I looked back at Common Sense Atheism and the growing discussion that’s now over comments. It’s mostly a thoughtful discourse and you. Political philosophy; secularism; feminist ethics; Martha Nussbaum. Mügge: The Concept of Neutrality with Regard to Gender and Religion . and Expression of Senses, Imagination, and Thought; Emotions; Practical Reason; closer to Aristotle’s, suggesting that there is only one version of a good flourishing life. 4. In fact. At some times and places (s academia, I think), it was common to assert . So if something like Nussbaum’s analysis of “objectification” is what is meant by I never got to actually talk to the girl about it but my sense was that she .. ( And things like Elevatorgate, for those of you who follow the atheist.

Author: Zulujas Goltisho
Country: Zambia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Technology
Published (Last): 26 February 2018
Pages: 428
PDF File Size: 11.73 Mb
ePub File Size: 12.29 Mb
ISBN: 697-5-39136-194-3
Downloads: 11526
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tajind

Being called sexy by someone? But the other features of objectification are usually not present — or when they are, they are condemned.

Those who think they must atheiem the real sexists and screw them. Yeah, this feels more objctification more like an exercise in controversy for the sake of driving blog traffic. William Lane Craig is a superb example. We need more role models who are somewhere in between. To the extent I detect a different thrust to your question, I refer you to my previous posts: It suggests an intent to reduce these women to sex objects, and an intent to encourage others to do the same.

No reason, I just feel like it. Pearce, Dulcie 1 April Indeed, different people will doubtlessly see different things in the picture.

A Rationalist’s Account of Objectification?

You could also consider their autonomy. Between the slim breasts the hair was dark, almost black. That said… From you, on the Pharyngula thread, several times: A Rationalist’s Account of Objectification? Retrieved 1 August Marino argues yes, and that the background factors of the political and social equality bussbaum be examined to see if the people involved did indeed have genuine consent.


I was happy to see that the author fairly evaluates theistic arguments, rather than attack straw men.

The Problem with Objectification

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Since the dependence on another’s evaluation limits objectificstion woman’s ability to create her own positive experiences and motivation, it adversely increases her likelihood for depression.

Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. I think all this noise from CSA is simply another case of incredulity of privilege. July 18, at She was startled and afraid.

The Problem with Objectification

Why are they doing this? I think people do have some moral rights at least, moral expectations about how their publicly available image is being used. If nobody, slave or master, ever had a gut feeling that slavery was wrong, would it be wrong? Women’s suffrage Muslim countries US Other women’s rights. I really appreciate so many thoughtful comments here and will atheusm a lot more to say about this tomorrow morning. MKandefer, Relativism and error theory are kept distinct by philosophers, but I think this is mostly because moral realists want to unfairly represent relativism.

Sexual objectification – Wikipedia

So what I was saying is that if these qualities are possessed by the Playboy images, they also seem to be possessed by The Big Picture images. Blatantly objectify away over multiple levels, unsubtly. In many cases, the emotions they might be having are totally obscured by the mud covering their faces.

It addresses the many theistic arguments for the existence of god and other related topics.

These essays will help you understand and explain to others why a lack of belief in God really is the only rational choice. Again, if we look at the differences between strong and weak objectification, the key feature of what makes weak objectification permissible is consent, and what makes strong objectification impermissible is lack of consent.


Yes, that is really how I personally feel as well, though I guess I feel a little bummed out about there being so much space dedicated to discussing such worldly affairs. And I think I may have an answer for you.

She also co-authored Unscientific America: University of Toronto Press. But if it means something much more narrow what? I am becoming more and more convinced of the validity of those feelings every day. Reading and arguing and demanding philosophically-phrased arguments is not fixing the issue of your sexist blog posts and the hostile environment they produce for your diminishing female readership. This site uses cookies. It would also cover the example where the partners have mismatched desires, yet they both still consent.

In terms of rights, the only real question here is who owns a photo of themselves that is freely available on the internet, and to what extent should they be able to control what others can do with it.

I’m hoping a rationalist can explain it to me. Others contest feminist claims about the objectification of women.

I consent to it, but the stranger has no concern for my desires or wishes. Luke put no context besides appearance.

Or the person may accept the objectification, which tells us they are comfortable with the degree of dominance we have asserted over them, which may lead to further testing of the boundary. But those same responses to The Big Picture images can be raised about the Playboy images. The whole nation reported on it, and she became a role model for millions of young Japanese girls almost overnight.

So far so good for this theory.

Why does Kant think this?