These kind representations do cause body image problems in men. Some more conscious toy manufacturers did redesign their action figures to look more like actual body builders, even if that is still not how soldiers and other combatants look like in real life (for the most part at least). Some actors dehydrate themselves for shirtless scenes.
They take steroids before filming these movies. It is no secret. You can’t achieve that in a few months, that’s 100% steroids backed by a team of experts who are giving them the best products in the exact doses they need.
But do you think this is less realistic than how women are depicted in movies? Because that is what the meme seemingly is trying to say.
I think what the meme is trying to say is “people in the media portray an unrealistic standard of beauty, it’s not just limited to women”.
It’s not really saying one is worse than the other.
But why does it have to mention that “it is not limited to women”? And why do people then complain that people start writing about women issues in the comments when that is literally what the meme is doing?
Why shouldn’t it? Is it not something people should be aware of?
The meme is just highlighting how the unrealistic standard of beauty is an issue for both genders, but some feminists make it sound like it’s only a woman issue.
I also don’t see complaints about people talking about women’s issues, at most there’s complaints about people belittling men’s issues.
I just don’t understand why a lot of men online only seem to be able to discuss this sort of thing in a context of what women or feminists are supposedly doing. If it really is about men’s issues and not against women, feminism, or belittling women’s issues, than why mention women in the first place?
Because there is a huge chunk of feminists who perpetrate misandry in the open and are praised for it. Because TERFs exist. Modern feminism has done so much “reverse sexism” that some feminists avoid calling themselves as such in order not to be associated with those people.
Not to mention, if someone started talking about body positivity issues for men without mentioning women at all people would come swarming and say “women have it WAY worse!” like it’s happening in this thread. Is it only acceptable to talk about it if it’s prefaced with “modern society has a huge issue with female body standards, but”? And people would probably find a way to complain about that wording as well.
A huge chunk of feminists are pereptrating hatred of men and are praised for that?
I don’t think we share a reality. Unless with a “huge chunk” you mean one hateful twitter post by one individual or whatever you are referring to.
Otherwise please show to me a few examples where feminists perpetuate hatred towards men. Otherwise I assume you were tricked by some Andrew Tate video into believing there is a conspiracy against men by female raptors in the shadows or something.
So the meme is basically anti-feminist? Complaining about women talking about the female body image presented in media while not also focusing on male body image?
I think what the meme is trying to say is that a superhero with a prehensile, tentacle like penis is setting unrealistic body expectations. Given the tongue in cheek nature of such a claim, and the photo chosen (bottom left of the meme) I’d imagine it’s partially a satirical jab at the kinda person intimidated by Chris Pratt’s abs (as well as just a self-acknowledged shitpost).
But some of the chat in this thread defintely demonstrates that some folks (mostly m’en I’d presume?) don’t seem to understand the vast difference between body image expectations for men and women in contempary culture.
And it absolutely slays me when they refer to Chris Pratt as having a “dad bod” lol
They have to be referring to “Parks and Rec” Chris Pratt, right? Cuz he definitely used to have a dad bod, but he does not anymore.
Chris Pratt used to be well known for never using a spot bucket. His body and career have changed a lot.
What is a spot bucket?
I think they are referring to a spit bucket which is used for the actor to spit out food they’re pretending to eat between takes
I have been told I have a dad bod and it does not look like Starlord. It does look like Andy Dwyer at his fattest, lol
It’s noticable watching old movies and TV that when the sex symbol takes off their shirt they have a well built but normal body. The modern crustacean look is rather bizarre.
modern crustacean look
Larry the Lobster?
Old like what? Rocky 4?
Like 007 Sean Connery
60s James Bond had a dad bod.
Bruce Willis in Die Hard is similar, like you can tell he’s in good shape but he still looks like a normal person.
Yikes the anti-feminist takes in this thread lol
Men do not experience body policing in even remotely similar ways to women. If that fact offends you you probably don’t actually understand how misogyny functions.
Dear men: stfu, you are not allowed to have any problems. Get back to your stoicism.
Sincerely, Feminists who claim to care about men.
This is not what anybody is saying, except for the meme bit towards women. Did you read the top line on it?
Dear confused men (hashtag: not all men): You have lots of problems. The vast majority are not caused by women. One of your problems is trying to blame us for many of the harmful things you do to yourselves, or that patriarchy/toxic masculinity does to you. Another problem is loathing it when women try to help you by explaining this to you but it isn’t what you want to hear bc it isn’t stroking your ego (or other bits). So there really isn’t much else to be done - your problems are yours to solve, and all we can do is try some damage control for ourselves while you guys bang your heads against the floor.
Sincerely - Feminists, who care about men, but not to the point of our own destruction any longer.
One of your problems
Thank you, oh glorious and righteous Angel of Feminism, for educating us lowly male peasants on Our Problems.
No one was blaming you all for shit until you came in here belittling male issues out of nowhere.
Bunch of feminists came in this thread and picked a fight. Piss off.
The meme is belittling feminism and/or women’s issues. If you don’t want to start a discussion, do not post provocative memes. Otherwise live with the discussion that will ensue.
No it wasn’t. It was pointing out that unrealistic body standards for men are never part of the conversation, despite being so blatant.
So you feel like whenever people talk about how there are unrealistic body standards for women they also have to mention and talk about unrealistic body standards for men.
But at the same time you complain about feminists allegedly talking about feminist issues in discussions about men’s issues.
I feel like something doesn’t sound right with that logic…
Nah, men can and do have problems. This post is an example of a man problem. There are people on this post trying to claim that men and women suffer equally in this regard and arguing with people who are pointing out that this is wrong.
