Posted on 11/15/2005 4:35:22 AM PST by Aquinasfan
Don't bother to read through this moron's article. Skimming it is painful enough. Just skip to my summary at the end...
I had good reason to look for the Sex Power God posters this past week: A friend of mine had posed for them. Upon finding the posters, I was pleased to discover my friend and 15 other lusty-looking Brunonians in various forms, positions and states of dress.
On Wednesday, however, I discovered something not so pleasing: On Pembroke campus, the SPG posters were now accompanied by a sheet with the Oxford English Dictionary definition of "objectification" typed on it. The definition that the signs use reads as follows:
"2. spec. The demotion or degrading of a person or class of people (esp. women) to the status of a mere object (see OBJECTIFY v. 2); reification; (also) behaviour or an attitude characterized by this."
Seeing as how SPG is generally considered a festival of naked people, perhaps it would also be helpful to include the OED's definition of "sexual objectification" :
"sexual objectification: the regarding of a person or class of people (esp. women) only as a sex object."
Finally, just to make sure that we all have our facts straight, we should include the broader OED definition of "objectification" that the signs do not use:
"1. The action or an act of objectifying something; a material thing which embodies or expresses an abstract idea, principle, etc."
Now, it's quite clear that the SPG posters do fall under this definition, which is likely why the sign-makers (they left themselves anonymous, and so must be referred to under this ignominious designation) chose not to include it. Our bodies, of course, are material things and, as anyone who has ever taken a modern culture and media class can easily tell you, parts of the body are often used as signifiers for other things. In this case, specific images of naked or half-naked people standing near one another in seductive poses signify the broader concept of sex and in particular the uninhibited attitudes that Sex Power God will hopefully bring about. No controversy here.
But what about the definition that the OED vigilantes used?
The first thing that you have to assume if you accept this definition is that the people on the poster are being somehow degraded. I don't think that they believe they are; if anything, their appearances on the poster express a kind of empowerment not seen in most other aspects of daily life. The people on the posters, through their positions, signify an agency with regard to their sexuality that American society wishes to oppress rather than liberate. The SPG gang aren't degrading themselves; they're showcasing their sexual freedom. In a liberal college environment, this deliberate choice (and after all, it was a choice, seeing as how they chose to pose for the posters to begin with) should be applauded rather than condemned.
Now, as for the charge that women specifically are being made into objects: If you look carefully at the posters, you'll notice that there are plenty of men having sex on there, too. The women on the posters are either in an equal power relationship with the men or are even more powerful than them. Think, for a minute, about how the vast majority of art views women as sexual objects through the scope of a male gaze; now think about how empowering it is for women to be able to reverse the trend by taking that gaze out of men's hands and putting it into their own. Think about how powerful it is for a woman to be seen as she wishes to be seen and not as others wish to see her.
As for the charge that the people on the posters are being seen only as sex objects, view the arguments above: Through an expression of their sexual identity, the people assert their independence and make themselves subjects, not objects.
As for the charge that we as a community are somehow degraded by seeing these posters - nonsense. There is nothing wrong with the liberal expression of ideas, especially when they encourage you to form your own.
So what we are left with is a faulty definition posted by people who didn't even have the guts to attach their name to it. In place of "objectification," I would now like to list the OED's definition for another term:
"Free expression: the uninhibited expression of one's thoughts, feelings, creative capacities, etc."
Will I go to Sex Power God? No, but that's my choice, and I love having a choice, which is what the posters are all about to begin with. The sign-makers can express themselves just as freely as the poster-makers can, and more power to them.
But the posters aren't about objectification - they're about free expression. And it's unfortunate to think of them as being about anything else.
Aaron Cutler '08 freely expresses his desire for you to see "The Greeks," playing both this weekend and next weekend at Stuart Theatre.
Man, I really missed out on the whole sex/power/God thing. We had to sneak off and do it in cars. But it only cost less than $1K/semester too.
We are slouching toward the worst behavior of the Romans before their corrupt empire fell. Notice that the orgy is in a "religious" context, just like in the good old days. People are making themselves weak through lifestyles of grotesque excess (not just perverted sex, also overeating, drugs, alcoholism, and many other addictions). And the barbarian Islamists are just outside the gates. One political faction is increasingly ineffective while the other faction ignores the barbarians as if ignoring the threat will allow the orgy to go on for one more day.
It's hard to believe otherwise. I thought I was shock-proof, especially regarding the excesses of "higher ed," but this was a shocker. Bill provided a public service by airing this.
Sadly, his commentary began with, "Look, we don't care what these kids do on their own time, but when the school pays for it..." No Bill, we should care about what these kids do on their own time. The fact that the alleged school sponsored this abomination simply compounds the problem.
When I think of Brown...I think of something that makes it necessary to grab my plunger.
[We are slouching toward the worst behavior of the Romans before their corrupt empire fell.]
Slouching toward Gommarah is a title of a book that reprents a better description of this article.
