Srivijaya
Active Member
*sigh* Never mind.It's not supposed to feel right. That's the point!! Jabba is a mild antagonist. You're not supposed to think his actions are right or good. That's the entire point of having an antagonist.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
*sigh* Never mind.It's not supposed to feel right. That's the point!! Jabba is a mild antagonist. You're not supposed to think his actions are right or good. That's the entire point of having an antagonist.
You mean why did a member of an alien androgynous slug race just happen to find a skimpy costume forced on a built up powerful woman? And find it titilating?I get the context argument. It was part of the plot. It fitted. Logically.
Still didn't 'feel' right though and I'm not a prude.
You mean like the original Star Trek which was, let's be honest here, basically James Bond in space? I mean just how many "women" did Kirk bang? (No seriously I never really watched the show I'm asking legitimately. Since that was the most well known aspect of the original series.)You mean why did a member of an alien androgynous slug race just happen to find a skimpy costume forced on a built up powerful woman? And find it titilating?
The answer is either the writers pulled one over the execs and are making fun of the audience as a monster-audience-avatar (a-la Cabin in the Woods) or, more likely, a lot of men like seeing powerful women objectified and humiliated. And it's a little gross to see outside the bedroom. Either way, weird.
*sigh* Never mind.
Understanding the time frame it was made in doesn't make it less icky to me. I can still appreciate the franchise for what it built and the good things it did (hell I'm roleplaying Edge of the Empire for my husband's birthday) but also say that was a dick move (literally). That was pretty much Carrie's commentary on it too.You mean like the original Star Trek which was, let's be honest here, basically James Bond in space? I mean just how many "women" did Kirk bang? (No seriously I never really watched the show I'm asking legitimately. Since that was the most well known aspect of the original series.)
Star Wars was made in the 1970s. If Disney pulled that trick now I'd be like wtf? But in the original trilogy the bite is significantly lessened. But that's just me.
Which I believe can be said of Halle Berry's toplessness. I never watched the movie so I don't know anything about the character of the woman she's playing except that her character's blase regard to being topless does tell me she's a bit unconventional and has a sane attitude toward partial nudity. The character thinks for herself, and is probably little swayed by conventional mores. OR, maybe the toplessness was included to simply titillate the movie goer, which is just fine.The video also seems to imply that being sexualized would in and of itself take away from the actual role of a character. That can be the case, but it didn't seem to be like that in most of the examples. On the contrary, there can even be cases in which that could add more depth by showing another aspect of the character, or also just make a character more memorable.
Not as many as you'd think...79 episodes...I'd have to do some actual research, but I doubt that it was a plot point in even half, but likely more than a quarter...although it became a more regular occurrence in the later episodes.I mean just how many "women" did Kirk bang? (No seriously I never really watched the show I'm asking legitimately. Since that was the most well known aspect of the original series.)
Overheard an apparently sincere conversation once: "he's taking me to see Titanic tonight, so don't tell me what happens, I want it to be a surprise! "I can't say. You would need to ask a woman or a gay guy. Who do they find "yummy". A bit of gratuitous sex does not bother me in the least. And it can help the movie. I remember many years ago when a friend of mine reported back on watching Titanic with his wife. He was getting rather bored, it was pretty much a romance that was aimed at women more than men. Then there was the topless scene in the middle of the movie. A totally gratuitous flash of breasts. But that one scene piqued his interest and he got back into the film.
Not surprising at all.Overheard an apparently sincere conversation once: "he's taking me to see Titanic tonight, so don't tell me what happens, I want it to be a surprise! "
I ask this because I came across the following video on YouTube
Watch it. Don't watch it. It's premise should be obvious; its producer, WatchMojo.com, doesn't believe female movie characters should be sexualized---or at least that's what it would like you to believe---although it never says why. At most it simply asks, "Is it really necessary?"
My only comment is, so what if Sexualized Female Movie Characters aren't necessary?
.
As I would respectfully ask if there's anything wrong with presenting mild erotic content through sexualization in a movie? (Off hand, I can't think of any other way to do it. ) Or is mild erotic content in movies a no-no?With respect, if someone has to ask what's wrong with the sexualization of people, then I must suspect their definition and/or understanding of what is involved in sexualization is relatively benign and perhaps superficial.
As I would respectfully ask if there's anything wrong with presenting mild erotic content through sexualization in a movie? (Off hand, I can't think of any other way to do it. ) Or is mild erotic content in movies a no-no?
Sexualization (or sexualisation) is to make something sexual in character or quality, or to become aware of sexuality, especially in relation to men and women.
Source: Wikipedia
erotic
Relating to or tending to arouse sexual desire or excitement.
Source: Oxford English Dictionary
.
E.g. this? (first thing I found)I love Wiki, but it -- like any encyclopaedia or dictionary -- is only a place to start if you want to understand sexualization. The definition you've quoted from it is practically useless. You might want to read up on what outfits like the American Psychological Association have to say about sexualization --- that is, if you're genuinely interested in the topic. If you're not genuinely interested, then I presume your thread is for entertainment purposes only, so -- enjoy!
