Certainly there is social bias on the issue, and where this was going has merit- but I have to say a few things. These women are half naked? Which half, the bottom half wearing pants, or the torso covered by a top that isn’t much more revealing than what many women might wear out on a warm day? I also wonder if context factors in? Say we took a little girl, and she went with her mommy to the beach to a little cafe where all the waiters were male “surfer types,” no shirts on, shorts- and after a nice lunch and talking to the servers mommy told her daughter to have a picture taken with the nice boys, and we got a picture of them all together- would that be so outrageous, keeping in mind those men would be even less dressed than these women and literally more than half naked? I don’t think it would be. It’s in the eye of the beholder I suppose. Take this scenario:
You see a recent picture of an SO with someone of the gender(s) they are open to sexuality with looking cozy, arms around the shoulders, faces close. What is your first thought? That they must be fuxking? That there must be an explanation? That you’d like more info? Now- if that picture is at a recent office going away party you knew about but didn’t attend- you’re more likely to believe “that is my coworker of hers who is leaving the country and was like family” than if the picture is obviously in a bedroom just the two of them right? If that picture is with any males shirtless and females in what looks like underwear and it’s in a crowd on a street you might believe “me and my siblings friends I grew up with did an underwear charity run” versus the same photo in a cheap hotel right? Context is key. What is next necessary to address is this- sexuality and perception.
If a little girl takes a picture with a handsome and shirtless “Aladdin” “Disney” type prince- would we be having this conversation based on that photo? Isn’t it the sort of “ideal” innocent romantic idea that little girls will gravitate to these types of figures? Or perhaps a male singing idol like a tween and a near 30yo boy band member with no shirt and sagging jeans (who is again- less clothed than these women)? So what we are looking at is an issue not of wether it’s ok for little boys to kiss or be photographed with grown women just because those women happen to be dressed a certain way (can a mother or her friends not wear low cut or midriff showing tops? Can they now wear yoga pants etc?) but that as a society we have places like “Hooters” and things like “booth babes” who are just part of the backdrop- waitress uniforms are commonly somewhat revealing even when not “over sexualized,” but what is the male equivalent? They are few and far between- there aren’t many “Hooters”...
... type restaraunts that cater to heterosexual women or gay men are there? Can you name one national chain that BOTH consists of a wait staff of entirely “attractive young men in skimpy clothing” AND is billed as a “family dinning” experience? Likely not. Ladies- how many of your men wear lingerie? Silk and lace, garters, chokers, etc- outside of “fetish” or other lifestyles but just as a “special” present to spice up vanilla sex? Men- how many of you do this? Ever slip into a corset or the like for your ladies? See- men and women have different responses and relations to sexual stimuli and sexuality in general in many aspects. There is no 1/1 comparison between most circumstances a little boy will be photographed with women displaying a sexuality and when a little girl will because on the whole, displays of male sexuality in society are more direct and aggressive and are not considered family appropriate window dressing....
.... so ask yourself this- if you take a picture of a woman in a teddy and take a picture of a man in a teddy, will they have the same reaction? If you supply maxi pads to women but not to men is that a double standard? There are differences between sexes and circumstances that make it not a double standard- and realistically something that should be addressed case by case. I’m not saying that we don’t as a society play to much to the idea of “boys will be boys” or that it is right that it is often considered more serious a crime for a little girl to be statutory raped than a little boy- I’m saying that we need to address that as a society but it is important to note that “double standard” doesn’t really apply here as in this specific example the genders are held to entirely different standards- a double standard is when one standard is applied unequally- and also that we can’t universally say that such pictures or actions are innapropriate by nature. In fact...
... to do so becomes a more complex gender issue relating to female sexuality. Would we be having this discussion if these same women were wearing corporate branded mechanics jump suits? Do we assume that by default either these women have no voice or conscious and to dress that way must have been forced or coerced by circumstance: or that by default any woman who would dress that way is automatically exuding sexuality? Now we step in to rape culture. The same logic that would say that any woman dressing this way is automatically presenting themselves as a sexual object or in a sexually compromising manner- is the logic that says ergo they must be accepting of sexual advances or at least expect the advances of those who are simply observing what these women are “putting out.” So we are now essentially saying that a woman doesn’t have the way to dress as she likes- and again- I’ve seen more provocative outfits at an amusement park in summer time- because if she dresses beyond a...