Men suffer from toxic body standards and would greatly benefit from body positivity and better representation in media. But men aren’t (as an entire class of people) getting harassed as 10 year olds by 40 year old men making comments about their bodies. Men aren’t (as an entire class of people) having relatives make open comments about the size of their secondary sex characteristics and their bodies in general. As a class you don’t experience this. Some individuals might, I’ve rarely met women who did not experience body policing from their earliest memories, ive rarely met women who have never experienced sexual harassment. The statistics are crystal clear in this regard.
Again, body positivity and better representation for diverse body types would be great for men too. No one is saying otherwise. Even that isn’t enough for women, because institutional misogyny exists at all levels of society and in nearly all people in society. Even well meaning and otherwise progressive people can and are misogynist. Even your family and friends are. Its impossible to simply change one thing. It requires a society wide change in tolerance for bigotry.
Piss off with the oppression olympics please.
So you mean, this meme should piss off? Because it is what started the oppression olympics.
Only if you read it as “women’s issues don’t matter because men also have issues” which is honestly a problematic place for your mind to go. And clearly not the intent.
I am pretty sure that’s the punchline of the meme. “Women say they are unrealistically portraited in media, but look at how men are shown!”. That’s the oppresion olympics you pretend to be against, is it not?
That phrase is meaningless lol, what part of my comment are you saying that to? The horrifying things that women experience every single day? Is the lived experiences of women and girls “oppression olympics” to you?
Is the lived experiences of women and girls “oppression olympics” to you?
Yes! Literally yes! You’re close to getting it!
“Women have it worse” is participating in oppression Olympics and it’s belittling men’s problems. I am not disputing the facts of how bad women have it. I don’t think anyone in this thread is.
I’m saying it’s irrelevant to the conversation at hand, and at BEST it’s a distraction.
Have you ever heard of “two for flinching”? That was (I hope) a thing back in my school days, whereby another boy would mime a physical attack, like a punch to the face, or body slam. When you instinctually recoiled, the other boy would delightedly proclaim, “two for flinching,” and punch you hard in the arm, twice. The message was clear.
Men as a class certainly do get policed by boys, girls, and adults about affect, height, weight, voice change, et cetera. I say this not to dismiss or downplay what girls experience, but to say that certainly happens. In fact, I’m certain that it’s two sides of the same coin, and it all needs to go away.
No, the ruling class of men is not made to suffer as a class of men. There is no power structure against men.
My other comments more than explain it.
The standard of “very good body” is higher for women, sure, but the standard of “good enough body” for women is much, much lower than the one for men.
The first one is useful if you want to be an actor or model, the second if you want to find a partner for life. Guess which of the two is more relevant for the average person.
Your body affects your life in many more ways when you’re a woman. My body affects my employment, it affects me whenever I go anywhere in public, it affects my relationships with friends with family and with coworkers. It’s open season to make comments about my body, regardless of if I’ve got a “very good body” or not. Harassment of women is the norm. It’s not attached to perceived attractiveness, at least not in that only those deemed very attractive suffer sexual harassment and assault. We all suffer in this, and over a lifetime starting as a literal child it totally dehumanizes you. Being lesser is a woman’s place, because all society will ever focus on is our bodies and how they relate to men. We don’t even get to be people, just game pieces surrounding men only relevant in whatever use we have to them. Misogyny is a cornerstone of our society itself. It’s baked into our politics, our tradition, our history, our legal system, our families, It’s everywhere. And thats why comparing the way men and women experience body standards and policing doesn’t work. The scale isn’t even close to the same, nor is the severity.
Being lesser is a woman’s place, because all society will ever focus on is our bodies and how they relate to men. We don’t even get to be people, just game pieces surrounding men only relevant in whatever use we have to them.
Ok, now this is just plain overdramatizing. We’re not in the 19th century anymore, on paper women have every right men have in the whole first world, plenty of corporations are built with the main purpose of providing pleasant experiences to women and a lot of women have been in very high positions of power. Women ARE people just as much as men according to the huge majority of people, and those who don’t think so are usually unlikeable by men and women alike.
Misogyny is very much an issue in the modern society because its roots were in misogyny and you don’t change thousands of years in a century, but we’re moving very fast. I can get that your physical appearance can make a difference in whether you get hired in some companies (and if it does, you probably dodged a bullet), but to say that in modern society women “don’t get to be people” is insulting to all the progress humanity has done.
I’ve lived it myself, listen to women and read the studies and surveys on these things. On paper means nothing, especially when women are unequal in ways the law does not even account for. In my hometown nearly half of all women have been sexually assaulted. I rarely meet a woman who hasn’t experienced any sexual harassment or assault, many experience it before they’re even adults. Girls and women are still suffering, in many ways things have barely changed at all. Yes we can work jobs now, yes we can vote. But even people who think it’s wrong continue to perpetuate misogyny anyway, misogyny exists everywhere in everyone across society. We all get indoctrinated as children into it, and it takes a lot to deconstruct all the propaganda we’re fed.
Society has made some progress, but honestly not very much. Women don’t even have human rights in the US. In terms of culture, in terms of actual people and their actual beliefs, we have actually changed very little in the last 50 years. People have always hated women and that has not changed as much as you seem to think it has. Again, I’d encourage you to listen to the stories of women when they talk about the way society continues to discriminate against them. I’d encourage you to frequent women’s forums online and read what we talk about and what horrifying realities we live in.
In terms of culture, in terms of actual people and their actual beliefs, we have actually changed very little in the last 50 years.
We’ve changed “very little” since the time of these ads? When there were still places in Europe where women couldn’t vote? When marry-yor-rapist laws were still common? In those years where we had the first female UK prime minister, the first female German chancellor, the first female US vice president and so on? Come on.
Sexual harassment is very much a problem in modern society, and way too many misogynists still exist, but to say that women are still “not people” and that we’re not moving forward in recent years is definitely an exaggeration. Women from 50 years ago probably wouldn’t believe it if you told them all the progress we’ve made in the meantime.
