A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
Why does the title need to be worded like that? The worst part is that I've only seen them phrased like this with women celebrities.
It's clickbait. The fact that the clickbait is demeaning is incidental. They're maximizing whatever sensational clickbait title they can get. At least their heart isn't intentionally evil, just incidentally evil.
I wish we had more actresses with muscles. Imagine a wonder woman movie where wonder woman actually looks like an Amazon who has been working out all day every day for decades
Target is both to hit your sense of justice (Iβm a male feminist) but also engage the innate urge to see the photos. Example
Anne Hathaway criticized by chauvinists for being too sexy on the red carpet
Oh wow, I hate sexism so much I better check out these photos!! so I canβ¦support women?
It CAN work for men but is usually not demeaning. Chris Pratt went from adorable pudge to sexy muscleman, click here to see him shirtless! Not the same I guess.
My instinct would be to click just to find out what exactly is "too sexy" for chauvinists. Same logic applies to the original post's article I guess.
I think these articles exploit this instinct. And I'm pretty sure it works for all kinds of people. When you put an opinion piece in some other people's mouth, everyone will want to find out if the opinion makes sense to them or if it's completely outrageous.
"Some people said this about this subject, come judge by yourself (and prove them wrong/right)"
The correct answer is to block that news site or whatever they call themselves, and don't give them clicks.
The whole article is almost certainly demeaning, as you would expect of a celebrity gossip rag.
That's disgusting! Where?
Florence Pugh has never been shy about her body.
Thats not even a weightlifter body lol.
Incels just think anything other than questionable consent with somebody who looks like a child is actually gay.
It's not, but it will upset viewers and bait people into clicking or sharing.
She did star as a wrestler in a movie not long ago, which I believe I saw during covid and was the only reason I recognized her.
Imo the article writers probably feel that they are decrying the way people are demeaning her, but it's just adding visibility for the judgemental.
It's a double edged sword. Everybody's got a different line for when something descriptive inadvertently becomes prescriptive
At least it contains the word βshamedβ. Shaming someone is usually seen as unfair and judgmental.
The title is clickbait, a regular thing for "magazines", while the article itself clarifies things.
You aren't wrong. It is in poor taste. More so considering the article says the comment was made by "fans" who felt disappointed her body shape didn't fit their imagination.
Yup. Don't click that link; this kinda bullshit cant be rewarded
If you want to see pics just Google her.
This "shaming" or the "shit storm" is usually (and I think here too) just some Incels commenting on Instagram. As Instagram optimizes for maximum engagement, the stupidest and most controversial take is always at the top of the comments, that's how we end up with these idiots getting their platform. And these "news sites" then make a big deal out of a few losers also as engagement bait. This whole system is fucked
I don't know what this article is about, and I'd rather not engage with this segment of society to find out, but from a quick Google images search it seems like she recently (?) caught flack for a Valentino dress, which was very sheer and through which her nipples could be seen. But anyone who's been paying any attention to fashion at all would know that sheer is very much "in". The latest Yves Saint Laurent line is a prime example of this. As for the quality of her body, which seems to be an unusually frequent topic, why's it anyone's business? Can a woman exist anywhere on this planet and not be objectified and scrutinized like livestock?
I'm guessing you have not been alive long enough to remember that newspapers, especially tabloids, have always been demeaning of women. To be honest I think headline is timid sounding compared to twenty years ago, when tabloids were more popular and running sensationalist headlines, and the picture of the person being always the most unflattering. I don't really see that kind of reporting nowadays, but it is now on social media where sensationalist shaming happens.
I have been, and it's just as demeaning, but I think constant attention needs to be brought to it
I think it would be best if they drew attention to the people who are being horrible, instead of repeating the horrible things they said. So yeah, you're not wrong for thinking this is demeaning.
Yeaahh I'm gonna need to see the pic so..uhh.. so I can answer your question, yeah that's it.
You can read this article here which has images, I canβt see what they mean though. She looks fire!
I did try to add images directly here but Iβm on a low signal area right now.
If youβre curious how to do this yourself, just type the headline into Kagi and then youβre done. I am on mobile so was lazy and screenshotted this post and then copied the text directly from the image to avoid trying, I then wrote all this so kinda defeated my not wanting to type.
Yeah she does! Whoo!
(Of course I was just joke horny-posting, but goddamn, I'm not complaining you delivered lol. They're crazy, she looks great!)
Right. I think this is my first time hearing about this person.
Same here, I don't really do new movies/tv too much.
Right. I think this is my first time hearing about this person.
I'm afraid I'm not going to provide a source because that would just make me a hypocrite lol
Every time those perfect faces or perfect bodies are projected into media, it demeans us all.
Source please
Afraid not. That would be contradictory to what I'm saying lol
I just mean pictures
In a just world the publisher of this article would need to submit for anti-misogynist reeducation.
"anti-misogynist reeducation" wouldnt be needed in a just world
A just world isn't a perfect world, just one where justice is present.
A just world isn't a perfect world
I wholeheartedly agree and still say that a just world wouldnt need "anti-mysoginist reeducation"
So more extreme measures?
I think having higher publishing standards is a good start.
Im not sure if it is more extreme, but Its a good start.
But im not opposed to more extreme measures, and im a fan of giving businesses more conditions to operate at all so maybe?
You claim to dislike it, yet you gave it greater reach by posting it on Lemmy. Good job! Or maybe your actual job, assuming you are being paid to shill for whatever rag this came from.
