A case for hijab: objectification and confidence

[Breur9991]

Despite what feminists and other 'liberals' say, wearing a hijab (Google it if you don't know what it is) is not a sign of oppression. In fact, there are clear advantages in wearing one. Firstly, it increases confidence since you're no longer worried about how you look. Unlike most Western women who spend millions every year purchasing beauty products and whatnot to seduce men, women who wear hijabs can focus on the more important aspects. Secondly, men are more likely to respect women who expose less flesh. Writing for the guardian, Ian Sample described how Fiske studied these responses:

Researchers used brain scans to show that when straight men looked at pictures of women in bikinis, areas of the brain that normally light up in anticipation of using tools, like spanners and screwdrivers, were activated. scans of some of the men found that a part of the brain associated with empathy for other peoples' emotions and wishes shut down after looking at the pictures....[t]he changes in brain activity suggest sexy images can shift the way men perceive women, turning them from people to interact with, to objects to act upon.

The finding confirms a long-suspected effect of sexy images on the way women are perceived, and one which persists in workplaces and the wider world today, Fiske said.

"when there are sexualised images in the workplace, it's hard for people not to think about their female colleagues in those terms. it spills over from the images to the workplace," she said.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/16/sex-object-photograph

Welcome to reality.

I think clothes could be defined as modest and immodest. Immodest are likely to make you be perceived as sexual objects, which means that you can be judged on how you dress.

 

[australopithecus]

Firstly, it increases confidence since you're no longer worried about how you look. Unlike most Western women who spend millions every year purchasing beauty products and whatnot to seduce men, women who wear hijabs can focus on the more important aspects.

Assumes caring what you look like and low confidence are mutually inclusive concepts, and it assumes most women by beauty products to seduce men, and not because, say, they like looking good.

Secondly, men are more likely to respect women who expose less flesh.

As a man, I call bullshit. I respect others for how they act, not what they wear.

Researchers used brain scans to show that when straight men looked at pictures of women in bikinis, areas of the brain that normally light up in anticipation of using tools, like spanners and screwdrivers, were activated.

Some men like half naked women and DIY. Hardly Nobel prize winning research is it? I could have told them that.

Scans of some of the men found that a part of the brain associated with empathy for other peoples' emotions and wishes shut down after looking at the pictures....[t]he changes in brain activity suggest sexy images can shift the way men perceive women, turning them from people to interact with, to objects to act upon.

...again, and? Sexually aroused men think with their dicks? Shockingly not shocking.

This research seems like a case of stating the obvious to me.

The finding confirms a long-suspected effect of sexy images on the way women are perceived, and one which persists in workplaces and the wider world today, Fiske said.

"when there are sexualised images in the workplace, it's hard for people not to think about their female colleagues in those terms. it spills over from the images to the workplace," she said.

How dare these women look good and distract the poor men folk.

Welcome to reality.

A reality where we blame women when men get aroused. Count me out.

I think clothes could be defined as modest and immodest. Immodest are likely to make you be perceived as sexual objects, which means that you can be judged on how you dress.

Assumes being perceived as a sexual object is inherently bad (in my case it is a curse, I admit), and assumes people care about being judged on how the dress.

None of this is a case for the hijab.

 

[Prolescum]

Despite what feminists and other 'liberals' say, wearing a hijab (Google it if you don't know what it is) is not a sign of oppression.

I think the ideals of feminism and liberalism match, in many respects, my own. In many discussions, you could say for the sake of brevity that I am both. However, I do not say that wearing a hijab is a sign of oppression; I say it is used in many cases as a tool of oppression. If you don't understand the distinction, perhaps you should dismiss my opinion as the blatherings of a liberal feminist.

In fact, there are clear advantages in wearing one.

The clarity of any advantages is yet to be shown.

Firstly, it increases confidence since you're no longer worried about how you look.

Bullshit. I've seen how much make up Iranian socialites wear. This advantage is hereby nullified.

Unlike most Western women who spend millions every year purchasing beauty products and whatnot to seduce men, women who wear hijabs can focus on the more important aspects.

Except when they spend millions every year of western cosmetics. This advantage is still moribund.