The dominant structure of the patriarchy has never changed. Women still earn less, disproportionately suffer sexual and physical violence, still face constant policing of our bodies, still face patriarchal attitudes in men and our friends and our families, were still expected to have children and marry men and we face prejudice and discrimination if we are unwed and have no children. This entire conversation has been principally about American power structures, but similar ones exist around the world. Women can’t even get safe health care in America. Women are legally not afforded the same rights as men in America, not that the legal system is the sole metric by which we measure inequality. We are still expected to be homemakers, still face sexual harassment in our homes in our workplaces in education and from our friends. We still get assaulted by men at staggeringly under reported rates. The ruling class is almost entirely men. The ruling class is almost entirely patriarchal. Rapists still barely suffer any punishment for their crimes, not even 10% of rapists ever see any kind of consequences for their actions.
You are vastly overestimating how much society has changed. 50 years ago we had no right to safe health care, and once again today we don’t. 50 years ago our mother’s were being beaten and sexually assaulted by their partners at sickening rates, and still we are today. 50 years ago women were paid less than men, and so we are today. I could go on. Nominally blatant hatred towards women is less tolerable in today’s media, but its still tolerated and present in a lot of it. Our actual lives, our actual experiences, our suffering at the hands of misogyny has changed very little from 50 years ago. I mentioned in another comment, but I briefly worked with kids at a youth center. And I can say with certainty that the trend isn’t even better with their generation. Systemic change was always required to solve systemic issues, and we have never even come close to systemic change with regards to misogyny. That would mean deconstructing one of the cornerstones of American society and culture, and you’ve seen how any attacks on American society or culture are perceived. Our concerns are always dismissed and our proposal for change always falls on deaf ears by those who see no problem with our suffering.
So just because crimes against women still occur we haven’t improved at all? It’s not an improvement until there is absolutely zero crimes being committed against women?
Again, you can’t expect that to happen in a century. Crimes against women have been taken much more seriously in recent years, hell, some of them weren’t even considered crimes 50 years ago. Prejudices and patriarchal attitude has also been getting less and less intense, as people, both male and female, realized they’re generally harmful to everyone. Things have gotten better, are getting better and hopefully will get even better as more and more “relics of the past” leave this world and newer generations take over.
This is very exaggerated
How much time would you say you dedicate to investigating men’s issues vs women’s issues?
As a woman and my friend group being mostly women anything that affects women I hear about. I have listened plenty of times to men talking about the problems they face. I’m aware of the challenges imposed on men by society, many of which are directly related to and affected by misogyny and toxic masculinity. I’m not a sociology researcher by any means, I see studies I come across and listen to people talk about problems they face. I have my own personal experiences with men and those of my friends family and partners past and present.
I don’t take issue with discussion of men’s issues, thats objectively good. It does not have to be to the dismissal of misogyny though.
As a woman and my friend group being mostly women anything that affects women I hear about. I have listened plenty of times to men talking about the problems they face.
Could you put a number on it? Like… for every 10 studies/articles on women’s issues you read, how many men’s issues studies would you be reading? 10 to 10? 10 to 5? 10 to 2?
Or let’s say you’ve spent idk… 200 hours looking into women’s issues, talking to women, etc… How many hours have you listened to men, or researched their issues? 200:200, 200:100, 200:50? (not counting debates) Your best ballpark.
Like how many men’s forums are you subscribed to?
This assumes women on average are as interest in “just sex” as men are. I don’t care for men thinking my body is just good enough for sex.
I mean, in a relationship, what else do you need a body for? The main thing that keeps two people interested in each other is the personality, as long as the bodies are “good enough” to sexually stimulate your partner there’s not much more they’re needed for. Hell, for some that isn’t even a requirement.
But it doesn’t make sense to complain about women supposedly having higher standards when men and women seem to have, on average, different expectations towards a relationship? I would rather be alone than being with a person who just finds my body good enough. For many men this seems to be different.
I always thought the “different expectations” prejudice about relationships was more about average men wanting a “body to fuck” that’s also a pleasant person and average women wanting a pleasant person that’s also a “body to fuck” (you know, the old adage about push-up bras and lies).
I don’t know if it’s also about how much is your body attractive to your partner, to me it seems like an unnecessary requirement and kind of “objectifying yourself”. Like, if a person is in love with your personality and finds your body simply “attractive”, is that not good enough for a relationship to you? That situation is like hitting a jackpot for most men I know.
It is objectifying towards yourself. And it stems from the fact that in media and our society in general women are valued by their looks. There are very few examples for likeable female characters, for example, who aren’t also beautiful and young. It’s a complex issues and that’s why it is especially questionable to produce such a meme.
It is objectifying towards yourself.
Then why would you do that? If you recognize it’s not right to expect that, why would you specifically want a partner that absolutely loves your body?
There are very few examples for likeable female characters, for example, who aren’t also beautiful and young.
Because, as we’ve been saying, most characters (whether males or females) in fiction are beautiful. There’s also very few examples of likeable male characters that aren’t also beautiful.
You might have a point with the age but I’d attribute that to historical Hollywood stars being mostly male, as more popular actresses get old we’ll definitely see more likeable old women.
Unfortunately there are too many “open-minded” and “open-minded”-adjacent people who have huge blindspots to their own hypocrisy and philosophical paradoxes. I’ve met so many IRL and net-folk who are lefty “activists” who are huge fucking racists and douchebag misogynists. Extinction Rebellion for example is full of them. I get a bad taste in my mouth whenever I remember certain interactions with them.
I think that might be related to whether someone sees people as good and bad, or as being capable of doing good and bad things.
From how I see it, classifying people as just good and bad is very reductive in that you assume that bad people do bad things with bad intentions and the opposite for good people. That means that if you’re certain that you’re a good person, you don’t need to question your own actions or motives because you can’t do bad.
