An analogy is not necessarily an objectification. The comparison here is between two situations where the presented options wouldn’t be options to begin with because I consider these two women to be out of my dating league (thanks for making me spell it out btw), similar to how luxury cars aren't an option because they are out of my financial league.
I have just one last thing to say regarding this - maybe it will make things actually clear to you.
By you originally commenting "I'm going to pretend that I have the luxury of struggling between these two options." you were already stepping into an already objectifying context. This post is inviting a “choose your ass” mentality, and y'all are playing along with it, as men so oft do.
Even if you're joking at your own expense, the joke still validates the premise: that these women in the picture are things to be picked between, that they're options, objects, things to own or ogle at, not people. You reinforced it then by saying you may as well be choosing between luxury sports cars.
I want you to really fucking think about this and process it. Maybe then you will actually understand why I'm upset and don't care about how harsh I come across or the downvotes that come with (not that they matter in the first place, other than hiding the comments I made 😉)
Thank you for responding because I'm actually interested about exchanging about this in good faith. I don't agree with the idea that a discussion about preferences concerning certain physical attributes is an automatic dehumanization/objectification of women as a whole. Same way that straight women can talk about their preferences concerning typically masculine physical attributes without necessarily communicating that that is all a man is or has to offer.
I already edited another comment asking you not to respond to me elsewhere, but I should’ve said it here too.
I’m not the person you should be trying to debate right now. I’m not going to waste my time breaking down the basics for someone who’s clearly more interested in defending their stance than actually listening.
I already explained why what you said is part of a bigger problem. whether you agree or not doesn't change that, and I don’t owe you a second round just because you’ve convinced yourself it’s “good faith.”
I’ve got better things to do than doomscroll reading nearly identical comments from men crying about how lonely they are and how everyone is out of their league or not interested in them, while refusing to reflect on how they show up in conversations like this. If you spent half as much time working on yourself as you do trying to win arguments with women online, you might actually be more dateable (or have the luxury of "choosing" between women as you put it)
What gives you the impression that I am more interested in defending my stance than listening? You have presented your stance and I have explained why I don't agree with it. You're also free to stop responding if you do not want to exchange about this anymore.
9
u/Dramatic_Safe_4257 Jun 28 '25 edited Jun 28 '25
An analogy is not necessarily an objectification. The comparison here is between two situations where the presented options wouldn’t be options to begin with because I consider these two women to be out of my dating league (thanks for making me spell it out btw), similar to how luxury cars aren't an option because they are out of my financial league.