Ariana Grande and the question of appropriate expression of sexuality

[Alejo]

I think the control is only possible via honesty and truth and knowledge.

What I mean is that you have to be honest with yourself about a few things that go on whenever you’re in the presence of someone you find attractive, and that very fact should be the first one “I find this person physically attractive”. Once you establish that, you’ll have an easier time recognizing the narratives that one tends to build around someone one finds attractive, grounding what you’re experiencing in biology will make it lose some of the dyes that our imagination tends to place on the event. Recognizing that it’s a genetic built in program (that probably follows a cyclical pattern too) that is larger than yourself is helpful as well, because you won’t identify with the rush of hormones that want to take over your behavior, even if they do get you to turn your head or pay extra attention. And sometimes you’ll find that the reason you find someone attractive is also tied to behavioral/psychological cues this person is sending out and how they match to some other program that you have within you, the damsel in distress and the knight in shining armor for example.

On the other side, I think you ought to marry that information with the concept of being a gentleman, and more than just polite and respectful (but definitely that too), a conscious gentleman if you will. So that one may rise above the impulses that will always be there, not to repress them and shun them, as they’re there for a reason, but to live above them.

Just my two humble cents.

 

[Laura]

And certainly read "The Strange Order of Things" to get some serious idea of where the "emotions", impulses, etc, originate. If you always have that in mind, you should be able to keep yourself in perspective and under control.

 

[loreta]

I think it is very important to act with modestly, as a woman but also as an individual. But who cares of modestly today? Vanity, egotism, pride are the way of life of this society. The body is not anymore perceived as a sacred space. Fashion is responsible of how women show all their parts of their body without thinking one second the messages that they are giving to men. I think modestly is a virtue, like gentleness, kindness, patience.

 

[T.C.]

I think the topic can be as complex and nuanced as you want to make it, but really it just boils down to the fact that if you're thinking about all this and trying to get to the bottom of it, it's because you care whether you make others feel uncomfortable.

That's not the same as self-censoring during a discussion about complex issues from fear of causing offence (which may even be the right thing to do in certain circumstances with a view to maintaining a strategic enclosure). I just mean in the context of if you're physically attracted to someone.

If you're aware enough to know if you're acting in a way that makes someone uncomfortable because you're attracted to them, then you can't use hormones to excuse inconsiderate behaviour, even if they are the cause.

It might be useful for guys to label this kind of self-control as 'being a gentleman', but it just translates to 'being a decent person', overall.

 

[Yupo]

I'm told that the concept of dark meat and light meat in poultry dates back to Victorian times. Referring to breasts and thighs would have been too racy. OTOH, feminine allurements were certainly on display in fashions of the day, even if skin was not so much on display.

 

[anartist]

Hello. I am a straight male who feels disgusted whenever I am objectified by gay males, but I cannot help but objectify attractive women. It is a problem that I have been trying to deal with but try as I might I cannot bring myself to a point where I can think otherwise. I refuse to ie to myself and attractive women possess me. No I do not openly objectify by whistling or yelling or obnoxiously flirting as many men do, but I am very much sexually attracted. I don't think I'm that bad of a person as I am made out to be because I can't help myself with my thoughts. I think even mentally disciplined men are subject to attraction to attractive women and as straight men it is a problem that women can NEVER understand. I am offended in fact that women despise us for having such thoughts because it is something WE CANNOT HELP. And to be frank, we are not purely sexual. As much as sexual aspect is an important aspect of attraction for us, many of us as very wholistic with our approach. I just wish there was better understanding between the two sexes on aspects of attraction as it is NOT all black and white. A hot girl's perspective on a man approaching her is NOT based on purely sexual objectified attraction but something entirely more wholistic though yes as a straight man there are kinks to be worked out as there is a sexual attraction WE CAN'T HELP BUT IF YOU'RE A GOOD PERSON YOU TRY TO WORK ON YOURSELF. I feel many women are in denial or are living in 2 different worlds but that is my skewed perception. Anyways just my 2 cents.

This reminds me of the thoughts I had when in art school. In life drawing class I found myself sketching attractive(that I found attractive) women AND men. I wondered if this meant I was homo or bi-sexual? And I also found that I was interested or even attracted to old men and women that I sketched as they were so interesting! When you're drawing it feels like you're seeing a lot more than the surface. Thinking about it at the time, it seemed to me that I was attracted to beauty, whether man or woman or nature or buildings or whatever. The problem with men and women in this sense is we get caught up in our culture and biology and so sexuality naturally arises, but I think if we step back and observe we'll see (as you mentioned-wholistically) that it is not only sexuality, or maybe even sexuality at all, but the attraction to the ideal, to beauty. In that sense we do objectify, and want to identify with the ideal.