If you however see people as capable of making good or bad actions with good or bad intentions, you should realize that people you see as good can do bad things and vice versa. That means you should always examine your own motivations and your own decisions to make sure you’re doing the right things for the right reasons.
I personally believe this is why it is so common among certain activist groups to harbor some absolutely atrocious beliefs that seem contrary to what they’re working for.
That makes a lot of sense. I guess it’s always a matter of education in the home and otherwise. Critical thinking and self-analysis seem to be difficult to engender when there’s a culture of accepted vertical hierarchy. I don’t think it’s wrong to say capitalist philosophical leanings create emotionally and philiosophically lazy individuals. The true laziness is always in the opposite direction of the espoused morals of work culture.
Man, fuck extinction rebellion and their transphobic religious prosthelytising
They’re like the Catholic Church of environmental activism.
Objectively false
And both cis men and cis women don’t experience body policing in even remotely similar ways to nonbinary people. Most women don’t need a letter from a psychiatrist costing thousands of dollars to get permission to have a body they can enjoy.
The difference is that those men are not objectified. Yes, those bodies are unrealistic indeed, but those beefcake guys are not presented as sex objects who have no other purpose in this world than to please women.
I get the feeling that you never hang out with a group of gals on a night out
Or like
Ever
Damn, RIP hungryphrog
I’m a woman, I have had many girls nights out with sex positive women… And yet no drooling over sexy superheros (or any other dudes)
I haven’t had a conversation like that since I was a teenager, many many years ago. (And even then it wasn’t hulked out guys we were giggling over, it was Nsync. Fully clothed.)
This baffles me, you can tell them this over and over and they’ll still tell you that you’re wrong, and ACTUALLY you’re attracted to the Chris Hemsworths of the world and not the Jack Blacks.
I guess I don’t hang out with myself then
Oh yes, Thor is oiled up and shirtless while Natalie Portman ogles him for the entire first movie because… It looks powerful? It represents his stoicism? Definitely not a sexual objectification thing, oh no sir
Tbf you can be ogled and not objectified. The difference is that Thor absolutely is portrayed as a complex character with his own agency, or subjectivity. The whole movie is about him learning to step out of the role of warmonger and into a more mature, nurturing role of a king. That gives him a lot of subjectivity - the opposite of objectivity
Edit: So to clarify, yes Thor is part of a series of unrealistic body standards for men. But he’s not objectified
In social philosophy, objectification is the act of treating a person as an object or a thing. It is part of dehumanization, the act of disavowing the humanity of others. Sexual objectification, the act of treating a person as a mere object of sexual desire, is a subset of objectification,
Emphasis mine. Where in “Thor” is Thor dehumanized? Do the creators of the movie dehumanize him? No, if anything he exhibits more humanity as the movie goes on. Does Jane Foster dehumanize him? No, she’s clearly sexually attracted to him and some scenes do focus on his body, but that’s not enough to dehumanize someone. He is not a “mere object of sexual desire” because those scenes exist amid an entire movie that treats Thor with respect as a character, including Jane who gets to know him and love him. The only character who dehumanizes him could be Loki but he’s clearly portrayed as being wrong
Tbf you can be ogled and not objectified
I gotta get me some of that copium, looks like the good stuff.
Or, like, learn what objectification actually means (and “cope” for that matter, what am I coping about? I’m just having an internet discussion)
Tbf you can be ogled and not objectified. The difference is that Thor absolutely is portrayed as a complex character with his own agency, or subjectivity.
By that definition, no female main character of a film ever has been objectified.
I think what the commenter is trying to say is that male characters tend to have more to their overall presence in movies than just their body since they are generally the protagonists, but female characters are often only there to show their bodies and have very little character depth in comparison.
Though, granted, that commenter probably has horrible taste in movies if this observation is so starkly visible to them.
No there are plenty of female characters who are portrayed as two-dimensional sex objects, just like there are male characters who are portrayed the same. But Thor is not one of them. And the existence of sex appeal around a character =/= objectification
No there are plenty of female characters who are portrayed as two-dimensional sex objects
But none of them were their film’s main characters, right? I mean, by definition if the character has agency and complexity to them, they’re not being objectified, and basically every main character has some degree of agency and complexity. Can you give me an example of a female film lead who is objectified by the definition you’ve provided here?
It’s not really to do with whether they’re the protagonist, it’s how they’re treated as a character (and by extension the actor). Off the top of my head the best example is Carly from Transformers 3. She’s incredibly 2-dimensional. What do we know about her, her motivations, what drives her? Well, not a lot. At best you could argue she has a good job and is responsible for getting Megatron to help OP. But when we look at the movie overall it’s not great. She’s consistently needing saved by Sam, the film goes to lengths to focus on her borderline inappropriate relationship with her male boss, and she just doesn’t do a lot for the plot that doesn’t serve some male. In fact, her introduction, arguably the most important scene for establishing her character, is a camera shot of her ass. That’s objectification because the character exists amid a web of weak characterization and conformity to gender roles that treat her more like a trophy than a proper character
Carly was not the main character of that film, Sam was. I really think you’re missing my point. You’ve defined objectification in such a way that no lead character could ever be said to be objectified. So, if you’re going to use that definition to claim that Thor isn’t objectified, you must agree that no female protagonist can claim to be objectified to be consistent with your own definition.
The difference is that Thor absolutely is portrayed as a complex character with his own agency, or subjectivity.
So is Black Widow, but she is 100% leathered up sex symbol too and no one questions that.
Sex symbol =/= objectified. There’s nothing wrong with being a sexy character. Sexual objectification is the reduction of a person or character to nothing but sex. Or, if you want a more accurate definition, you can look at Wikipedia’s definition which I gave somewhere else
It does look powerful though. He looks super strong and has an incredibly hot women who is into him, many guys want to live that fantasy.
