This interesting article from Salon looks at women are now objectifying men in the ways they have often complained that men objectify them. This is especially true with a man's penis (aka, his junk).

The author notes the polar extremes of how women talk about a man’s dick — in praise of his virility and masculinity, and as a form of total and complete emasculation. Nice. Just sharing the love, now, aren't we?!

 

This [above] is the Jared Leto crotch-grab referenced in the subtitle.

The real story of how women evaluate men’s junk

From "Bachelor in Paradise" to Jared Leto's crotch-grab, reminders this week that women objectify men's bodies too

Tracy Clark-Flory
Wednesday, September 10, 2014

(Credit: Camrocker via iStock)

“He has an uh-mazing dick.” Those were the words of Michelle Money — yes, that is her real name — on this week’s season finale of “Bachelor in Paradise.” She was referring to the appendage of Cody, her now-boyfriend, with whom she had just had an overnight date. Even before she saw the aforementioned member, she told the camera in a pre-date interview that she was excited to see what she would find that evening. “Like, sometimes I get the impression that guys with that big a body have a small dick,” she said, her mouth blurred on the final word, on top of an obscuring bleep. “But I could be totally wrong. Maybe his dick is very muscular, like the rest of his body. Like the hulk.”

I must admit, when she said this, I pumped my fists in the air. That’s not because I enjoy seeing men, or women, reduced to their genitals — quite the contrary! I don’t like it when sexual aptitude is conflated with penis size, either. I’m very pro-“motion of the ocean” thinking, for the record, and to any straight man concerned that his penis is not large enough, allow me to direct you to a diagram of the vagina and, importantly, the G-spot. But it was refreshing to see sex talked about so blatantly on a TV franchise that historically has only allowed allusions and metaphors — and a whole lot of slut-shaming. But beyond all that, here was a woman talking about a penis in public like I’ve only heard women talk in private.

That wasn’t the only time that happened in the show’s finale. Following an overnight date during which her beau Robert wore his jeans to bed, contestant Sarah told the camera, “I don’t even know if he has a penis.” In that two-hour-long season finale, we saw the polar extremes of how women talk about a man’s dick — in praise of his virility and masculinity, and as a form of total and complete emasculation. It also happens that this week Jared Leto inspired a bunch of penis-fawning by grabbing his junk during a performance, which Lauren Yapalater broke down on BuzzFeed via several stills and commentary such as, “WHOSITSWHATITSBALLOOGAAAHELGSKHGLSNDGMSD?????!!!” Just to fully convey her enthusiasm, know that I had to cut off the latter part of the exclamation points, along with special characters, to fit the quote on this page.

We’re used to hearing the kind of despicable “guy talk” that evaluates women according to their bra size or even … interior dimensions — but not so much women. So all these ladies talking about peen made me proud, it made me ashamed — and then I decided to talk to some of my lady friends about how we talk about penises.

My friend “Susan” says she started her sex life fooling around with guys who all had what she described as “very standard-issue schlongs.” Then in college, she started sleeping with men of all different sizes and shapes. ”It was neat, actually — a lesson in the depth of human variety,” she said. “I started to realize that the way people talked about penises — bigger is better, basically — was a symptom of shallow and unimaginative sex.” She did sleep with one man with an especially large penis and says, ”He practically broke my cervix. Oh god, it hurt. There is nothing good about a cervix-banger.”

Small penises are not an issue for her, she says. “I think that becomes more of a problem in a very standard, missionary-style sexual relationship. I know I’m old-fashioned, but I do think that good sex is less about genitalia and more about the way you feel when you’re together — your ability to let go, to surrender, to connect. The soul stuff.”

As for the recent reality-TV dick talk, Susan says, ”I find it funny how women have adopted the objectifying language that is so crude in men. The idea that a woman is ‘a good piece of ass’ or ‘a nice rack’ is pretty diminishing, but somehow, when I turn on reality TV, it seems to be crammed with women who want to ogle a guy’s six pack and talk about his junk.” And now I feel ashamed for cheering them on.

