And, coming back full circle, people don’t make that argument successfully when they demonize basic sexual enjoyment. Calling people perverts for sexually enjoying nudity, calling enjoyment of boobs just because one enjoys boobs “base”, belittling phrases like “MENZ LIKE TEH BOOOOOOBBBZZZZ”, these attack and demonize enjoyment of sexuality. And a clothed prostitute would still be sexually objectified.
2 Likes
And again, my point. My enjoyment of a boob for the sake of boob-osity “irritates” some other people. Moral majority through and through. Again, I know that Siede’s proclaimed argument involves objectification and, again, I argue that she missed the goal and instead focused on what you talk about here, how nudity and sexuality offend some.
1 Like
That’s what one of the producers actually said. It’s been quoted several times in the comments now. She was merely mirroring the producers mindset.
That is PRECISELY what she is arguing… And given that one of the producers actually said that, it would seem to be accurate and genuine to me. Maybe he meant it as a joke, though the director in questino didn’t seem to think so. YMMV.
You were the one who brought up biology, actually not me. I was responding to your point, where you seemed to indicate that men are slaves their biology. I don’t think that’s true, and neither do you seem to, so I am unclear on why you brought it up in the first place?
Also, I assure you, I’m not driving trollies. I took your comments seriously, and I assume you are taking mine seriously as well. I responded to things you actually said, as you are doing. If we can’t come to some understanding, it’s like due to one or the other of us being unable to make our point clear enough.
Not all men are attracted to women, of course. Nor does “natural” attraction mean that there isn’t a social component to sexuality and how we think about it, which is part of what she’s discussing.
2 Likes
My point flew over your head. My position is that it is lazy artistically, not immoral. Just like comic sans isn’t immoral.
4 Likes
Dammit. I tried searching, I tried scrolling through 180+ comments to make sure nobody else had posted it… But I still managed to repost.
Comments popping out after than boobs on GoT.
I had some thought somewhere but by the time i got to the end they had vanished. And it looks like the end of the thread is moving as I type.
I think the problem comes when it feels like someone is trying to get their naked quota on the screen. The prop/background nudity in the brothels seems to fit but could have been done with seductively clothed people. That tavern picture in the article with the naked woman on his lap I remember watching that scene and thinking “What did I miss - Why is she naked - I do not understand” to be fair I may have missed something since i was not fully paying attention.
She is not, nor am I doing any such thing. Do you really need boobs on every street corner for you sexual enjoyment? Do you need to have a background in a fantasy show that has nude women in the background for literally no reason? Does pointing out the hypocrisy of having that with women but not with men really an attack on your sexuality? I don’t think it is. She gives very specific examples of nudity being employed for no real purpose other than titalation. And she establishes that this is in part because one of the producers literally is trying to appeal, in his words, “to perverts”.
I’m not sure how much clearer I can be that neither I nor the article are demonizing sexuality in any real way.
5 Likes
No I got your point entirely. You expressed a subjective judgmental opinion about what constitutes quality. Again, that’s straight up shaming. “Sure you can like boobs if you want, I guess, if you’re lazy and don’t like real art.” It’s Tipper Gore and Frank Zappa before Congress all over again.
1 Like
Breasts =/= equal full frontal. The only thing that, on an anatomical level, equals male genitalia is female genitalia and I have yet to see that on display on GOT.
“It’s scat porn, basically it’s the opposite of art.”
You say you aren’t then you launch right into doing it. There’s very little nudity, overall, in the scope of television. I finally get some enjoyable nudity and you try and claim I demand boobs on every corner. It’s not even subtle, we have abandoned any dialogue about actual objectifying of women for you to flat out tell me I shouldn’t like sex.
You are currently trying to say that I’m wrong for having a healthy, normal, positive sexual response to the naked female form. Why is there nudity in Game of Thrones? Because of that response. But you dismiss that "
And yet there clearly is a reason. It’s just a reason you’re trying to smear.