Do you think Natalie Portman was ogling him because she thought he looked hot and the camera happened to catch her staring or do you think it was written into the script?
I simply don’t see women clamoring for men to go to these extremes. I’m not saying doesn’t happen, I just don’t think it’s very often. And it’d be super cool if the men on this thread would take comments from women about our own experiences at face value and not assume we’re what? Being coy about what we actually find attractive?
yeah the thing about body and personality problems in men is that it is much more driven by other men and not as much by what women actually want. it is still very much an issue, just different than how similar problems in women are usually characterized.
deleted by creator
You’ve never watched a romatic movie or chickflick have you?
It happens, but it’s not pervasive. There’s nothing wrong with sexual imagery in a vacuum.
The issue for women is the sheer avalanche of bullshit. Images of half naked women with unrealistic bodies are EVERYWHERE. Billboards, magazine covers, commercials, etc.
It’s okay to discuss men’s issues without needing to whatabout them. Women’s issues are also valid. This isn’t a competition it’s about media creating body dysmorphia in people.
I don’t disagree. In these discussions though there almost always are a few comments that try to make the case that men actually have it just as bad as women, and I think it’s good to challenge that.
You can support what men have to deal with while also acknowledging that it’s infinitely more oppressive towards women. I think it’s often hard for some people not to mention it because it’s like, yes, feminists have been talking about this exact thing for decades, why is this a realization suddenly?
But men have been told since forever to bottle things up and not acknowledge them. Men don’t get to have emotions. This is not a new issue and in fact many men themselves perpetuate this problem. That isn’t the exact same issue anymore.
When we finally get to a point where people are discussing it, bringing up the group who have been dealing with it for years as though men aren’t allowed to to have these feelings too absolutely minimizes the initial conversation.
There is space for both conversations to happen, and both should happen. But when this happens in literally every thread trying to discuss male body dysmorphia that’s not positive conversation anymore.
I agree. I’m not trying to shut down that conversation, just contextualize it a bit and have it be part of both conversations. Both conversations are linked so I don’t see why that wouldn’t be natural.
“i’m not trying to shut down that conversation i just don’t think your viewpoints are valid”
🤣
I think my point is that they really aren’t linked. It is two groups experiencing similar things, but for a variety of reasons the context is completely different. And moreover because the conversation is essentially brand new for one group and extremely well known for the other, talking about them like they are the same cheapens the conversation around the newer group.
I’d liken it to a friend telling you about a problem they’re having and instead of listening to them, starting to talk about your own similar problems. I realize that’s a superficial example but I think it explains where I’m coming from.
I mean in no way to disregard or minimize the long and well documented struggle women have had with body image issues. But I do think men’s body image issues deserve to be discussed on their own merit without always needing to be contextualized through the lens of women’s issues.
It is hard enough to love yourself without wondering if people secretly think your body is vile
I don’t see a comment saying that. All I see is someone saying that it isn’t a real problem for men.
I don’t. I see a comment trying to draw a distinction between the way that unrealistic bodies tend to be contextualized in our culture. It doesn’t say that they don’t cause body issues for men.
Here’s one: https://kbin.social/m/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world/t/159507/Buffed-af#entry-comment-635033
The only thing you’re doing here with your comments is saying “but women have it worse!” You’re not here to discuss the actual issue, you’re here to derail the conversation.
And the only spaces in which feminists have had these conversations is in private academic settings on the “men’s issues” day of their course curriculum. To feminists, men’s issues are a footnote. And that’s fine–I don’t expect feminists to really give a crap about how societal sexism affects men; that’s not their purview and it certainly isn’t on them to bring attention to those problems. But stop pretending feminists have given men or their issues equal or even just proportional time in their discussions, much less their activism.
Please take a look at the meme again. Did you read the first paragraph on it? You should tell this to the meme author.
Do you find that the men in romantic movies and chickflicks have body types as unobtainable as the dudes in superhero movies? Like, yes they’re fit, but they don’t tend to have bulging muscles because women don’t tend to be into that.
There’s a difference between a movie with attractive people in it, and a movie with someone who had to dedicate themselves to their fitness for months and still had to do things like dehydrate themselves for the day of the shoot to achieve a sculpted look. They’re worlds away in terms of effort to achieve the desired effect. And women do not tend to be into the “dehydrate yourself to look more cut” look.
The point isnt that men aren’t given unrealistic body goals, they definitely ARE, but the push isn’t coming from women, generally.
If you think they aren’t objectified that’s your own lack of perspective.
Reminds me of the “everyone has sinful urges” anti-gay pastors
“Buff men are built for the male gaze”
My guy, I have some news for you
As a woman, who is into men, and has friends who are also into men. Everyone I know who is into men would say Hiddleston is more attractive than any of them.
When we say buff men are there for the male gaze what we’re saying is that they’re filling a male power fantasy of being the “big strong hero” archetype. You’ll also notice that all of them were depicted as being complex characters in their own right, absent of just being big and buff.
Even guys are objectified if they are pretty enough. Many women do that with movie stars.
Oh my friend, they very much are objectified. Have you never hung around straight women or gay men? Those men are slabs of meat and that’s it.
The thing is on both sides it’s for the male gaze. Women are are objectified for men (look how sexy she is, don’t you want this?), and men are objectified for men (look how strong and handsome he is, don’t you want to be like him?)
men are objectified for men (look how strong and handsome he is, don’t you want to be like him?)
If you think women aren’t enjoying the male eye candy, I have some news for you
Reread my comment and you’ll find I never said or claimed that. But that’s not the primary reason it’s done. Women aren’t the primary demographic for comic books and comic book movies. Superhero men are drawn the way they are for the male gaze, and women are drawn the way they are for the male gaze. If some women like it too, that’s just a bonus for the publishers. This translates onto the screen.
