General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDoes the Rio "Carnivale" objectify women?
I just read an article at ABC news about Rio's "Carnivale," lots of women in the pictures were wearing the teeniest outfits, showing off their bodies.
Men were wearing scanty outfits too.
Is this festival in Brazil an opportunity to just objectify women?
Autumn
(45,120 posts)Are the women and men objectifying themselves?
The carnival's excesses are considered an "act of farewell to the pleasures of the flesh," before Lent, during which Christians are supposed to abstain from bodily pleasures.
Archae
(46,340 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)of course my "Spring Break" was a lifetime ago and a Sunday school picnic compared to Rio.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)And for their own protection they should be forced to cover up, from head to toe. Sex is shameful and so is the human body. If you lust after or find someone attractive you are objectifying them. Sex is dirty and should be shamed at all times, no exceptions.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)two band-aids and a fig leaf.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)but not that many.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)it objectifies sexuality in general. Actually much of it could be considered a parody of sexual objectification. More importantly mardi gras is an organic anarchic community self organized celebration.
If you are honestly interested in feminist perspectives on carnival, here: http://brayhammardigrasthesisproposal.weebly.com/
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)Orrex
(63,219 posts)liberal N proud
(60,339 posts)dlwickham
(3,316 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Wall Hit Smiley
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)Xithras
(16,191 posts)It's a seriously ancient tradition whose purpose is to shrug off social norms. It's a celebration of sex, fun, and just about everything else that is culturally "taboo" for upright and normal people.
Brazilians generally have more open attitudes about sex and sexuality in the first place. When you pile a bacchanal mindset on top of that, things can get pretty wild.
I suspect that a Brazilians response to your question would be something along the lines of: "If you're worried about objectification, you're not getting the point of Carnivale."
thelordofhell
(4,569 posts)Carnivale is incredible.......but all the media wants to show are the women
msongs
(67,432 posts)All God's good children were conceived through a sheet.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)This short video will explain it all
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)A BRAZILIAN TIMES MORE ADDICTIVE THAN HEROIN ZOMG O NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/jul/14/farout
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)if you dare.
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Really, it's a shame I'm so damn honest.
BainsBane
(53,041 posts)causing problems again. I'm glad to see he's been restored to full health after his run in with the beagle.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Even Charles Darwin had trouble accounting for such a fine specimen.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)In a "just friends" kinda way, of course.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Kurska
(5,739 posts)"Sexuality that I personally do not like".
So no, because I like it.
Personally I see little shameful about the human body and even less so about the wondrous and so utterly human sexual drive.
Some appear to disagree.
NBachers
(17,133 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)And let me know if multiple voting is allowed.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Although interestingly enough, getting rid of it wasn't even enough to get rid of it.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Now meta is all over gd. People are going to discuss DU.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)and I think they thought they could get rid of it, and the problems it undeniably caused, by getting rid of the forum.
I think they could have, if they had followed through and stayed on the GD hosts with the whole 'be ruthless with meta' instruction- instead, they allowed the door open a crack and now of course, it's back with a vengeance. Perhaps this is an acknowledgement that, as you say, 'people are going to discuss DU'.
But it's the admin's site. If they don't want people discussing DU to the point of flat-out "get some new hobbies" absurdity, endlessly poring over and obsessing on the little details, making their weird little lists of people on this team and that, treating this goofy comment or that ill-timed joke or the other mis-perceived slight from 14 months ago as if it's a high-stakes game of stratego or some other ridiculous shit, they could put a stop to it.
It's their site.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Anyone can hijack a completely within the sop op and start their own "meta" discussion. And so what?
If we all thought that was unacceptable juries would think so too. But we don't.
Orrex
(63,219 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Then everybody could be, like, do I agree with Orrex? Or Rex?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I suspect they've come to a similar conclusion regarding a number of things, pertaining to DU.
