• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

woman's fashion's effect on society.

Automata heart

Automata heart

a skirt full of scamper and a head full of vodka
is it just me, but is modern fashion making woman and even girls seem more like sex objects? a lot of these clothes leave nothing to the imagination. and i think this is affecting the view of what is beautiful and the view of society on people who choose to cover up.
opinions.
 
Last edited:
People who objectify women based on their clothing are the ones making them seem more like sex objects. People should be able to wear whatever they want.

EDIT: Also this post went through like five edits (before I settled on "based on their clothing") as I tried to find a non-judgemental way to say "clothing that covers less than most clothing" that wasn't so cumbersome; if anyone's got anything, I'd love to hear it!
 
Last edited:
I agree with Rainbow Dash - women should dress however they like, or whatever they feel comfortable and happy in. I've been called out before for wearing a tank top outside (seriously, it was summer), because my chest is pretty prominent and apparently daring to have cleavage and be happy with the way I look makes me a 'slut'. I'm like thanks, dickface!
 
Agreeing with the two above me. I do, however, have a problem with media/adds/commercials that objectify women to sell their products (PETA, I'm looking at you >|). I really, really don't care for beauty pageants, or magazines selling products with images of 'sexy women!' to make it look more appealing, or the women in game shows that are basically just there to be pretty. Sigh.

The thing is, women should dress however they want. Slut-shaming is not cool and telling people how to dress is no one's business. But when a company uses women or people to try and sell their product, it is objectifying.
 
Isn't this what leads to cliques? It is affecting our culture, and the view of "beautiful" has turned into a slim person, to say the least. I heavily agree with Pathos and everyone before.
 
You all go, "wear whatcha want," but the OP's point is that the popular culture's objectifying of women as little more than 3 dimensional porn is forcing women either to dress as sluts or be largely disregarded. (Which I agree with-look at Lady GaGa, do you think she would have gotten near as many fans had she been ugly/dressed modestly?)
 
To be honest, guys tend to objectify women as sex objects regardless of what they wear (case in point: my ex, why did I go out with him in the first place), so I don't really think women's fashions, "slutty" or otherwise, make a difference. (though guys generally will consider a girl who dresses provocatively more "easy" than one who dresses more modestly)

I definitely agree with Pathos's point on the media. They're basically saying "HEY BUY THIS PRODUCTS AND CHICKS WILL BE CLIMBING ALL OVER YOU" and that isn't exactly gonna happen.
 
Flower Doll said:
(case in point: my ex, why did I go out with him in the first place),
Click to expand...

Just a wild guess, but maybe because you objectified him too? I mean, it's not as if you found his character attractive.

Really, though, do you have an answer for that rhetorical question?
 
Teh Ebil Snorlax said:
like
Click to expand...

Well, I found that one a *little* bit on the suggestive side, but uh that's if I was getting a bit picky, I guess.
More to the point, those pictures represent a really wide fashion range, and I'm preeetty sure, ignorant as I am, she has some moments where she's wearing nearly nothing, and you've conveniently left them out to make your point.
So... why?? Seriously? Is leaving out information to make someone else look bad really better than... whatever you said he did wrong?
Anyhow I'm inclined to agree with Pwnemon on some of those points, if he didn't intensively research the GaGa fashion trends, at least the whole point about being ugly still stands.

Ahem, anyway;
Fashion... beauty... stuff often reveals a lot because that's what people like! I mean, it's not so much that it contributes to the problem, but more that it's a sign of the problem. Something like that.
I don't think that everyone should dress heavily. I don't even think it affects the perception of beautiful -- that's up to the models themselves. Heck, everyone could walk around naked for all I care (though I wouldn't want to!). Trying to cover up people's bodies probably won't make a difference to the whole... objectifying thing. Or if it did it'd be a positive effect! :D
 
Last edited:
Pwnemon said:
You all go, "wear whatcha want," but the OP's point is that the popular culture's objectifying of women as little more than 3 dimensional porn is forcing women either to dress as sluts or be largely disregarded. (Which I agree with-look at Lady GaGa, do you think she would have gotten near as many fans had she been ugly/dressed modestly?)
Click to expand...

Oh, shut up. Women don't 'dress like sluts'. Seriously, just shut the fuck up. It's you that is objectifying women by calling them sluts; women are just getting dressed.

Here, I have a question. Why can't women go topless, but men can?
 
Um...because their chests are considered more sensitive an area? (Sooner or later this post will get deleted, I bet...)
 
BECAUSE BOOBIES ARE GROSS, DUH

But yes. Lady Gaga might dress that way for attention, but who cares? If she is happy dressing the way she does (and I would certainly assume she does or she wouldn't do it so often), then where's the point in calling her a 'slut' or a 'whore' or whatever?

