She does, but again, she then goes on to use the word herself, without irony, as well as making arguments which support the mindset. Look, if you don’t see it or don’t agree then you don’t see it/don’t agree, but the fact that someone there used the word first doesn’t change the fact that she’s using it now, and fortifying that usage with arguments that I should be offended by gratuitous displays of sexuality.
No, she uses the term repeatedly and backs it with other arguments. I don’t agree that she’s just tongue in cheek referring to it.
I think, maybe, you’re watching the wrong show.
5 Likes
[quote=“vendorx, post:163, topic:57272, full:true”]
But then why is nudity what’s the focus? As I stated above, would the prostitutes in the high septom scene be any less sexually objectified if they had some pieces of cloth wrapped around their waist and chest? No, not a bit, so this to me demonstrates that the issue is less about objectification and more about nudity and sexuality. [/quote]
This is a very good argument, leading unfortunately to an utterly false conclusion. That’s because you’ve missed the issue with the next bit:
The article is objecting because the female extras, and only the female extras, are objectified - male extras never are.
That is the double standard which is offensive.
Whether it’s acceptable or not to objectify extras is a completely different discussion. It has nothing to do with GoT treating women as disposable sexual objects. Which it’s definitely guilty of.
5 Likes
I think she was continuing along with expressing the mindset of the director… maybe she’ll clarify that point? @CarolineSiede, care to comment on this issue, as it seems to be a source of confusion here in the comments? I think people are taking away different things from your use of that word?
And again, she says, flat out, that she doesn’t mind the main characters being naked, because they are fully formed characters, who have sexual agency (much of the time, of course, the mangled Cersei/Jaime Sept scene not withstanding). She is specifically refering the use of women as props and objects for no clear reason, other than “MENZ LIKE TEH BOOOOOOBBBZZZZ”… really men should be more pissed off that they are being pandered to in that way, shouldn’t they? Are men really so base that they’ll only watch a show with lots of boobs for no reason?
3 Likes
CLARION NOTE OF A TRUMPET
COOKIE HAS BEEN AWARDED. shakes hand, gives knowing but warm glance
Rob pretentious? Are you crazy??
And there is my complaint precisely. You yourself spell it out, that the mere enjoyment of sexuality is somehow more base, that I should be offended by it unless it’s part of some other artistic mission. Look at your wording “MENZ LIKE TEH BOOOOOOBBBZZZZ”. Yeah, a lot of us do, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. So why is it being argued that I should be offended at their presence, or my enjoyment of them, unless it’s in some other context (in this case a more fully developed character.) That isn’t about objectifying women, that’s about attempting to belittle my enjoyment of sexuality, that’s quite literally saying that if I just enjoy boobs because I like boobs, I’ve done something wrong.
2 Likes
[quote=“Mindysan33, post:189, topic:57272, full:true”]
… really men should be more pissed off that they are being pandered to in that way, shouldn’t they?[/quote]
Even when I was a teenage boy who would desperately watch anything with the remotest hint of boobs, I was deeply offended by products that assumed I would buy anything because it had boobs.
4 Likes
This post reminded me of this:
1 Like
Your comment reminded me of this
3 Likes
No. I mean yes. I mean I read Playboy for the articles, and Rolling Stone for the music reviews. Wait, what is my point?
Of course not, and I am gonna burn another pass–most people look better in well fitted clothes. And the way Battlestar Galactica handled nudity with Tricia (I.e. it was all implied, never shown) was a waaay better manner to tell the story.
I don’t disparage naked bodies (shit, I have probably been to more nudist camps than most here), but when it comes to story telling it is like habanero peppers. A little goes a long way.
So show me Wang’s and bewbs. But don’t try and disguise it as a plot point unless it really, truly is.
It’s not the enjoyment of sexuality that’s a problem. It’s the treatment of women as mere objects of sexual desires and the commodification of that which I find problematic. You like boobs, that’s fine and dandy, but women are not just there for male gratification. The argument @CarolineSiede makes here is that this is precisely what is occurring. She doesn’t complain about the main characters being sexual in the show, because they are also portrayed as human beings.
There is nothing wrong with enjoying boobs (nor does the article argue that), but it’s important to remember that women don’t exist solely for the pleasure of men, and there is centuries where that mind set was not only dominant, but commonsensical. Lots of men STILL think this way, as a matter of fact. She’s making the argument that such portrayals of women help to reinforce that view.
And you took my comment out of context, BTW. My point was not to say that men should not ever find a woman sexual attractive, but they should be sort of annoyed that they are thought of as being the sum of their biological urges.
2 Likes
'zactly. Wink wink nudge nudge but no for real we need tits because the perv audience is vital to our success it’s not really porn smile nod.
I suppose presuming that an adaptation of a fantasy novel into a television series on HBO would NOT be basically porn is wildly off base of me.
Definitely not dismissing the point, even though the point has been made ad nauseum - Game of Thrones is in it’s 5th season and I’ve seen similar articles nearly weekly each season.
Again however, I think I need to point out, because you are failing to understand, willingly or otherwise (maybe I’m being trolled), that I not once claimed anyone shouldn’t talk about these issues because “biology”. If that’s what it “seems” like to you, then you need to re-evaluate how you apply your views to what others might say. Once more then: The article literally says the creators are appealing to perverts. Such a statement could be considered unreasonably aggressive if taken to imply that men are perverts because of a natural attraction to women (Otherwise, the implication is that the creators are actively trying to tap into the niche pervert market by including naked women as background props, but that doesn’t seem overly accurate or genuine, does it?). Should they use women in the show as they do is an entirely different point then the one I make - no one with reason is on the other side of that argument.
Personally I have a more interesting concern, and that is the trend of where the social internet has taken us. There seems to be three types of common commentators, the one who goes out of their way to aggressively make a stance to demonstrate their moral superiority, the one who goes out of their way to spew negativity and showcase their displeasure with everything they come across, and the one who just trolls to rile the other two up.
1 Like
I think I generally understand your point and agree with you, but it seems to me to be a little too precious to fret over the ratio of male to female nudity shown, as a way to make a commentary on society, or to somehow redress one of societies inequities.
If we are to assess this show as art, rather than as a gratuitous string of killings and sex scenes, we have to allow the creators to present their scenario as they have imagined, not as we wish it to be. We don’t (hopefully) re-read and judge Shakespeare’s Macbeth, or Austen’s Emma in the context of our current societal mores, and there is no relationship between what is onscreen, or in print, and our current values. IMO, the creators have the right to conjure up whatever vision they choose to present, and we have the right to appreciate it as it is, or not, as with all art. It either strikes an emotional chord within us in some way, or not, and attempts to homogenize the experience for everyone seem doomed to failure.
Dammit. I tried searching, I tried scrolling through 180+ comments to make sure nobody else had posted it… But I still managed to repost.
5 Likes
It is the artistic equivalent of comic sans, pachabels canon, or starting your book off with, “it was a dark and stormy night”. You have permission and agency to like all of them, including nekkid peeps. But they all irritate other people.
3 Likes