My dude, I’ll put it plainly, I think you might be gay. There’s no way you look at a ripped, naked Chris Hemsworth butt and think “that scene was for men”
Its a male power fantasy. It isn’t “I want to sex up Chris Hemsworth” its “I want to be an absolute flesh monster like this guy” its about the idea of male success and dominating others. Written by dudebros for dudebros.
That’ll be news to my wife! (Also, you assumed I’m a man. I am, but you still assumed.)
Actually, the statement works whether you’re male or female
Think about it
Haha that’s fair
As a straight male I feel nothing looking at buff men and I can assure you it’s the same for many other men. We truly don’t feel much looking at them and they’re not presented this way for our gaze.
About the only guys I know that do care are caring because they’re insecure about their own bodies. Especially friends who exercise regularly to try to achieve these physiques.
That’s so crazy to me, I’ve always heard women saying that level of muscle doesn’t do much for them, with the assumption being super buff dudes must just be a male power fantasy…
But you’re saying that it’s not even a male power fantasy? You feel nothing? You wouldn’t feel like Thor was puny if he was only average gym bro levels of muscled? I know you don’t speak for all straight dudes, lol. It just suddenly seems like these poor dudes are putting themselves through hell for absolutely no reason. That’s both encouraging (Heyy, maybe we can stop that nonsense!) And depressing (that it’s been happening for no reason at all)
Whether it works on you or not. Whether it succeeds or not… The intent of the portrayal is a masculine power fantasy. Hell, it might be for the writer. Tony Stark (and 80% of all Marvel-men’s) ‘I’m an asshole but you love me for it’ vibe is the same thing really.
That’s great for you. I’m glad that you’re secure in your self image. The people that these are targeted towards aren’t.
That proves the point then doesn’t it? The way society assigns value to women based on their perceived attractiveness to men is attached to misogynistic propaganda. We tell girls how to look when they’re six months old. They already know they have to be deathly thin by the time they’re 10. Many girls developing eating disorders in fucking middle school. They almost only see women who exactly fit societies definition of attractiveness in every single movie. They get bullied, they see other girls being bullied for their weight. The size of their breasts becomes a subject of mockery when they’re not even in puberty yet. Their family members, their parents, will impose standards upon them. Their friends will, their teachers, every single adult they ever encounter.
So you might see this and think nothing, just a bunch of buff guys. And that perfectly demonstrates it. This has no affect on you, you do not suffer oppressive conformation pressure due to every single aspect of your body and appearance. You don’t see yourself as having no value because you don’t look exactly like them, you don’t have every single person in your life every single piece of media in your life telling you that you have no value because you don’t look like them. We do, that’s something we deal with every single day. That’s something that literally kills us, that contributes immeasurable suffering into the world. It’s not even close to the same.
No one was even TALKING about that, why do you have to come here with your “oh women have it worse”. WE KNOW. THAT DOESN’T MEAN IT’S GREAT FOR US EITHER.
Jesus.
The commenter I am responding to made other comments, you should read them.
Also saying women have it worse doesn’t even come close to it, you should re-read my comment.
I think the “steroid guy is how all men should look” isnt coming from women but rather “alpha dudebro culture” that has no interest in asking women what they want (that would be gay/beta etc)
deleted by creator
This is just blatant sexism.
Are you saying my comment is sexism or the practice is sexism?
Why not both? Objectifying people can be sexist, and your comment was clearly sexist. They’re not mutually exclusive.
How is my comment sexist?
…no? Have you actually hung out with real people?
My partner and I tried to come up with an example of a character built for the female gaze. The best we could do was Idris Elba as a Jinn from 3000 Years of Longing.
Edit: I think you all are missing the point.
From Wikipedia
In cinematic representations of women, the male gaze denies the woman’s human agency and human identity to transform her from person to object — someone to be considered only for her beauty, physique, and sex appeal, as defined in the male sexual fantasy of narrative cinema.
So while women might like looking at the men in Magic Mike watching nameless romcoms, they have no agency in their own stories. The men might serve their every need and save them from whatever situation, but they’re still doing all the things, and they follow the men-in-charge storyline.
Legolas?
Any male character from Twilight? Any male romcom character?
Twilight? The movie where the dude makes all the decisions and routinely threatens the life of the girl who has negligible agency?
Sure, women like it, but it’s written with the archetype of the man being macho and in charge. I.e. the Male Gaze.
Been reading this thread and honestly, the only thing you’ve convinced me of is that the concept of the male gaze has become so diluted through expansion that’s it’s effectively meaningless.
Bella Swan? Oh, she’s written to appeal to the female fantasy of being protected by a big strong man who is so emotionally devoted to her that being separated from her drives him to suicide. I.e. the Female Gaze.
See what I did there?
The part you’re missing is agency. It’s not just about what appeals to men or women. Whether or not Bella is in a situation that a woman might envy, she does nothing in the story. She is an object to be fawned over and protected.
I mean isn’t it a little odd that apparently men and women both like movies where men do everything? Maybe that’s a trend worth investigating?
If you want a Female Gaze movie, find a movie where the man is reduced to an object that does nothing while women run the show. It’s shockingly hard to do.
Bruh
That’s still the male gaze. Most women I know don’t care about bicep size. It’s one of those things men do to look more like other men they think have good bodies.
The scene with Tony Stark chopping wood is much closer to the female gaze, according to my friends at least. For them it’s all about the forearms and in general the type of body you get from real physical labor, not the kind of body you get from the gym
Most women I know don’t care about bicep size.
Bruh
As someone mentioned, literally almost any male romcom lead.