For me, personally, it's one of the reasons I don't take certain aspects of this place all that seriously, anymore. The breathless more-serious-than-serious tones about the staggeringly awesome import of some completely utterly ridiculous thing. The DU-rama. The portions of this place that have become increasingly disassociated from rational perspective as it pertains to the actual universe, outside this website.
It tells me that some folks have spent waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long in their echo chambers.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)in 5, 4, 3, 2.....
My Good Babushka
(2,710 posts)In objective reality in Rio and on the SI issue is that there are images of women, most people saw women, but some people could look at them and see only one thing, men furiously wanking off. Not leisurely exploring their sexuality, not having a nice, happy time, but only angrily whacking off with ugliness and hatred towards women in their souls. I think that was really too much. You cannot assume you know what other people are thinking or feeling. Women have parties where they can sell marital aids to each other, and it's celebrated when they talk about masturbation in terms of "celebrating themselves" and "exploring". That is objectifying masculinity down to the part that is hard and sticks out. They don't even have faces. I think men's sexuality was treated with unfairness and ugliness. Some men or women may have been aroused by the pictures, but you don't know that, and you can't assume that. That's like if women went to grocery store and the store refused to sell her cucumbers because "well, we know what you're going to do with that!"
They perpetrated a gross and unfair caricature of men and their sexuality. I think I actually heard Yakkity Sax in my head during the debate. They paint a tired old picture of men uncontrollably chasing women, and worse, painted themselves as the bitter old women in compression hose, beating others on the head for impure thoughts.
Response to My Good Babushka (Reply #19)
Post removed
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)or the grown men saying they would hit IT, do IT, bang IT
now, tell me what this objectification is again?
talking about a vibrator has NOTHING to do with a man. um, that would be the point. hence, no, not objectifying men. that is about lame
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)Just as I heard my wife and couple of her friends saying the same about some shirtless guy in one of the Twilight movies. And my wife and I ended up hitting each that night....twice.
To each their own.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Think anyone actually said that, here?
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)My Good Babushka
(2,710 posts)she is not confused that she, her discrete living breathing person, is the product she produced. The man (or woman) in the marital aid factory is not confused that he (or she) is the consumable image he (or she) produced.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)BainsBane
(53,041 posts)Is to worry about male sexuality on DU. At best it's a non-sequitur.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)malaise
(269,144 posts)Trinidad carnivals. We had a blast and never thought we were 'objectifying' ourselves.
Still we had on more clothes than our men.
Ah well!!!
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Calypso Muuusic !!
Phase 2
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)In one case there is celebration of all, in the case of porn (however, soft) it's dehumanization of separate group.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)or "is attractive" or "is not wearing much (or any) clothing."
Here's something I posted to one of the other threads where people were still not understanding objectification. That thread was about bathing suits, but you could replace that with "goes to Carnivale" or whatever.
If you're choosing a bathing suit and heading out to the beach, you're a subject.
If you are hired by someone else to wear a bathing suit chosen by someone else to be photographed by someone else in a setting chosen by someone else and posed by someone else to be looked at by someone else, you might be being objectified.
Here's a definition:
Objectification is a notion central to feminist theory. It can be roughly defined as the seeing and/or treating a person, usually a woman, as an object. In this entry, the focus is primarily on sexual objectification, objectification occurring in the sexual realm. Martha Nussbaum (1995, 257) has identified seven features that are involved in the idea of treating a person as an object:
instrumentality: the treatment of a person as a tool for the objectifier's purposes;
denial of autonomy: the treatment of a person as lacking in autonomy and self-determination;
inertness: the treatment of a person as lacking in agency, and perhaps also in activity;
fungibility: the treatment of a person as interchangeable with other objects;
violability: the treatment of a person as lacking in boundary-integrity;
ownership: the treatment of a person as something that is owned by another (can be bought or sold);
denial of subjectivity: the treatment of a person as something whose experiences and feelings (if any) need not be taken into account.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)so some of us are having a prolonged upset. We could post them in the boys club, and gawk there, but that doesn't seem to have the desired results.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)sibelian
(7,804 posts)Well stated.