Another friend, the phenomenal sex writer Anna Pulley, is bisexual and in a committed relationship with a woman. “My straight friends always tell me about the penises of the guys they date,” she said, noting that I am the exception (leave it to someone who writes publicly about her sex life to be demure in real life). “‘He had a nice dick,’ has been used more than once as the sole reason to keep sleeping with someone, regardless of personality. Other friends have held up pinkies to illustrate their displeasure with a dude’s size.” Ah, the ol’ pinkie move!

What about men who are not well endowed but have the right moves, though? “I’ve literally never heard ‘he was small but knew how to use it,’” she said. “I think women are a lot more size-ist than they want to be.” Real talk from this one! Although now is a good time to mention that another friend of mine did enthuse to me about her boyfriend, ”It’s small but he knows how to work it!” Pulley added: “I personally enjoy smaller wangs because I am hella tight.” All around, good news for all sizes.

My friend “Georgia” tells me, “When I’m describing a man’s penis to my friends, I often find girth more impressive than length. Curve is often the thing that makes the penis unique. Does it curve up? To the right a little? All of these thing contribute to the experience and are important notes to be shared.” Usually she employs the measuring stick of “thick, thin or average.” A couple of women weighed in on my inquiry via Twitter: One said she once described a penis as “serviceable,” while another told friends of a particularly “huge” member, “I almost died when I first saw it.”

On the harsher side of things, my friend “Mary” tells me that she had a friend who broke up with her boyfriend and then began referring to him as “needle dick.” “We laugh every time,” she says. “She was, like, at one time describing it to me and she said she remembered thinking, ‘Is it in?’” On Facebook, responding to my call for women’s firsthand accounts of how they have talked about penises, a woman wrote, “Stubby. Sorry, Rob, but I was waiting for you to penetrate me and, um, you already had. Then you said your oral capabilities made up for it. They didn’t.”

I suppose it’s fair to conclude that the reality of how women talk about penises is both men’s best fantasy and worst nightmare.

~ Tracy Clark-Flory is a staff writer at Salon. Follow @tracyclarkflory on Twitter and Facebook.

This is from The Onion, so it's satire, but satire is based in reality. In this case, a common reality. Don't be this guy.

Family Watches In Silence As Dad Checks Out Waitress

ISSUE 49•42 • Oct 14, 2013 

 

CLEVELAND—Struggling not to openly show discomfort, family members dining with local man Louis Munson sat quietly on Sunday as Munson peered intently in the direction of Olive Garden waitress Layla Martinez. Munson, who first noticed the 23-year-old brunette as she walked past carrying another table’s pasta entrees, reportedly gazed at her for approximately 12 seconds, lingering on certain features of her anatomy while his fully aware wife, two sons, and daughter watched in silence. Though the family’s unease had largely passed by the end of the meal, sources say it was re-sparked when Munson suddenly noticed Martinez from across the restaurant bending down to tie her shoe.

America Is Addicted to Porn

This graphic comes from Buzz Feed - it was shared by some friends on Facebook. Since 72% of the visitors to porn sites are men, this is a male issue.

I don't go so far as to say that all porn is horrible and it must be banned - that's too slippery of a slope for me. And the reality is, as is true in all addictions, that a lot of people can view porn from time to time and it causes no problems in their lives or relationships - and some couples like to view porn together.

But the average age of first exposure now is 11 years old - and again, these are mostly boys. My exposure to Playboy as a young teen resulted in objectification of women, so I can't imagine what hardcore pornography is doing to these young men.

Frank G. Karioris - The Subject and the Object of Your Gender

This is an older post from The Good Men Project site, but I think it's a worthwhile read, even though it has a much more (needlessly) academic tone than most articles on GMP. Karioris seems to be arguing for men to take back their definition of masculinity that, at least in the academic world, has been almost solely defined by feminists and feminism.