A) What is so terrible about being a 'slut', ie. sexually promiscuous? Even if we assume that it is bad (which I certainly don't think it is), why are we calling people that for wearing certain clothes? It's not 'slutty' to dress in a way you feel good in, imo.
B) Calling people names is bad, you guys. :( Didn't yer mammy ever teach you that?
 
Pwnemon said:
You all go, "wear whatcha want," but the OP's point is that the popular culture's objectifying of women as little more than 3 dimensional porn is forcing women either to dress as sluts or be largely disregarded. (Which I agree with-look at Lady GaGa, do you think she would have gotten near as many fans had she been ugly/dressed modestly?)
Click to expand...
What does 'dress as sluts' mean? How do you judge if someone has been more sexually promiscuous than you would prefer them to be based on what they are wearing that day? Does the number of people she's had sex with go down if she's wearing sweatpants and a jacket?


'Disregarded' isn't the word you want. That implies there is some way I could dress where men would reliably give a damn about what I have to say on subjects I know more than them on. There's no way to win; I might as well wear what I want to wear.
Teh Ebil Snorlax said:
Oh yeah, Pwnemon, she's so immodest. It's like she's addicted to nudity or something. Sick [redacted].
Click to expand...
Everything she wears is ridiculous. It's kind of awesome. But yes she does wear things that cover less than those outfits so there is some semblance of a point; why the fuck would you make moral judgments on someone for what they're wearing that day?

Also can we please not use that word :( just because you're trying to be facetious doesn't mean it doesn't bug me.
Username said:
Just a wild guess, but maybe because you objectified him too? I mean, it's not as if you found his character attractive.
Click to expand...
Let's not try to imply that a woman only considering a man for his physical appearance is equivalent to the other way around.
Mewtini said:
Um...because their chests are considered more sensitive an area? (Sooner or later this post will get deleted, I bet...)
Click to expand...
Boobs are theoretically to feed babies. That is why they are there. This is not inherently sexual.
Tarvos said:
man sleeps with lots of women: hero
woman sleeps with lots of men: slut
Click to expand...
... where 'lots of men' can mean anything from 'more than one ever' to 'a different man every night'. Hell, 'slut' can refer to someone who has ever had sex.


Quick note: very tempted to infract anyone referring to people as 'sluts' after this point. Let's not go there.
 
in some places in Africa, woman can be topless because the Brest is not considered sexual.
I'm wondering if its society's view of sex that has changed fashion. i mean, now days, when its everywhere, that can't NOT affect society and fashion.
also, I'm really glad to see some people of the male gender commenting! keep it up guys!!
 
Zuu said:
what?
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as reverse sexism.

In the sociological standpoint, any ism is power + privilege + bigotry. So sexism is power (man supremacy) + privilege (man privilege) + bigotry (stereotypes about gender). So one can not be sexist against men in any of the contexts that I have ever used that word or anyone else in the egalitarian discourse has used that word. So I didn’t direct sexism at men. I can’t. It’s simply not possible in a world where men have the social power. So you’re wrong. Plainly, simply, wrong.
Click to expand...

You can stereotype men, which is harmful, but sexism, racism, homophobia, all bigotry is power + privilege. There has never been any prejudice or power against men for being men.
 
Furiianda said:
Well, I found that one a *little* bit on the suggestive side, but uh that's if I was getting a bit picky, I guess.
More to the point, those pictures represent a really wide fashion range, and I'm preeetty sure, ignorant as I am, she has some moments where she's wearing nearly nothing, and you've conveniently left them out to make your point.
So... why?? Seriously? Is leaving out information to make someone else look bad really better than... whatever you said he did wrong?
Anyhow I'm inclined to agree with Pwnemon on some of those points, if he didn't intensively research the GaGa fashion trends, at least the whole point about being ugly still stands.
Click to expand...

Spike said:
Furii was on this already, but just because we're citing pictures here I'm pretty sure Pwnemon was referring to when she does this.
It looks like you're pretending she never dresses provocatively or something. She does... don't argue flawed arguments with more flawed arguments.
Click to expand...

enekoiru said:
Everything she wears is ridiculous. It's kind of awesome. But yes she does wear things that cover less than those outfits so there is some semblance of a point; why the fuck would you make moral judgments on someone for what they're wearing that day?

Also can we please not use that word :( just because you're trying to be facetious doesn't mean it doesn't bug me.
Click to expand...

Well, obviously, she wears things that cover a lot less than those outfits (bubble dress ftw), but I'm not disputing that she sometimes dresses provocatively (for many different values of "provocative"), I'm disputing what Pwnemon said, which implied that she always dresses provocatively, by providing counterexamples. If I'm not disputing that she sometimes dresses provocatively, what would be the point in showing examples of when she dresses provocatively?

Though I do apologise for using the b-word. I have been trying to stop with the gendered insults.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom