Sexual Objectification Argument Analysis
Objection
A potential objection to this argument is that the weak instrumental use of another person is benign and that sexual objectification is something that adults could give their consent to. Marino, who is a supporter of Nussbaum’s theory, argues that there is nothing wrong with "just-for-pleasure kinds of objectification” (Marino, p. 347). Given the right social and political context, two passionate lovers who are in the heat of the moment could give consent to each other to be sexually objectified.
Sexual objectification is morally benign because if consented to, say in a passionate moment between lovers, then it does not amount to a case of sexual objectification (Marino, p. 347). This is because, ordinarily, the ideal sexual encounter is thought of, and viewed as being with someone who is so inflamed in desire and passion …show more content…
Consenting to something demeaning does not make being in a demeaning status justified. Giving consent to be sexually objectified provides reason for people to believe that women are unbothered by the fact that they are seen as sex objects in society. When women consent to something that society holds to be a moral wrong, it begins to lead others to believe that it is not so wrong after all. In other words, it changes how sexual objectification is perceived. Consent here, creates the illusion that it is not that big of an issue. For example, allowing someone to steal your wallet makes you less of a victim because you did not put up a fight; however, if you were threatened, or forced to give it up, it changes things. Women have their statues imposed onto them and they seem to allow it to happen, but they do not have much say in this; it is imposed onto them after
A potential objection to this argument is that the weak instrumental use of another person is benign and that sexual objectification is something that adults could give their consent to. Marino, who is a supporter of Nussbaum’s theory, argues that there is nothing wrong with "just-for-pleasure kinds of objectification” (Marino, p. 347). Given the right social and political context, two passionate lovers who are in the heat of the moment could give consent to each other to be sexually objectified.
Sexual objectification is morally benign because if consented to, say in a passionate moment between lovers, then it does not amount to a case of sexual objectification (Marino, p. 347). This is because, ordinarily, the ideal sexual encounter is thought of, and viewed as being with someone who is so inflamed in desire and passion …show more content…
Consenting to something demeaning does not make being in a demeaning status justified. Giving consent to be sexually objectified provides reason for people to believe that women are unbothered by the fact that they are seen as sex objects in society. When women consent to something that society holds to be a moral wrong, it begins to lead others to believe that it is not so wrong after all. In other words, it changes how sexual objectification is perceived. Consent here, creates the illusion that it is not that big of an issue. For example, allowing someone to steal your wallet makes you less of a victim because you did not put up a fight; however, if you were threatened, or forced to give it up, it changes things. Women have their statues imposed onto them and they seem to allow it to happen, but they do not have much say in this; it is imposed onto them after