His use of the subject-object divide in this context is interesting. His view is that women, from their own subjective perspective, have defined masculinity as an object in their experience of men. Many men have accepted that definition as an objective truth and adopted it as their definition of masculinity, even when it conflicts with their own subjective experience of being a man. We need, as men, the argument goes, to reclaim our subjectivity and create our own unique masculinities.

He notes the role of feminism in trying to help women becomes the subjects of their gender identity - which is true. Over the 50 or 60 years that feminism has been working on that cause (and many women have become the subjects of their own lives rather than the object in a man's world), there has also been an increasing objectification of women as sex objects in particular, especially in the media.

It's worth noting that as men are finally launching a nascent movement toward becoming subjects (as I've mentioned before, most men have been defined and oppressed over the centuries by those few men with wealth, so we have not been our own subjects - we were subjects of the king), men are also becoming sexualized objects in the media, or more so than in the past.

The Subject and the Object of Your Gender

February 27, 2012 By Frank G. Karioris

 

The primary concept presented here highlights the disjunctive dichotomy between being the Subject of one’s story or the Object of someone else’s; which connects to a multifaceted conception of masculinity while examining the idea that gender writing has sometimes silenced men’s voice, creating a faux marionette of masculinity.

Every story has a subject around which the narrative centralizes. Beyond the subject lie people and objects, which the subject encounters and defines through a particular lens. Paulo Freire, an educational philosopher, explains that the distinction between Subject and Object is a system which disempowers the Object and furthers their domination.

To be the Subject requires the ability to define one’s self in context with an active participation in the construction of an identity. In opposition to the Subject is the Object, which is defined by something outside of it and which has no control of its selfhood. To be the Subject is both a condition of determining one’s own identity, and requisite for empowerment.

“If men and women are searchers and their vocation is humanization [becoming Subjects,] sooner or later they may perceive the contradiction” of being Objects and will “then engage themselves in the struggle for their liberation” [3]. In this regard, feminism has taken up the banner for female liberation. This struggle for liberation, and the desire to be a Subject, has led to a redefinition of femininity and in the same breath has opened up the idea that masculinity can likewise be reassessed.

The implications of this change is that a person, by defining their own identity, alters the manner in which identities are defined and thought of, producing a movable construction of gender. A critical idea that has been central to Feminism is the belief that one “must take care not to (mis)represent the diverse positions of different women, nor collapse the complex multiple social identities of women into a simplistic notion of gender identity” [4].

This recognition of the multiplicity of gender identities is a starting ground for Subjects. Diane Elson says women are not “a homogeneous group with the same interests and viewpoint everywhere.” Feminism has tried to create a space for women to determine their own identity, allowing women to be the authors of their own stories.

While the idea of a singularity of femininity has been dispelled, masculinity is still seen as such. As female ‘icons’ such as Barbie have been dethroned, the unattainable bastions of masculinity (John Wayne and Clint Eastwood) have remained. This unrealistic version of masculinity is problematic and often takes the form of a universal masculinity, posed as the oppressive force towards women.

Judith Butler says: “The political assumption that there must be a universal basis for feminism, one which must be found in an identity assumed to exist cross-culturally, often accompanies the notion that the oppression of women has some singular form discernible in the universal or hegemonic structure of patriarchy or masculine domination.”

She continues the idea of a singularity of gender and masculinity, stating: “The urgency of feminism to establish a universal status for patriarchy in order to strengthen the appearance of feminism’s own claims to be representative has occasionally motivated a shortcut to a categorial or fictive universality of the structure of domination, held to produce women’s common subjugated experience.”

Not only does it allow for a singular masculinity, Butler states that it also puts women into the same shared experience, in effect creating a singularity of femininity as well. By presenting men as the common enemy, it seeks unity under domination, and puts universality upon both masculinity as adversary and femininity as victim.

