This video is kind of lame. The question-begging is usually very badly posed, on top of it all. Are we making men and women into something they are not?
I'll say it.
What is the "iconic" male sex toy?
What is the "iconic" female sex toy?
By this I mean, in a regular movie or TV show or mature-audience cartoon (such as Family Guy) will you see for a sex toy used by men or by women?
Which is the "more objectifying"? Please post your answer!!
A woman doing "extra sexy" things or in a "sexy" pose can present a hyper-real image to men, i.e., an image that conveys much more than what is contained in the image itself. I guess the measure of this is whether men and women would react the same or differently to the image.
Why should we suppose that a man in exactly the same situation should have a comparable effect on women? What does that even mean? A man in his underwear versus a totally nude man, how much "sex appeal" if any, does this have for women? Are there images or poses or whatever of men that have a strong impact on women? What are they?
All these kinds of lame presentations -- I wouldn't call them arguments -- is that men subbed into alluring pictures of women are not appealing.
What about hypertrophy? Women with gigantic fake breasts, emaciated bodies that make them look curvier or whatever -- what is the equivalent in men? Schwartzeneggar when he was in early body-building competition?
Are men who are older, have "craggy" faces, slight greying of hair and beard, more appealing? Young men are appealing? Are they both, but in different ways for different reasons?
What sorts of images do women find appealing, if any? Please post your answer!!
The men shown here are quite average. They don't have any extreme features or "doctored" features, so they do not, should not, cause a comparable exaggerated impact on women viewing them.
There are no "normal" men in ads either. The "nerd" portrayed is an extreme exaggeration, as much, in the opposite direction, as the PhotoShopped, implanted, Playboy model or Sports Illustrated bikini girl. Men with ridiculous beefcake, combined with hairless, or hair in all the right places, great skin, good face structure, perhaps a cleft chin (some women consider this a deal-breaker), good eyes, good eye color.
Are women even more "forgiving" of defects and failings? I've heard some pretty objectified talk, too small eyes, balding, back hair, knobby knees, no cleft chin, etc., etc., all as reasons for not finding a given male appealing. Women are unabashed "junk-gawkers" given the right circumstances, too, as I've witnessed on many occasions. Compunction? What's that? Talking about men's bodies and about things like performance also seem to be no-holds-barred. I almost want to say "moreso than men" and I have fairly free access to men's talk. Given one or two "strong features" in a woman, men seem to be prepared to overlook a great deal else, but it seems not to be the case with women.
So many questions.
Is the only thing worse than "The Gaze" the absence of "The Gaze"?