3 Likes
Dude, you can enjoy all the objectively lazy art you want. Shit, I still eat top ramen and enjoy butterfingers (yay, i made a false equivalency fallacy! I score a point!). But if someone accuses me of not respecting my food and being food lazy because of it…
“That’s a fair cop”
3 Likes
I cannot wait to accuse a friend of being food lazy!
1 Like
/signed! : D
1 Like
the only thing hypocritical is our societies double standard in treating breasts like sex organs in the first place, when they are no such thing. They are secondary sexual characteristics whose primary purpose is to feed children. Men have the same equipment just it’s (usually) not activated. Therefore the only real equivalent to topless women is topless men and their is no shortage of that on GOT. Until we have an equal definition of “nudity” we can’t hope to achieve full gender equality.
Feminists are so eager to see male genitalia when their is almost never any sight of female genitalia. The vast majority of female full frontal include pubic wigs that cover any offending bits. So until men can have their bits covered with similar apparel that cannot be compared either. As far as butts are concerned their seems to be more male on the show, but who is counting…
I think we can have nudity and have a strong feminist perspective on women being objectified… Once again, @CarolineSiede goes out of her way to say she doesn’t have a problem with the main characters being naked, because they are treated in the narrative as human beings, with sexual desires. She makes the claim that women and men as background are treated differently.
Hell, historically, women have been objectified with their clothes on for the most part, at least in terms of TV representations of women.
Again, you can like naked women all you want, but don’t get put out when WOMEN, who have been treated as lesser than and as objects (and still are) point out what WE find problematic with how women are portrayed in the media.
I don’t think you’re response to a naked lady is wrong. I do think that ignoring the objectifying nature of how the show depicts women is a little myopic. Really, dude, no one here is trying to demonize you. It’s kind of all in your head if you think that’s what she is trying to say.
I also kind of object to your assertation that your experiences are somehow normal. I’m sure there are normal for you, and there is no shame in your attraction to women, but what about men who likewise find the excessive nudity problematic? Are they some how abnormal because they aren’t like you?
[ETA] Also, being a woman in this society, I have a very different perspective on men finding women attractive - does that give them the right to make comments which I generally find unwanted? Where is the line there between the right of a man to “enjoy” looking at me (or other women, not like I’m some hot shit) and my right to just exist and not be subjected to what I consider harassing treatment? I don’t think you’re making this argument, but the fact is that lots of men who catcall women in the streets DO make this argument… where is the line?
3 Likes
There are a lot of ways I could approach this argument, the most obvious being attempts to set objective standards to art, but as I tend to personally hold some tastes as base myself and at least emotionally agree with you, I’ll take the easiest path.
So we’re talking about lazy or elevated tastes, right? Well it’s Game of Freaking Thrones! In my little rant earlier I kinda tried to make this point, I do NOT consider Game of Thrones high art, it would definitely fall into the ramen noodle category for me. It’s really gussied up ramen noodles, I mean someone’s dumped a lot of slices of pork and shallots and snap peas and such in there, but it’s ramen noodles.
Again, I agree with your general point but disagree with your interpretation of Siede’s piece. I think she failed to engage in a meaningful exploration of objectification and instead wrote an article that primarily exposed subjective attitudes about sexuality in media. Is there a place for a real discussion or review of female objectification through nudity in GoT? Sure. did Siede bring it to the table? I don’t think so.
1 Like
No, I am the non-sensical jester (with better keyboard skillz) !!!
1 Like
Welp, maybe that’s fair enough. I tend to think you’re misinterpreting her to be making an attack on some “natural” male sexuality, but perhaps we’re going to have to agree to disagree on that point.
1 Like
Okay, we are really talking, if not agreeing. While I wouldn’t put GRRM into say the highest echelons of writing, I do tend to consider his work at least bordering on a Michellan star. And yes, I am decently well read, and find “three Michelin star” books obnoxious.
Another anology I could make, food wise, is that there are scenes in the TV adaptation that are perfectly sauced, prime beef bourgiognon. Then they are followed with Nilla wafers covered in under ripe bananas and vanilla pudding that is too sweet
(I can make food analogies all day. Ask anyone here 
)
2 Likes