(from: Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls)There are several components to sexualization, and these set it apart from healthy sexuality. Sexualization occurs when
- a person’s value comes only from his or her sexual appeal or behavior, to the exclusion of other characteristics;
- a person is held to a standard that equates physical attractiveness (narrowly defined) with being sexy;
- a person is sexually objectified — that is, made into a thing for others’ sexual use, rather than seen as a person with the capacity for independent action and decision making; and/or
- sexuality is inappropriately imposed upon a person.
So if the American Psychological Association's definition of "sexualize" differs significantly from the one I presented, as you imply it does, do you actually believe that when WatchMojo.com used the term "sexualized" it was referring to the American Psychological Association's definition? I highly doubt it. I would bet it uses the word defined as:I love Wiki, but it -- like any encyclopaedia or dictionary -- is only a place to start if you want to understand sexualization. The definition you've quoted from it is practically useless. You might want to read up on what outfits like the American Psychological Association have to say about sexualization --- that is, if you're genuinely interested in the topic. If you're not genuinely interested, then I presume your thread is for entertainment purposes only, so -- enjoy!
Ehh I'd take slave Leia over Padme any day. At least she was memorable. Despite said dick move.Understanding the time frame it was made in doesn't make it less icky to me. I can still appreciate the franchise for what it built and the good things it did (hell I'm roleplaying Edge of the Empire for my husband's birthday) but also say that was a dick move (literally). That was pretty much Carrie's commentary on it too.
(Although James Bond, the books, were especially gross. I do not recommend.)
Yes "research"Not as many as you'd think...79 episodes...I'd have to do some actual research, but I doubt that it was a plot point in even half, but likely more than a quarter...although it became a more regular occurrence in the later episodes.
So if the American Psychological Association's definition of "sexualize" differs significantly from the one I presented, as you imply it does, do you actually believe that when WatchMojo.com used the term "sexualized" it was referring to the American Psychological Association's definition?
All of which are fine with me.Oxford Dictionaries
sexualize
(British sexualise)
verb
[with object]
Make sexual; attribute sex or a sex role to.
_________________________________
Dictionary.com
sexualize
[sek-shoo-uh-lahyz or, esp. British, seks-yoo-]
verb (used with object), sexualized, sexualizing.
1. to render sexual; endow with sexual characteristics.
___________________________________
Merriam-Webster
Definition of sexualize
sexualized; sexualizing
transitive verb
: to make sexual : endow with a sexual character or cast
____________________________________
Collins English Dictionary
sexualize
(sɛkʃuəlaɪz )
Word forms: sexualizes, sexualizing, sexualizedregional note: in BRIT, also use sexualise
transitive verb
To sexualize something or someone means to make them sexual or consider them in a sexual way.
____________________________________
The Free Dictionary
sexualize (redirected from sexualized)
Related to sexualized: Sexualisation
sex·u·al·ize (sĕk′sho͞o-ə-līz′)
tr.v. sex·u·al·ized, sex·u·al·iz·ing, sex·u·al·iz·es
To make sexual in character or quality:
_____________________________________
Cambridge Dictionary
sexualize verb [ T ] UK usually sexualise /ˈsek.sju.əl.aɪz/ /ˈsek.sju.əl.aɪz/
to see someone or something in sexual terms, or to make someone or something sexually exciting:
______________________________________
Your Dictionary
sexualize
transitive verb
-·ized·, -·iz·ing
to make sexual; endow with sexual significance, feeling, etc.
_______________________________________
Thing is, when a word is used in an ordinary context you can't concluded it's using it's most formal definition. Unless a word appears in a formal context there's no reason to believe it's necessarily using its formal definition.
As I would respectfully ask if there's anything wrong with presenting mild erotic content through sexualization in a movie? (Off hand, I can't think of any other way to do it. )
That doesn't seem to be what is meant in the YT-video which this thread is about, or at least that's not the impression I got from it.
Yes, and it is far, far more likely that WatchMojo is using the word in its common sense, than in a scientific sense, which I assume is significantly different than its common one.Doesn't matter at all whether WatchMojo is using the word "sexualization" except in the important sense how the word is being used will largely determine how one answers the question you've posed in the OP.
Characterize it however you wish, but if you're unable to play the game using the definition WatchMojo appears to use, then so be it. But regardless of how you choose regard it, it certainly has no bearing on the genuineness of my inquiry. That you seem to feel genuine inquiries can only be conducted under scientific standards using scientific definitions misses the point that not everything worth examining falls within the parameters of scientific definitions, particularly when it comes to social issues. Social issues, and the words society uses to express them, must often be examined within their social framework, and not that of academia. And that means accepting what society means when it uses a word.Use what I think is your definition of sexualization and pretty much the only sensible answer to your question is "no". In other words, you've set up a game, not a genuine inquiry.
Most importantly, dictionaries reflect the common understanding of a word, AND its usage, which is why they're important when trying to understand their use in common contexts. Want to use a word in within the rigors of science then I agree, it's best to use its scientific definition.Quoting dictionaries fails to address the issue that dictionaries are quite often superficial -- especially with words that have scientific meanings, as does "sexualization".
Then I assume that when I observed "Boy, he's insane" you think I actually mean the word as legally defined:I would never quote a dictionary as the final authority on the meaning(s) people give words, especially the techincal meanings specialists (such as scientists) give words.
How about using the definition I presented from Wikipedia? It's as good as any of the others I listed.Depends on how you are defining "sexualization", now doesn't it?