• DudePluto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Tbf you can be ogled and not objectified. The difference is that Thor absolutely is portrayed as a complex character with his own agency, or subjectivity. The whole movie is about him learning to step out of the role of warmonger and into a more mature, nurturing role of a king. That gives him a lot of subjectivity - the opposite of objectivity

    Edit: So to clarify, yes Thor is part of a series of unrealistic body standards for men. But he’s not objectified

    In social philosophy, objectification is the act of treating a person as an object or a thing. It is part of dehumanization, the act of disavowing the humanity of others. Sexual objectification, the act of treating a person as a mere object of sexual desire, is a subset of objectification,

    Emphasis mine. Where in “Thor” is Thor dehumanized? Do the creators of the movie dehumanize him? No, if anything he exhibits more humanity as the movie goes on. Does Jane Foster dehumanize him? No, she’s clearly sexually attracted to him and some scenes do focus on his body, but that’s not enough to dehumanize someone. He is not a “mere object of sexual desire” because those scenes exist amid an entire movie that treats Thor with respect as a character, including Jane who gets to know him and love him. The only character who dehumanizes him could be Loki but he’s clearly portrayed as being wrong

    • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The difference is that Thor absolutely is portrayed as a complex character with his own agency, or subjectivity.

      So is Black Widow, but she is 100% leathered up sex symbol too and no one questions that.

      • DudePluto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sex symbol =/= objectified. There’s nothing wrong with being a sexy character. Sexual objectification is the reduction of a person or character to nothing but sex. Or, if you want a more accurate definition, you can look at Wikipedia’s definition which I gave somewhere else

    • Tedesche@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tbf you can be ogled and not objectified. The difference is that Thor absolutely is portrayed as a complex character with his own agency, or subjectivity.

      By that definition, no female main character of a film ever has been objectified.

      • DudePluto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No there are plenty of female characters who are portrayed as two-dimensional sex objects, just like there are male characters who are portrayed the same. But Thor is not one of them. And the existence of sex appeal around a character =/= objectification

        • Tedesche@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No there are plenty of female characters who are portrayed as two-dimensional sex objects

          But none of them were their film’s main characters, right? I mean, by definition if the character has agency and complexity to them, they’re not being objectified, and basically every main character has some degree of agency and complexity. Can you give me an example of a female film lead who is objectified by the definition you’ve provided here?

            • Tedesche@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Haven’t seen that particular film, but is the female lead shown to be powerful? Does she have agency? I would presume she does. Is there some complexity to her character (e.g. she has to resolve some sort of inner turmoil during the film)? My point is the these criteria (which DudePluto put forward, not me) preclude such characters from being objectified. I don’t agree with that. As I understand objectification, characters like the lead in La Femme Nikita can be sexually objectified, even though they have agency and complexity to them. My point is that DudePlato’s claims about how objectification works preclude many examples of female leads that have been argued to have been objectified in the past.

          • DudePluto@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not really to do with whether they’re the protagonist, it’s how they’re treated as a character (and by extension the actor). Off the top of my head the best example is Carly from Transformers 3. She’s incredibly 2-dimensional. What do we know about her, her motivations, what drives her? Well, not a lot. At best you could argue she has a good job and is responsible for getting Megatron to help OP. But when we look at the movie overall it’s not great. She’s consistently needing saved by Sam, the film goes to lengths to focus on her borderline inappropriate relationship with her male boss, and she just doesn’t do a lot for the plot that doesn’t serve some male. In fact, her introduction, arguably the most important scene for establishing her character, is a camera shot of her ass. That’s objectification because the character exists amid a web of weak characterization and conformity to gender roles that treat her more like a trophy than a proper character

            • Tedesche@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Carly was not the main character of that film, Sam was. I really think you’re missing my point. You’ve defined objectification in such a way that no lead character could ever be said to be objectified. So, if you’re going to use that definition to claim that Thor isn’t objectified, you must agree that no female protagonist can claim to be objectified to be consistent with your own definition.

    • anonono@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tbf you can be ogled and not objectified

      I gotta get me some of that copium, looks like the good stuff.