Robin Thicke - Blurred Lines [Feminist Parody] "Defined Lines" - General

[QUOTE=Vedicardi;42052658]its an issue more with the double standard within the industry and the problems around that than the concept itself, as well as an issue of occurrence. just because you care about one thing does not mean you just do not care about the other side of the issue.[/QUOTE] That's why it was a question? [QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;42052673]that'd be an issue to if it existed in any large scale but... it doesn't really? most music videos with female leads tend to feature similarly attractive female backing dancers. beyonce dances with women as wildly attractive as beyonce - she doesn't dance with scantly clad male sex-icons. many others feature handsome men in stories about love. there are few of the same ilk as this blurred lines video[/QUOTE] Oh please. If we're talking about the dancing motive it's always either the lead dancing/singing + attractive dancers of the same gender, or it's the lead dancing/singing + attractive dancers of the opposite gender. Both male and female leads do that. You're turning a blind eye to it. It's not like men are always portrayed as handsome and respectful in love story vids. See some of gaga's or kesha's videos where she uses male dancers, or I dunno, "dance again" from lopez. Now I admit it's not 50/50 but nothing ever is. And the mechanism behind it is really easy. All men want to have women drooling over them, that's why you see all those male leads using all those female dancers who apparently want them, it makes the look successful. Not as many women want that kind of recognition (showing that men drool over them and stand in line in front of their bedroom like men would). You'd rather see a story vid with the lead falling in love with a perfect guy or something. Different expectations. [QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;42052673]regardless, you're not looking at the money and the power here. who makes music videos? directors. what are most directors? male. who gives directors money? record companies. what are most record companies headed by? men powerful men with powerful money aren't making music videos that undermine men[/QUOTE] Right I forgot about the white male illuminati lizards who hold the power and want to enslave women. You think the directors intentionally put a message that undermines women and empowers men disguised as music videos? They make a video that's gonna sell, regardless who it's gonna undermine, empower or piss off. You make it sound like a conspiracy.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;42053361]Right I forgot about the white male illuminati lizards who hold the power and want to enslave women. You think the directors [b]intentionally[/b] put a message that undermines women and empowers men disguised as music videos? They make a video that's gonna sell, regardless who it's gonna undermine, empower or piss off. You make it sound like a conspiracy.[/QUOTE] omg lmao do we have to do this on every single video mate. you manage to miss the point on a weekly basis. it's getting tiresome the issue isn't with intentional damage. the issue, if anything, is that most of these balances of power happen [i]unintentionally[/i]. peolpe don't even realise they're being degrading. that's more frightening than any ridiculous notion that the 'male illuminati lizards' (epic joke btw) do it intentionally

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;42053440]omg lmao do we have to do this on every single video mate. you manage to miss the point on a weekly basis. it's getting tiresome the issue isn't with intentional damage. the issue, if anything, is that most of these balances of power happen [I]unintentionally[/I]. peolpe don't even realise they're being degrading. that's more frightening than any ridiculous notion that the 'male illuminati lizards' (epic joke btw) do it intentionally[/QUOTE] Hey you're the one who made that shocking discovery and worded it in this ridiculous way. [QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;42052673]regardless, you're not looking at the money and the power here. who makes music videos? directors. what are most directors? male. who gives directors money? record companies. what are most record companies headed by? men[/QUOTE] You also said this [QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;42052673]powerful men with powerful money aren't making music videos that undermine men[/QUOTE] Which suggest it's intentional and cooperated. But okay, I'll let it go. Like I said in the part of the post you skipped. It's not that they don't realize, they don't care. And they make a video that's gonna sell. Period. If it didn't sell, they wouldn't have produced it that way.

Haha the lyrics were funny.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;42053599]Like I said in the part of the post you skipped. It's not that they don't realize, they don't care. And they make a video that's gonna sell. Period. If it didn't sell, they wouldn't have produced it that way.[/QUOTE] i don't think anything i've said would contradict the idea that "sex sells" but where we differ is you don't seem to think that's a bad thing? i'm a bit confused atm because it seems like you're saying "it's not sexism, it's just that putting women with no clothes in the videos sells :)" ... that strikes me as odd

Title: Gender debate By moop900 On the internet Any Hate brings pain Between two genders

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;42054828]i don't think anything i've said would contradict the idea that "sex sells" but where we differ is you don't seem to think that's a bad thing? i'm a bit confused atm because it seems like you're saying "it's not sexism, it's just that putting women with no clothes in the videos sells :)" ... that strikes me as odd[/QUOTE] It's "it's not sexism, it's just that putting women and/or men with no clothes in the videos sells; Also the people who make the music videos just reflect people's desires, they are not the source of the problem just a symptom. You are barking up the wrong tree.". It would be sexist if people would throw tantrums over male dancers and be completely fine with female ones. Ironically we get the polar opposite. And I am taking into account that there are more half naked female dancers than male ones, but I explained to you why it's not some evil white rich male scheme.

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;42042996] i.e. all of the dudes who go "WOW DUMB FEMINISTS THIS IS RIDICULOUS" are proving their point,[B] just too thick to realize i[/B]t[/QUOTE] don't you mean they're too (holding back laughter) ...[I]thicke[/I] to get it? (sitcom laugh track)

What a truly horrifying time we live in.