Disagree. They generally fall into the male gaze as well. Not necessarily physically, but the roles they play are generally cool collected dude that calls all the shots and/or saves the girl. Something men want to emulate.
Also they’re almost always rewarded with the love of the woman.
Surprised you could only think of Idris! Would say he’s definitely female gaze in most of his roles. Off the top of my head, and as a woman who talks about celeb ‘crushes’ with other women, the tops are:
- Stanley Tucci in literally anything.
- Tom Hiddleston (Loki had way more female attention than Thor)
- Jack Black as Bowser
- David Harbour as Jim Hopper
- Sean Austin (in general, but also as Bob in ST)
- Paul Rudd (again, in almost anything)
- Pedro Pascal (particularly as Joel)
- Hugh Jackman in musicals (as opposed to being Wolverine)
All examples of men who, for the most part, are not obvious sex symbols in their roles, all of whom women go absolutely wild for.
I think you’re ignoring the non-physical aspects of Male Gaze.
The problem with your examples, is that in most of the stories/roles you listed, women don’t do anything. Unless the story does something to elevate women beyond passive objects, it’s still written for the Male Gaze where men make are in charge and make all the decisions.
Hmm, I see your point now I’ve looked up the actual theory of female gaze.
It seems in the modern social media space, female gaze has been used to mean something more like “the male characters who women find attractive are the ones that show more emotional, loving, nurturing and supportive traits”. So if used this way, it’s not a direct contrast to male gaze. Maybe we need to call that observation something different!
I wonder if Bob (Sean Austin) does fall into the proper definition though? His character does exist for the most part to lift every other character around him, especially Joyce Byers.
deleted by creator
Ripped dudes who show off to countless nameless faceless women? Despite performing “for” women, they are calling all the shots and definitely in charge.
so is showgirls secretly a feminist film?
I haven’t seen it, but based on what I’m reading, yes actually.
You know how everyone didn’t realize Starship Troopers is a satire?
Same director.
In hindsight, it would be extremely difficult not to read Showgirls as satirical, in the context of Verhoeven’s career. At that stage, after all, the Dutch filmmaker was in the pomp of his Hollywood phase, which saw him use popcorn genres as a way to critique his adopted homeland’s socio-political landscape: there was Robocop’s shots at law enforcement and corporate supremacy and Starship Troopers’ caustic indictment of the country’s more fascistic impulses and jingoistic foreign policy in the guise of a ‘big bug’ movie.
Showgirls may come with more rhinestones attached, but it’s even more searing in its depiction of a dehumanised world, whose ultra-consumer capitalist worldview is encapsulated in one typically bald exchange between Nomi and Cristal: “You are a whore, darlin”, “No, I’m not!” “We all are, we take the cash, we cash the check, we show ‘em what they wanna see.” The fact Showgirls wasn’t immediately understood as satire speaks to an implicit, and possibly patriarchal, bias in film criticism about what tenors of filmmaking are accorded intellectual respect – something Nayman seems to get at in You Don’t Nomi when he notes how “Verhoeven was widely understood in America as a satirist and as a social commentator as long as the primary texture of his films was violence … [whereas] he makes a movie that has a texture that is more overtly sexual [and] all of a sudden people didn’t think he was a satirist or a commentator … they just sort of said ‘what a pervert’.”
Edit: realizing now that you might have used it as an example because you’re in on the joke.
Exactly. This is pretty much what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the words.
Man, you shifted those goalposts fast! You’ve been doing this a long time, haven’t you?
What goalposts did I shift and where did I shift them to?
Women are are objectified for men (look how sexy she is, don’t you want this?), and men are objectified for men (look how strong and handsome he is, don’t you want to be like him?)
If you can’t see it, I don’t think I can help you.
I’m not really sure how you move goalposts in your initial claim. I don’t think moving goalposts means what you think it means. Maybe you mean double standard, which I would still disagree with but it would at least make more sense here.
ITT, people who think attractive man = female gaze.
I think you have a point except for the fact that the meme is about unrealistic body standards, not objectification. So it’s kinda like bringing up pancakes in a conversation about waffles
But why does the meme has to take a jab at the problems women face? It’s undebatable that women are faced with unrealistic body standards all the time. And I don’t get why the meme has to try and take away from that.
fair point
I’ll take “someone that hasn’t hang out with women for 300” Alex
I really feel like this misses the point. And it sells both men and women short.
The most cruel part of depictions like this isn’t simply that the opposite sex is or isn’t drooling over them. It’s that they are presented as ideal and desirable physiques.
This impacts how people feel like they should aspire to look. And that impacts how they feel about their own bodies.
It is so reductive to focus just on whether these bodies are objectified by the opposite sex. It’s the internal struggle people are faced with that is the real issue.
That’s not just a hot take, that’s straight up nuclear.
Wonder what steroids they’re using
And don’t forget the intentional dehydration for topless scenes. Hugh Jackman has been very open about that.
Same technique used by body builders I assume during competition.
How does that work?
they kinda gradually stop drinking over 2-3 days, often on the day of the shoot they don’t drink anything, it makes your skin kinda thinner and it helps make your muscles more “ripped”
Oof, that sounds seriously unhealthy. No food for a couple days, sure, most humans can handle that no problem. But no water? Damn.
oh it’s very unhealthy, stresses your kidneys, heart, causee just the worst headaches
Everyone at a bodybuilding competition does this as well. It certainly doesn’t seem good.
A healthy, normal-weight adult can fast safely for a week, after that you should get a doctor involved to take blood levels to be on the safe side and take whatever micro-nutrients you get prescribed. The longest fast ever was done by Angus Barbieri, 382 days, on a diet of coffee, tea, sparkling water and supplements (as per doctor’s order). He was an absolute unit going in normal weight people don’t last that long.