Secondly, men are more likely to respect women who expose less flesh.

Received wisdom does nothing here, I'm afraid. If you make such a claim, it must be backed up with actual data. Until that time, this advantage is ignored.

Writing for the guardian, Ian Sample described how Fiske studied these responses:

Researchers used brain scans to show that when straight men looked at pictures of women in bikinis, areas of the brain that normally light up in anticipation of using tools, like spanners and screwdrivers, were activated. scans of some of the men found that a part of the brain associated with empathy for other peoples' emotions and wishes shut down after looking at the pictures....[t]he changes in brain activity suggest sexy images can shift the way men perceive women, turning them from people to interact with, to objects to act upon.

Did the researchers take into consideration a man's philosophical and intellectual integrity? One study in one field does not make a case for your claim. Perhaps someone can address this in full.

The finding confirms a long-suspected effect of sexy images on the way women are perceived, and one which persists in workplaces and the wider world today, Fiske said.

Boobs make men horny shocker.

"when there are sexualised images in the workplace, it's hard for people not to think about their female colleagues in those terms. it spills over from the images to the workplace," she said.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/16/sex-object-photograph

I've never been in a workplace that has sexualised images. Perhaps I've only work for a bunch of lefties.

Welcome to reality.

I'd like a refund. The rides were crap, and this stuffed donkey is already torn.

I think clothes could be defined as modest and immodest.

I think they could be defined as colourful and whimsical.

Immodest are likely to make you be perceived as sexual objects, which means that you can be judged on how you dress.

The point is, if you make judgements based upon personal appearance and your own prejudice, you end up being nothing more than an ironic footnote on some random internet forum.

 

[IBSpify]

Breur I think you will find that most people on this board don't believe that the hijab is bad, but rather, that forcing a person to wear one is bad.

If a person wishes to wear a hijab for any reason, be it as a fashion statement, or whatever, that's fine, it's their choice. When you take that choice away either by saying that not wearing it is illegal, or by claiming it as a religious decree and women who don't wear it should be punished (even if the punishment is not specified) is when the hijab becomes a tool of oppresion.

 

[Aught3]

Researchers used brain scans to show that when straight men looked at pictures of women in bikinis, areas of the brain that normally light up in anticipation of using tools, like spanners and screwdrivers, were activated. scans of some of the men found that a part of the brain associated with empathy for other peoples' emotions and wishes shut down after looking at the pictures....[t]he changes in brain activity suggest sexy images can shift the way men perceive women, turning them from people to interact with, to objects to act upon.

The finding confirms a long-suspected effect of sexy images on the way women are perceived, and one which persists in workplaces and the wider world today, Fiske said.

"when there are sexualised images in the workplace, it's hard for people not to think about their female colleagues in those terms. it spills over from the images to the workplace," she said.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/ ... photograph

This research made me think a little as to why women in bikinis are considered sexual. My hypothesis would be because they are exposing parts of their body (breasts and groin) that are not usually shown everyday in public. This seems to match up with reports of 'sexy ankles' back when long dresses were popular and matches with men staring at exposed faces in countries where hijabs are common. So rather than discouraging the objectification of women, having them cover-up seems to reinforce this process. Scarcity excites us. When women cover up parts of themselves that part comes to be seen as desirable, an object worth seeking. Perhaps a good exercise would be to visit nudist beaches in order to train yourself not to objectify the hidden parts of other people's bodies.

Firstly, it increases confidence since you're no longer worried about how you look.

I think this is probably the strongest argument for the hijab. Being able to walk down the street without people looking at your features could be an interesting and possibly liberating experience, especially if you are someone who worries about your appearance a lot.

Welcome to reality.

Er, thanks. I feel like I've lived here all my life!

I think clothes could be defined as modest and immodest. Immodest are likely to make you be perceived as sexual objects, which means that you can be judged on how you dress.

Yes, clothing could be dived up this way but it would be completely dependent on the cultural context in which you choose to make the distinction. For example, bare-breasted is fine in Papua New Guinea but immodest in New Zealand, a t-shirt is fine in New Zealand but immodest in Saudi Arabia, etc.