I kind of read the point of this video (considering the 'See how it feels to be harassed' part especially) as that they're purposefully taking it to the opposite extreme to make guys see how the song made them feel. I still feel it's a bit exaggerated even for that purpose (and considering the castration part, I'd be concerned if it wasn't at all), but their point is valid, even if perhaps not well-executed.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;42055262]It's "it's not sexism, it's just that putting women and/or men with no clothes in the videos sells; Also the people who make the music videos just reflect people's desires, they are not the source of the problem just a symptom. You are barking up the wrong tree.". It would be sexist if people would throw tantrums over male dancers and be completely fine with female ones. Ironically we get the polar opposite. And I am taking into account that there are more half naked female dancers than male ones, but I explained to you why it's not some evil white rich male scheme.[/QUOTE] just because it sells does not make it right. and you missing the point on why you cant just say "but what if things were the other way around?!!" is astounding

[QUOTE=Vedicardi;42056546]just because it sells does not make it right.[/QUOTE] What do you mean by "it"? Objectification of both genders or that there are more half naked female dancers than male? [QUOTE=Vedicardi;42056546]and you missing the point on why you cant just say "but what if things were the other way around?!!" is astounding[/QUOTE] No you're missing the point. I've never made the "but what if things were the other way around?!!" argument.

objectifying any person is bad. the fact that it happens more often to women in music videos is the point of this

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;42057038]What do you mean by "it"? Objectification of both genders or that there are more half naked female dancers than male? No you're missing the point. I've never made the "but what if things were the other way around?!!" argument.[/QUOTE] [quote]It would be sexist if people would throw tantrums over male dancers and be completely fine with female ones. Ironically we get the polar opposite.[/quote]

his point is that with the new trends everyone goes apeshit over female dancers in skimpy clothing but nobody gives a shit about male dancers doing the same, and thus people are as not as sexist as a lot of feminists say [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] i dont entirely agree though but its something to think about

[QUOTE=Hellduck;42057368]objectifying any person is bad. the fact that it happens more often to women in music videos is the point of this[/QUOTE] But objectification ie sexy dancers isn't a problem until you make it one. Get over it. Half naked dancers sell. And there are more half naked female dancers because female leads usually don't strive for a bunch of men lining up to have sex with them. [QUOTE=Vedicardi;42057404]quote[/QUOTE] How the fuck is it a hypothetical "what if" argument if I'm talking about WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING? Dumbass.

well one, he said that isn't his point, but clearly that is the one he was making with that statement, or the concept he was presenting. and the reason we don't get upset is because it rarely to never happens and has not been shown to have any particular societal effects. the few effects we do see that sort of culture having (half nude men on shopping bags), while rarely addressed by femenists/femenism specifically, is intended to be phased out in the movement. it is a movement against the idea against gender stereotypes. if male gender stereotypes had been proven to be harmful in the greater scheme of things to a greater extent than they do effect women, then it would surely be something worth fighting for, but it is not. While it is worth talking about, in the greater scheme of things (I think) that issue, in regards to women, is not only greater, but actually effects both genders more on its own than specific gender stereotypes of men do, individually.

how the hell is it a movement against stereotypes if the video's humor is ENTIRELY based on a stereotype

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;42057653]how the hell is it a movement against stereotypes if the video's humor is ENTIRELY based on a stereotype[/QUOTE] You can't use words like sexism, discrimination or stereotype when they are used against men in these people's heads.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;42057615]But objectification ie sexy dancers isn't a problem until you make it one. Get over it. Half naked dancers sell. And there are more half naked female dancers because female leads usually don't strive for a bunch of men lining up to have sex with them. How the fuck is it a hypothetical "what if" argument if I'm talking about WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING? Dumbass.[/QUOTE] again, you can't say "IT SELLS!" and then be wiped of all guilt when it comes to creating a problem. no fucking shit it sells, who doesn't know that? you are thinking in elementary terms if you think anyone doesnt realize that. and if you think that's why the way things and dont understand WHY you think that is the case, you're behind the curve. think about it. do women write those "female leads?" how the fuck dont you get that for starters, this video is trying to prove a point, it is a parody. context. for more clarification on why it doesnt "matter" as much when men are objectified, or why it is discussed less, read my previous post. you should already know all of these things, however. its been how long sil? this cant be the first time you are reading this arguement. dumbass hehehehehehe owned [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Silly Sil;42057676]You can't use words like sexism, discrimination or stereotype when they are used against men in these people's heads.[/QUOTE] "used against" it is a parody rofl. it is making an example, it is not saying "this is how things should be" it is saying "this is how it feels to be us"

[QUOTE=Vedicardi;42057680] "used against" it is a parody rofl. it is making an example, it is not saying "this is how things should be" it is saying "this is how it feels to be us"[/QUOTE] except the women in the original video are trying to be sexy and these guys are acting as ridiculous as possible for the sake of the humor

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;42057653]how the hell is it a movement against stereotypes if the video's humor is ENTIRELY based on a stereotype[/QUOTE] because it is proving a point that the stereotype is wrong. its not trying to be funny (in that way, at least. it is not a comedy video, in other words, it is using humor to make a point)), it is trying to make a point. [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;42057721]except the women in the original video are trying to be sexy and these guys are acting as ridiculous as possible for the sake of the humor[/QUOTE] its over exaggeration, its parody to make a point. do you understand what a parody is? they are not "trying" to be sexy rofl

[QUOTE=Vedicardi;42057722]its not trying to be funny[/quote] [quote]its over exaggeration, its parody[/QUOTE] [img]http://puu.sh/4hDbk.png[/img] [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] I rest my case you have no fucking clue what you're talking about

"Parody is a frequent ingredient in satire and is often used to make social and political points." "A parody (/ˈpærədi/; also called spoof, send-up or lampoon), in current use, is an imitative work created to mock, comment on or trivialize an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of satiric or ironic imitation." [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] I rest my case you have no fucking clue what you're talking about