The libertarian faction (not a small group on this forum) will, of course, claim that you are overstating the case as members of the Taliban Wing of the GOP always do. Their argument breaks down in the same place it always breaks down--when we consider the impact of our changed social mores on our children. The students who revel in orgies like this probably don't want to become parents at all. Certainly they are not becoming the kind of people who will take responsibility for any children they do bring into the world. And our society will slide farther and farther down the slope.
Exactly right.
-A8
The sexual immorality of these kids is not what's bringing our society down the slope. Are they behaving in a distateful fashion? You betcha. Will some of them ruin their lives through debauchery? Of course. But the overwhelming majority of the attendees will finish their educations and grow up to be respectable, suburban homeowners with high-paying jobs. The heterosexuals, at least, will raise well-behaved kids who will go to private schools and do just fine.
The sexual incontinence that brings the country down takes place among the urban poor. The fruit of their peccadillos will not be hangovers and embarrassing college memories, but fatherless, gormless, predators and professional victims, and directionless young girls with no better idea than to breed more.
The Saturnaliae that take place at a university won't affect this real problem one way or the other, and certainly won't drag the country down, disagreeable as they may be. They're just another grandstand for B.O., easy targets for anyone who wants to play the moralist, but who doesn't have a clue about how to address the real problem.
Distasteful? Mixing plaids and stripes is distasteful. This is pure, unadulterated evil.
College kids getting together to drink, dance, and have sex?!?!?! I am shocked!
"Sadly, his commentary began with, "Look, we don't care what these kids do on their own time, but when the school pays for it..." No Bill, we should care about what these kids do on their own time. The fact that the alleged school sponsored this abomination simply compounds the problem."
I couldn't agree more. Has anyone raised the issue of STD's?? Is Brown a totally private institution or do they get some Federal funding?
I strongly disagree with your comments.
"But the overwhelming majority of the attendees will finish their educations and grow up to be respectable, suburban homeowners with high-paying jobs. The heterosexuals, at least, will raise well-behaved kids who will go to private schools and do just fine."
What about the Ivy league educated who have been indicted for securities violations, embezzlement, etc. Enron anyone?? The culture on these campuses is forming the idea in these kids minds that "anything goes" as long as you can 1) get away with it (think Clintons) 2) It's great as long as I win/backstab and make partner by the time I'm 30 3)accumulate as much wealth as I can possibly steal without getting caught.
"The sexual incontinence that brings the country down takes place among the urban poor. The fruit of their peccadillos will not be hangovers and embarrassing college memories, but fatherless, gormless, predators and professional victims, and directionless young girls with no better idea than to breed more."
Your above statement is really rather offensive. I suppose you're a Brown alumni?
Absolutlely disgraceful. I must have pictures to enhance my understanding of this outrage.
There's a difference between drinking, dancing and having sex in the back seat of a car and a school-sponsored orgy. If the concept is difficult, the video would have made the difference very clear.
Errr...I spoke too soon. Didn't read to the part where it said the program was sponsored by homosexuals. Never mind the pics.
Hopefully you'd feel differently if a relative was involved, but somehow I doubt it.
Oh, that's right. College sex parties caused Enron. Pretty much. </s>
Your above statement is really rather offensive. I suppose you're a Brown alumni?
No, if I'd gone to Brown, I'd probably have a P.C. hair up my kiester. One like yours.
"No, if I'd gone to Brown, I'd probably have a P.C. hair up my kiester. One like yours."
LOL. Well, no one who knows me would ever call me PC! I just tend to call it as I see it. :)
Homosexual Agenda PLUS Moral Absolutes Ping - another Two-fer.
Just read the article, apparently there is a video (don't want to see it, plus don't want to take the 45 minutes it would take to download the thing). This is actually par for the course at universities around the country. FR has had articles about university/college sponsored "sex workers" festivals and seminars, pornography classes (study porn, and make your own), "gay" studies and every manner of sexual indoctrination. Now they add "God" into the mix (it was unclear what the purpose was, other than to make sure that everyone except themselves was offended).
The message is clear - if, as parents and grandparents, you don't want your offspring to get curdled in mind and heart, be VERY CAREFUL where you send them to school. You might think, MY kid will plough through this crap and not get influenced. Everyone is influenceable to one degree or another, unless they are strong enough to do the influencing.
These, my friends, are the future "leaders" of the country. Those who go to elite, expensive universities. Those who learn to exploit others continue in the same vein when they attain positions of power.
Freepmail me and DirtyHarryY2K if you want on/off the H.A. pinglist, just me if you want on/off the M.A. list.
Note: I assume that they included the word "God" in this orgy because they themselves think they are "god"? They can reject the moral absolutes extant in every religion and make their own rules? And note that homosexuals organized it. On the forefront of debauchery and loathesome immorality. If homosexuality is fine, it lowers the bar to the ground, and now everything is acceptable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.