I’ve often viewed sexual objectification as a passive-aggressive thing. As in the human being objectified (most often a woman) is passive to the aggressive actions (usually from men). What clinches the deal and makes it textbook passive-aggressive behavior is how the perpetrators are so insistent in their disavowal and sullen in their complaints of being misunderstood. These vintage watches (from martonmere at Etsy) are the perfect illustration of such sexual objectification of women. Note how the male penis is the automaton, moving up and down as the watch ticks, while the females remain unmovable, unfazed, objects to receive. (Not to mention, the watches need winding, and this whole subject winds me up!) More on these sort of watches here.
Never seen anything like that before. It’s weird, because watches are a public thing. Imagine wearing that scene on a shirt – you wouldn’t be welcome anywhere in public. Also the first one looks dangerous – were it to be attempted in real life.
I know you’re talking about objectification more than anything else, but the images depicted in these watches seem to have two willing participants. In other words, it’s not like they’re depicting rape. They’re too disgusting to own or use nowadays, but can you help explain the objectification angle?
I’m not so sure these women are all such willing participants… In one, the man takes advantage of his position (make that positionS — his physical position as a man and as a teacher); in another, he brandishes a weapon. But through them all, women are depicted merely as means of male sexual pleasure. That is the definition of objectification.
Ah, that clears it up a bit. Although the women in both #1 and #3 are smiling so I figured the weapon isn’t so much a threat as the dude was just walking around doing guard stuff so he had his weapon when the sexual shenanigans started.
Still, I do see the objectification angle.