....n acceptable threshold she is by default a sexual entity or has sexualized herself. Perhaps that woman in a “revealing” outfit is in fact showing off her sexuality- or she could be dressing as is comfortable to her, natural to her, in a style she finds pleasing, or out of pride of her body and the effort she puts into it. So really- it isn’t that we should be upset by a picture of a little boy with “sexy ladies,” it is that we shouldn’t sexualized men or women inherently based on their dress or our preconceived notions- but instead take a situation in context. The thing to be upset about isn’t some photographic “Where’s Waldo” pedophile erotica created in the imagination of the viewer- but at complex social issues and dynamics relating to gender roles and expectations as well as the imprinting of gender roles on children....
.... because the thing is you could take a picture of your kid with someone fully covered in a huge bulky mascot suit or just some random “professionally dressed” person in your life and the whole time they could be having sick fantasies and be a pedophile. You wouldn’t know. You may have a favorite framed photo of your kid with a closet pedo on a shelf right now. What are you going to do about it, especially since you don’t know? But it’s doubtful that those women would have sex with that little boy, or that our surer waiters would have sex with a little girl. It’s doubtful our little boy or girl would have sexual thoughts of the thing or truly understand or even think of the sexual context- the same sexual context we could place of a photo on Santa’s lap or even mommy or daddies lap- who we also don’t by default know aren’t having some sick thoughts.... so what do we have? A whole load of adult assumptions being dumped on a child....
... and an unknown and invisible vague pedo threat, with everyone in the world except yourself a suspect.... and the kicker here is- what about this photo sexualized the child? What other than the presence of adults of the opposite sex even suggests that there would be anything wrong with this photo? Ask yourself that. If you say it teaches disrespect of women- is it a better lesson to teach children that people who don’t dress or look a certain way are bad or to be avoided? The underlying lesson that these women don’t get to choose how to dress themselves because you feel it innapropriate? It’s actually very silly the more you deconstruct it. But in the end... as said- context is key. Who took that photo? A parent or guardian? I’d have to imagine they aren’t far- otherwise how did the child get in that situation? If a parent lets a gang of adults molest their child in front of them you have bigger problems than the family photo album no? So yeah- there are social issues here...
... but the tag kinda misses the mark by a long shot.
-essay concluded. Please stay tuned for my next paper- “Why spatulas are actually a metaphor for neo Marxist post colonial economic segregation between the American Midwest and the Yugoslavian border territories.” It is sure to be every bit as riveting as this comment string that no one read all the way through but still took the effort to down vote.
I read a comparison the other day between the way McCarthy hunted for "Reds under the beds" in the U.S. anti-communist frenzy in the 50s and the way people today ignore any context and nail suspected sex offenders to the wall today. You know: Guilty until proven innocent, but all your proof is disqualified or ignored and your life is over buh-bye.
,
I think @guest_ has it right that context is everything and people need to tackle this on a case by case basis. It would be absurd to assume anything sexual is happening in anyone's minds in this picture, but I guess anything's possible. People just need to remember to get a little context before grabbing their torches and pitchforks, or their metaphorical spatulas.
Thanks all. I started writing and before I knew it.... lol. I think @jasonmon raises an interesting point on the “red menace” and how humans tend to allow emotions to lead us to witch hunts and inevitable use of these labels as political and power dynamic tools completely destroying any hint of noble but misguided intent of the original frenzy. @avocadonut- I humbly bow. @internet- my essays look like a thesis and my thesis... well- let’s just say it would likely be 30 years+ to get my masters because someone would have to finish reading the damn thing before I could get my expensive wall decorator. @pokethebear- I was off work but couldn’t leave because I had to wait to reply to an email that someone hadn’t sent yet so....
-essay concluded. Please stay tuned for my next paper- “Why spatulas are actually a metaphor for neo Marxist post colonial economic segregation between the American Midwest and the Yugoslavian border territories.” It is sure to be every bit as riveting as this comment string that no one read all the way through but still took the effort to down vote.
,
I think @guest_ has it right that context is everything and people need to tackle this on a case by case basis. It would be absurd to assume anything sexual is happening in anyone's minds in this picture, but I guess anything's possible. People just need to remember to get a little context before grabbing their torches and pitchforks, or their metaphorical spatulas.