Going without water will be deadly in three days or less, no exceptions. Doing it in a climate where you’re not sweating helps but ultimately you have metabolic products to flush out of your system which won’t work without water intake. The body is going to allow poisoning itself before it shuts down, that’s the kind of situation where no matter what you intend to do, at some point you’re going to catch a rabbit with your bare hands, rip of its head, and drink the blood.
Oh, and while I’m at it: Distilled water is safe to drink. Yes, it’s easier to get water poisoning with distilled water as opposed to ordinary but either is an achievement and requires fasting as well at not giving in to that sudden urge to murder your salt shaker. We get the overwhelming majority of our minerals from food, not drinks.
The good ones, under doctor supervision. If youre someone who doesnt think they’re on gear you’re a sweet summer child of the most innocence.
Mostly testosterone for building the muscle base probably, then potentially something like anavar (oral oxandrolone) for a few weeks before filming the shirtless scenes, as orals make you temporarily blow up with water and glycogen. Could be some use of diuretics before filming, too - they definitely use water manipulation/restriction to get that ultra-lean look on the day. I’ve only included drugs you could feasibly get from the doctor, rather than anything too exotic. I do, however, guarantee they all used a significant amount of steroids in addition to the extremely strict diet and training they are very keen to talk about.
My favorite part about all that work is that it’s undone literally that same night, when they eat and drink like a normal person.
The first of the second row, Viagra
Trueee 😂
points at science project that works out 20 hours a day while taking a cocktail of steroids and hormones from a panel of doctors
This is what a normal man should look like.
They don’t put men like this in movies for women.
Yet they all still drool over them 🤔
Sometimes (the freak lobster men like top right aren’t what most women are into lol), but Hollywood doesn’t give a shit about what women want. This is what men want. It’s all power fantasy.
Nah?
Well maybe.
Usually nah.
Unless?
Nah. They gotta have cute puppy dog eyes at some point. Gotta be more than a husk. Or a himbo. Himbos are good too.
What is the point? Of course a good looking man is good looking. Why wouldn’t I find his body attractive?
How do you know that? What makes you say that? Does it even matter why they’re put into movies?
As far as I understand it the image posted does not claim that these bodies are put into movies for women. Personally I would argue that unrealistic bodies are put there for both genders, but perhaps more so for the opposite sex. However, looking at the posted image neutrally and without reading anything into it that’s not there, to the main idea behind the image is to point out the fact that not not only women but also men are depicted unrealistically more often than not. Or at the very least statistically above average.
Some women might lust over this, but that’s not why they are put there. They are the male power fantasy and are added for the benefit of the guys that watch it.
There’s a reason most straight women find Loki more attractive than Thor and I’ve seen guys completely blindsided by that because they see everything through the male gaze.
Did anyone ever do a Love sausage cosplay? Would be sick
Ugly people don’t sell. I’m shit outta luck
When asked what character i wanted to be, i have always said tentacle monster. The tentacle monster gets all the hot chics.
I thought it was the prehensile penis from The Boys.
And there’s a sentence I never expected to write out.
It is. That was the origin on of this meme. It was in TheBoys subreddit specifically as a joke about the prehensile penis.
Why can’t you talk about this issue without a side jab at the issues women face?
Is nobody going to comment on the bottom right picture 😂
You mean the bottom left one right?
All of these are in superhero movies, not exactly a representative sample of male movie bods.
Except for the fact that basically every leading man who takes his shirt off in 99% of mainstream movies have physiques much closer to this than those of most regular people.
How many women in movies with regular bodies are shown?
Very few as well. I was addressing the unrealistic male bodies, not dismissing the fact that the same problem exists (arguably to a much worse degree) with regards to women like the OP seems to do.
But OP was very likely referring to the fact that women discuss how female bodies are depicted unrealistically in almost every piece of media. The meme makes fun of women talking about that issue, pretending that men are also depicted unrealistically. That’s the whole punch line.
Yeah I know, that’s why I made sure to point out that I was NOT doing that. No matter the OP, you can and should acknowledge both rather than pretending that they’re mutually exclusive.
Have you watched anything other than action movies?
Modern action movies are like this, but if you go back into the early 80s, and especially 70s, leading men in action movies had normal bodies. Tbh it kind of went down the tube with Stallone and Arnold.
True! The point I’m trying to get at is that male bodies in drama and comedy are all extremely normal, whereas female bodies in absolutely everything all conform to one particular beauty standard. The male protagonist in any comedy movie is usually extremely normal or even below average while the woman is some absurd standard. There is a very clear difference and the people trying to pretend there isn’t in this thread are either blind or willfully and knowingly lying.
Of course I have, what sort of ridiculous question is that? Have you heard any music that isn’t jazz?
So you should know that male bodies are often decidedly average or below average, while female bodies are almost always absurdly high standards. The fact that you’re trying to suggest it’s not a trope to have a really average guy with an unbelievably attractive woman is bonkers. You people are either blind or knowingly just lying. I don’t think you’re this dense so I have to assume that there is a reason you would try to lie like this, the only reason I can come up with for that is that you’re male supremacists of some sort, you’re lying just as naturally as the white supremacists do when it comes to oppression in the area they care about maintaining supremacy over.
Wow… That’s an IMPRESSIVE army of strawmen and other completely unearned vilification you’ve got there.
I’d refute all of it, but based on the speed with which you’re jumping to patently absurd conclusions, I very much doubt that anything short of divine intervention would change your mind and unlike you, I’m not in the mood for conjuring fictional beings to aid an argument based on a misunderstanding.
Anyone else who might be interested can read my comment history both in this thread and in general if they’re curious to see whether I might be the Andrew Tate style maniacally misogynistic creep liar in wilful denial that you have concluded me to be.
Stopped reading at the redditism. Leave it on reddit.
OP, the link in your post is dead, I think a lot more people are going to miss it lol