♦◊♦

Masculinity in many cases has been made an Object whilst feminism has claimed femininity as Subject. Holding that men are important in the gender conversation and that masculinity, and its redefinition, is necessary for the success of an evolution in gender roles and relationships, men must become instruments for change and advocates towards Subjects.

Dissociating men from the feminist movement is detrimental to the movement, the women involved in it, and the men who are excluded. The fight for true gender equality must stretch beyond gender camps.

Regardless of gender, one should be the Subject of their own identity. Men must seek a more significant voice in a gender discourse that accepts a varied understanding of masculinity. Each of us should have the ability to define for ourselves how we choose to express our masculinity or femininity and be the Subjects of our own story.

♦◊♦

 References
1. Butler, J. (2008) Gender Trouble, London: Routledge.
2. Elson, D. (1991) ‘Male bias in the development process: an overview’, in Elson, D. (ed.) Male Bias in the Development Process, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
3. Freire, P. (1996) Pedagogy of the Oppressed, London: Penguin Books.
4. Jackson, C. & Pearson, R. (1998) ‘Introduction: Interrogating Development: Feminism, gender and policy’, in Jackson, C. & Pearson, R. (ed.) Feminist Visions of Development, London: Routledge.

 There is a good comment and reply for this post - worth checking out. The post really generated few comments, and my guess is that people were turned off by the academese.

Maxim: How to Cure a Feminist

The answer appears to be, wait for it . . . drive a Camaro and that will make her strip down to her sexy red underwear because Camaros make her "so hot." The World According to Maxim - is it any wonder they have had to cut staff and scale back the magazine? Are men changing in what they want, or are there just more and free sources for the same material on the internet? I hope for the former and suspect it's the later.

Anyway . . . .

My friend Duff posted this over at Facebook in response to the image from Maxim:

"I think some people equate feminism with negativity because feminist ideas question their latent sexism, something that forces people to confront something negative in themselves. People who refuse to do so sometimes project these negative feelings onto what they perceive to be the source--other people, specifically women. Since feminist ideas frequently critique attacks on women in the first place, rejecting feminism by attacking women is more of the same, and precisely why we need more feminist philosophy, discussion, and activism." —Duff McDuffee

Professor Yesi King shared this response, also at Facebook:

So according to Maxim in order to "cure" a feminist and turn her into a "real girl", you have to feminize and pornographize her...Yes this image was really in Maxim magazine and no thanks Maxim, I'll pass.

Most of the people who have commented on the various threads this article/image have created are focused on the degrading image of women - that a vegan feminist is not a real woman, that a real women stands around in her lingerie and gets turned on by a Camaro.

I totally sympathize with women who are seriously offended by that assertion.

I was just as appalled about the depiction of men and what men value and how they are valued. I left this comment on one of the threads at Facebook:

While I totally sympathize with you about the degrading message this crap offers about women, I have to say I find it offensive that they think a man wants a woman who is turned on by a car. At that point she ceases to be a woman, but merely an object to use as a tool of masturbation, and the male becomes a status object whose value is based on his mode of transportation. In both cases, the people involved are dehumanized into objects.

I have seen some people - men - argue that this is satire. Maybe, but having seen copies of Maxim over the years, it fits with their image of women as objects of sexual desire and not as human beings. And it also fits with its marketing of clothes, cars, and gadgets as how men should define themselves.

Just for the sake of reference, here are some standard issue images from Maxim, which I believe reflect how they view women:

Holly Weber

European cover

Actress Grace Park

So - is that piece on curing a feminist really satire? Or is that how they view women? And as men, is that how we want to view and relate to women, as objects?

Maybe I am too serious - or maybe I one of the "white knights" (not the white supremacist group) the Mens' Rights Activists hate on so often (although, to be fair, I have no interest in rescuing these women - they are well-paid). But I prefer to relate to women as complex, interesting, intelligent, four-dimensional human beings. Could be I am just weird that way.

What do you think (about the Maxim thing, not my weirdness)?