The liberated ladies at ManWatchers.com are not shy about what they want. But doesn't this amount to sexual objectification of men?
Obviously, it's that and more. Question is, if it's okay for women to sexually objectify men (they've always objectified men as support objects), does that mean it's now okay for men to objectify women both as sex and support objects? During the past few years, the media has delighted in making fun of this turn about in sexual objectification - "man bites dog" stories are always good for a laugh. But as they giggle gleefully, at least a few pop feminists must feel just a little uneasy about the Pandora's box opened by this. How will women feel when men begin objectifying them as support objects? When men begin to judge a woman's desirability not just by how fresh her skin is, or how perky her breasts are, or how nice her butt looks, but also by how much money she makes.
Human survival always depended upon male disposability and female fecundity. But as genetic research makes it possible for men to produce eggs, what will we need women for? Love? Support? Sex? Companionship? Yes, all these and more. But as technology turns the reproductive advantages in men's favor, the severity of the backlash against women will depend primarily upon the degree to which pop feminists continue to create tension between the sexes, and what answers they provide to the question above.
What do you think? - Post your comments on the Equalitarian Forums.
|