 AS
THE LINGERIE FOOTBALL LEAGUE,
BUT IS NOT SELLING SEX, REALLY?ON THE LEFT, NATASHA HASTINGS
WEARING BIKINI BRIEFS.
ON THE RIGHT, ALYSON FELIX
WEARING COMPRESSION SHORTS
True, some men allow themselves to be manipulated and “victimized” by an inherent “weakness” programmed into the male DNA. For both women and men, the eternal battle between intellect (reason) and instinct (sexuality) is . . . confounding, a perpetual challenge beset with a wealth of conflicting social, political, and religious dogma.
There was a time when “fashions” worn by women, such as during Hollywood's “Golden Age” (1930s to 1950s) were typically classy, attractive, even sexy, but very professional. Now, don't think I'm a prude about sex, or that I'm pushing for women to wear a hijab like many Muslim women. If you've heard the joke about selling a bikini to an Eskimo, then you definitely know that wardrobe functionality is better than a wardrobe fiasco; and class is better than trash.
Looking at Felix you see an athlete who's obviously a woman; but looking at Hastings you see the "sexuality" of a woman, and oh yeah, she's also an athlete! Of course, let's acknowledge the aforementioned observation is all about "perception." But, don't you think the apparel worn by Sanya Richards-Ross below is more, "I'm about the business of being a serious athlete," than to wear a two-piece bikini that's not designed for comfort, but is designed to showcase and prompt a woman to constantly touch herself to re-adjust the fit of her sparce clothing from pinching her breasts, anus, clitoris, and vagina?
But now, we live in a free-fall era where up is down and down is up; where some professional women who work in front of a television camera (below) present an appropriately conservative persona, where a man should make “eye-to-eye contact only," and where men are supposed to keep “it" in their pants . . . but where
this same woman will also publicly present herself totally naked in a legendary adult mens magazine. Again, the eternal battle between intellect (reason) and instinct (sexuality) is . . . confounding.
Shelly Jamison, former newscaster at
Channel 10 in Phoenix, ArizonaShelly Jamison modeling for Playboy Magazine
in July 1989, "TV Newscaster Bares All"What's the best "look and feel" for the office?
CLICK IMAGE BELOW TO WATCH VIDEOTHE CONUNDRUM CONTINUES
Are women being coerced to be sexual objects?
Wearing a bright yellow, full-body, form-fitting dress is not sexual, right?
Frankly, except for Gayle King, most of the on-air female talent at CBS News are not obese, and most dress in a professional, non-sexual manner, such as Norah O'Donnell . . .
such as . . .
Adriana Diaz Anne-Marie Green Catherine Herridge Dana Jacobson Elaine-Quijano Jamie Yuccas Jan Crawford Jane Pauley Jericka Duncan Lesley Stahl Nikole Killion Weijia Jiang So, why does Gayle King dress like this . . . So, except for Gayle King, the majority of on-air women at CBS News do not dress to be "objectified" or as sexual objects.
Again, why is there a need to show so much skin? Is there a requirement, and under what or who's authority, for women to "hint at" or to show varying degrees of cleavage? Are women coerced to wear plunging necklines? Are women coerced to wear tight-fitting, clingy, and curvaceous upper-body garments?
"Hint at" or show varying
degrees of cleavageTight-fitting, clingy, and curvaceous
upper-body garmentsIn other cultures and nations, are "newswomen" coerced to wear tight-fitting,
clingy, and very curvaceous garments that showcase the upper-body and lower-body?
Australia - Davina Smith
Australia - Natalia Cooper
Australia - Wendy Kingston
Brazil - Ana Luiza Guimaraesl
Britain - Gabby Logan
Britain - Natasha Kaplinsky
-
Canada - Gloria Macarenko
China - Liu Xin
France - Isabella Ithurburu
Germany - Judith Rakers
Greece - Tina Kandelaki
India - Anjana Om Kashyap
India - Rubika Liyaqust
Italy - Diletta Leotta
Nigeria - Kiki Mordi
Nigeria - Minna Salami
Saudi Arabia - Lojain Omran
Spain - Adela Ucar
Women who wear provocative clothing are not "asking for it (to be fu_ _ ed), and frankly, it doesn't matter if men know the difference. Do some women intentionally use their "sexuality" (fu_ _king skills) to move up the corporate ladder? Absolutely; as do some men! Looking beyond the provacative clothing worn by music celebrities and Hollywood starlets, we can easily find "working class" women who are also scantily-clad with their boobs visibly flopping back and forth and up and down, and butt-cheeks jiggling, twerking, and bouncing left and right and up and down, and often without any undergarments.
Given the aforementioned, it seems a contradiction not to complain about the pseudo-sexual tactics some women (and men) use to obtain favor from men only for these same women (and men) to subsequently complain about the sexual behavior of Kevin Spacey, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein and dozens of other men for doing . . . whatever, or for going . . . too far. Again, the overwhelming majority of men are not convicted felons, or currently incarcerated, or awaiting trial for allegedly engaging in sexual harassment and/or acts of sexual perversion against women (and children), and have always been able to decide the appropriateness of when and where to get an erection. Therefore:
QUESTION 1: Since the overwhelming majority of men have always been able to decide the appropriateness of when and where to get an erection, are women aware they are being coerced or forced into wearing clothing that intentionally promotes their sexuality to strategically attract the attention of men who have a history of or who are most likely to engage in sexual harassment and/or acts of sexual perversion against women?
QUESTION 2: Without regard to their safety including the possibility of death, do some women intentionally use their sexuality as a weapon to strategically manipulate any man to their favor, to command attention?
Hum, are women coerced to present themselves as sexual objects?
Hum, look what she's wearing versus what he's wearing. So, are women coerced to present themselves as sexual objects?
So, are women coerced to be sexual objects? Here's what James Brown said:'Cause a woman got to use what she got to get just what she wants - hey!
I welcome your feedback.
For Part 1, click here.
For Part 2, click here.
For Part 3, click here.
Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com
Reynolds' Rap
December 28, 2018
© 2017-2019 Tripoetry. All Rights Reserved.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
.jpg)