BainsBane
(53,041 posts)Orrex
(63,219 posts)In other words, if one doesn't accept Nussbaum's particular definition of objectification, and if one disagrees that a given act qualifies as objectification, then it basically knocks down the main tent pole.
And if Nussbaum's seven deadly sins of objectification don't apply in a given case, then on what basis are we to vilify a man's particular behavior as objectifying?
Response to Archae (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Feral Child
(2,086 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)Are you fucking kidding me?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)See, you don't have an answer.
cally
(21,594 posts)Women do not go alone, are often afraid, during Carnival. I spoke to journalists preparing a story on this issue. Of course, western media will not cover the story because it's so much more in keeping with current media practice to show the costumes and show and not what others experience.
BainsBane
(53,041 posts)It is a period in which people relinquish the restraints of daily life to dance, party, and sometimes do what they might not other times of the year. Some have described it, along with soccer, as a sort of opiate for the masses. You should know that the images you see of Carnval in Rio are all from the Sambadromo, a stadium that one must pay to enter. It is a competition by the various samba schools for who does the best presentation. It's a complex social phenomenon that has been written about in a number of books and articles. The queen of carnval is usually a woman of mixed race, what Brazilians call a mulata. The celebration of the mulata during Carnaval belies the ongoing racism (denied by most Brazilians) that elevates whiteness the rest of the year, as evident in telenovelas and magazines where white women represent beauty.
However, carnval de rua (of the street) is different. That is how most cariocas (residents of Rio) experience carnival. People don't wear the expensive costumes and simply go out on the street to dance, drink, and have a good time.
I have never spent carnival in Rio, but I have in Salvador. There carnval is entirely street. Bands move through the main avenues and people listen and dance free to charge. One can pay some money (nothing like the cost of Rio carnval) to dance within a carnival bloco (like Olodum, Ile Aye, Ara Ketu, Banda Eva, etc.) but you can enjoy carnival every bit as much if not more without paying.
The other thing to understand is that Brazil is far more sexually open that the US, and women are more empowered in many ways. Certainly objectification exists, but it's different.
Videos from carnval in Salvador.
This is a link to a YouTube channel with videos of this year's carnval, from this Sunday.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjtuvQ17A2DO3Lh-wqIGh853XCSXTkZiQ
Olodum, probably the best know of the Bahian blocos, from carnival 2012.
An interesting thing to observe is that recent videos show are now women performing in Olodum, which was not the case when I was there in the 90s.
Shivering Jemmy
(900 posts)thank you.
BainsBane
(53,041 posts)and included a link to a live carnival feed from Salvador, if you're interested. Carnival technically ends tonight.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024603847
From what I have heard it's a big, fabulous, fun party.
They are far less closed as far as bodies and sexuality go. It's a completely different culture.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I've been to MANY Mardi Gras parades. It's today by the way, and I'm staying out of the middle of it because I've been there and done that. It's a party. Trying to make it about objectification is ridiculous. When people drink ludicrous amounts of alcohol, they tend to get a little loose. It just happens. You go to Mardi Gras to have a good time. I'm not saying that sexual harassment is in anyway okay, it's just when you are going to a street party with tens of thousands of drunk people, you really can't expect for everyone to behave.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Seriously.
BainsBane
(53,041 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)underpants
(182,861 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)and ask them why?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Tsiyu
(18,186 posts)Just because he's not wearing his collar and leash right now doesn't mean he won't wear it for Carnivale, so stop saying that!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)But he totally earned that Emmy with that role.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)You do know what women are supposed to do to get a string of white beads in the French Quarter, right?
snooper2
(30,151 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)if a bare-breasted woman walked through a crowd of foot fetishists on Mardi Gras. "Show your feet! Show your feet!"
Dorian Gray
(13,498 posts)Carnivale is carnivale.