Hey there, welcome to DC. I have to disagree on Mamma Mia! - I totally loved it - but that's a different story. You asked, "How can we stop women for objectifying themselves and other women, when we can't stop men from doing it to another group?" One of the questions I've had rolling around in my head for a while is, can you objectify or exploit yourself? I'm still thinking this through so I'm open to be convinced either way but I tend to think you can't objectify or exploit yourself.

Since this is hard to address without an example, here's one - I have this cute dress that's short and low-cut and I think it looks hot. When I wear it, I want people to look at me and think, wow, that girl looks hot (it's also comfortable and simple and easy to wash but that's besides the point). Am I objectifying or exploiting myself by wearing that dress? Maybe I am but I chose to do that.

A lot of times when I think of the terms "exploit" and "objectify" it's usually in the context of someone doing the exploiting or objectifying to someone else, taking away the exploited or objectified's agency, like child exploitation. In the example above, I have full agency and I choose to use it by wearing a short dress.

Another way I hear those terms used is that strippers exploit themselves but they often also have free agency and choose to strip. Does that mean it's still exploitation or objectification? With self-exploitation or objectification, the individual makes a choice that the benefits of exploiting or objectifying oneself outweigh the drawbacks, so is it still exploitation? If I agree to flash someone for $1 million and both the person I flash for and I feel like we got the better end of the deal afterwards, did I exploit or objectify myself? I feel like I would have been exploiting whoever would pay me $1 million for the show.

Again, I'm sorry if these are dumb questions but it's something I've been thinking about. I should probably blog about it on my own :)

I think this issue brings more questions than answers. I would wonder what "choice" is? Is it a choice or is there agency if someone is coerced? If they have no other viable options? If they don't know about the options or other choices? Is it choice if it is completely made under pressure by outside forces? Can it be a choice if it is made in an act of desperation? (Granted I am using the term choice with the lay definition, not the legal definition of a voluntary action.) I like Jessica's point in Full Frontal Feminism, if it is a choice, it is important to know why the choice was made.

I think that's what it comes down to - how much of a choice is it? Again, to use my dress example, I recognize that I am a product of my environment and that it has been instilled in me through the media and other sources that wearing a small dress is supposed to make me feel like I look hot. I have seen that attractive women wearing short skirts have been considered "hot." At the same time, I have several other options in clothing (granted I can't exercise some of them because it's warm weather but I digress). No one said "you should wear that dress" (unless you count aforementioned media influences). I made the choice not as someone feeling desperate.

A different example that may make more sense here: When I was visiting New Orleans a few years ago, a woman took her pants off in the street after a crowd collected $100 for her. I would probably not take my pants off for $100. But, for all I know, she had a partner saying, "we really need that money, please just do it." She might have had no other way to make $100 or not known about other ways to make $100. Maybe she did it because people were screaming at her to do it. Maybe she was totally broke and had hungry kids at home. In that situation, would you say that she exploited herself? I'm inclined to say that the crowd exploited her.

Anyway, thanks for humoring me :)

msunderestimated,

thank you for your thoughts, after reading them I too started wondering about exploitation. As you said, there are many levels of possible exploitation going on here, her partner may have told her to do it, she may have had no other choice(in her opinion), or maybe the people were screaming at her. All of these are very possible reasons, but I think that there are so many others, and I think that when we look at something like exploitation, especially with your example, there are many more levels that could be addressed. My first thought when you asked whether or not she exploited herself, was to find out who called the crowd. Did the crowd gather around her and tell her to do it, or did she gather the crowd and tell them what she would do for $100. Let's assume (and I am not saying that all women who do this are strippers) that she is a stripper, if so, she might not have any problem showing herself as she did. If this is the case, then wouldn't she be exploiting the crowd because she new that if she acted in a certain way they would give her money? I guess my point/question is this, the exploitation works two ways, the men have some desire to see a girl(s) naked/kissing... and so the men/society exploits the girls to get what they want. But, on the flip side, because it is known what guys want, this desire can be exploited.

Going back to your dress example, you are exploited because you are taught to look hot and are thus objectified/exploited. But, a girl who is hot, can exploit the fact that she is hot to get what she wants(I am being very general here and I know that a girl cannot get everything she might want by being hot). Of course the case also exists where someone neither feels pressured to be hot, nor uses hotness to exploit others. In that case no one is exploiting/exploited and perhaps straight men, lesbians...get the pleasure of seeing a hot girl.

But of course, issues like hot and sexuality are not necessarily always going across gender. For instance, a guy who has muscles can use that to exploit the insecurities of a "wimp" "nerd"... and at the same time, the hot girl at school, because she is hot will be able to exploit the insecurities of the girls around her.

So, in order to end this rambling, I guess my conclusion is that exploitation can occur whenever and where ever there is desire for something; desire to be beautiful/hot, muscular/handsome, smart, rich, good at sports... Everyone can exploit, and it is very possible that the girl/guy who is exploited for some reason can use that same reason to exploit someone else. ie the hot girl who is exploited/objectified by guys but then uses here hotness to hurt other girls and define social dynamics or the nerd guy who is picked on by the bullies but then can brown nose the teachers and do things without getting caught because he is not the bully. (bad example for the guy, I know, if you have a better one I would love to hear it.)

Anyway, that is about it, these are my thoughts, and by no means final so if you like them let me know and if you don't tell me why and we can learn together, thanks

also, I guess in answering your question, did she exploit herself, I am going to have to say no. I think there are three options, something is desired it is negotiated for and you get a bad deal/are exploited, you choose to do something that others desire because you want(no exploitation), you do something others desire because you can get a good deal(you exploit others). These three things do not give credence to the severity of the inequality of the deal, like when you have no choice or the other person has not choice. But I hope you understand what I am saying.

Female Chauvinist Pigs is an AWESOME book. It sums up so eloquently and concisely exactly the way I feel about the whole idea of "raunch culture" and how ostensibly "taking ownership" of the degradation men put us through is supposed to make us feel like we have achieved equality. Hurry up and finish the book so we can discuss it more!! And we have to find some way to get in touch bc I'm in the DC area, too :)
In response to the questions you had, check out Noam Chomsky's response to how he views pornography--it's on this site somewhere. I'm actually very politically conservative, and to find myself agreeing with Noam Chomksy was a bit daunting, but my (very liberal) husband is thrilled that I've now decided we should name our firstborn son Noam. ok, just kidding, but he hits the nail on the head in this clip.

Tierra, I've never seen Mamma Mia! in musical or movie format. But it IS Abba (no offense to Abba fans), I'm not sure how much stock I'd put into yet another one of those Musicals-made-from-pop-music.

I mean, look what happened to "Lennon"...

At any rate, to msunderestimated, your comment made me think of Ensler's "My Short Skirt" (http://weedivine.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/for-v-day-my-short-skirt/), and I'm going to continue following this conversation. It's an interesting conundrum you've all been bringing up. Ms, I agree with you that if I have something I know I look good in -- and I do like to look good now and again -- I'll wear it.

However, I think the exploitation comes more from the outsider's view. I don't think I am exploiting myself in wearing whatever makes me look good, but it's the other person oogling (whatever have you) and exploiting me for their viewing pleasure.

It's my short skirt. I chose to wear it. Get over it.

And in your reading travels through feminism this summer (last summer was my Full Frontal Feminism summer, a great intro into this world I've fallen into, changed my thoughts on everything) I wonder if you've come into contact with anything regarding women in sports or sports media. [Senior thesis alert]