 

[Weontv]

The sexual objectification of both genders is an everyday occurrence in a society like this. Ariana, being someone who has more or less sold their purity for fame, glory and wealth is the last person I would go to for any kind of accurate dialogue in a situation like this. I am quite sure that she is objectified quite regularly, and I do disagree with it, but I also disagree with the way she carries herself, the lyrics in her songs, what she wears, etc. I will stay away from playing the blame game, but I think that she is well aware that her appearance has helped her significantly in her "career"(if you can call it that), and I would go even further to say that she has probably overlooked or even participated in behaviors where her sexuality was used as a bargaining tool to get what she wanted. As the saying goes, "sex sells".

I think there is a strong bias against men around this entire subject. Due to our biology and the way our society and culture has perpetuated itself over the centuries. Does anyone here think that a superstar male who is both attractive and charming is not getting women throwing themselves at him every time he goes out in public? The way the media and fans would deal with something like that, had he complained, would be to challenge his masculinity and manhood, suggesting that he is gay or weak.

None of these things should be surprising, considering what we know about organic portals and people in general. We live in a hypersexualized society, half of its citizens are beings stuck halfway between the animal kingdom and an individual, and as far as I can assess, life for them is extremely sexually themed and it manifests in to practically everything they do (hence all the LGBTQ people identifying themselves entirely through their sexual orientation, etc)

I think that a larger part of why Ariana did something like this was for the positive reinforcement she would receive from her legions of star struck fans, because if she wasn't dressing in scantily clad outfits and singing about "booty's and body's" she might attract a different kind of fan and rid herself of the issue altogether(which of course, will not happen). She is certainly a victim of society, but also a culprit of her own choice. I think that celebrities in general are awful people and will just "go with the flow" in terms of whats trending and status quo. I can give you a handful of statements made on twitter from women who are saying things against men that seem to be based in an alternative reality, things that are completely irrational and emotionally driven, but they go unseen or ignored because the big thing right now is to demonize men for their actions towards women. At the end of the day these things are expected because of what we know to be true. I see society now as a well lubricated demonic machine, perpetuating itself endlessly further and further to its lowest form.. In fact the more I look in to it, the stronger my inclination to know that without a doubt this is the work of something beyond a human being, a higher form of intelligence altogether, because it is all just so insidiously woven and malevolent.

These people are all spiritually sick and that will manifest in to their behavior, and I doubt we have seen the last of this type of harassment, as things progress and society sinks further in to the abyss I expect to see things much worse than this and will not be surprised when I do.

 

[Joe]

What would men controlling themselves entail? I'm honestly asking and have ideas myself, but I think this could be a good discussion. My idea is that controlling the self would be done by not ogling women, not catcalling, keeping our hands to ourselves and not hounding a woman to go on a date. Those are what come to my mind as far as what should be taught to young boys, but maybe there are other behaviors that I'm not thinking of that could be taught as well.

I think this task of control is really only for those who are interested in observing, understanding and gaining some mastery over the 'machine' parts of themselves, i.e. those parts that are biologically driven. Anyone with such a goal would be motivated to pay attention to their inner drives as they come up and to look at them from an 'observer' POV. That's the first essential step to being able to decide what, if anything, to do about such drives. This also applies of course to any other impulses that arise within us that we feel are not under our conscious control. It's a life-long task, no doubt, but a very worthy one for those who want to stop being so easily provoked and controlled by external/internal stimuli.

 

[Joe]

Others have more or less said this already, but the one thing that stands out with the original AG comment is that she took exception to the 'fan' saying "hit that", yet she herself sings exactly the same kind of sexually violent lyrics to thousands of people, including young girls, on a regular basis.

In short, her complaint in this regard should figure in the top ten list of glaringly hypocritical statements by a public personality in recent years.

 

[Laura]

Human beings are complex and I think that some part of the body/brain is always going to think about attraction issues. The goal is not letting that part of the self be in charge and run the show. AG caters to the lower part so she shouldn't be surprised that this is what responds to her.

 

[T.C.]

Others have more or less said this already, but the one thing that stands out with the original AG comment is that she took exception to the 'fan' saying "hit that", yet she herself sings exactly the same kind of sexually violent lyrics to thousands of people, including young girls, on a regular basis.

In short, her complaint in this regard should figure in the top ten list of glaringly hypocritical statements by a public personality in recent years.

It's all part of the postmodern mindjob, in this case with feminism and sexuality.

Firstly, the postmodern standard for morality is solely based on one's level of perceived privilege. On that scale, Grande outranks the guy who made the comment because he is male and she is female. So she is entitled to do what she wants relative to him. If he says something like that, it's wrong because he's male.

However, it gets worse in the sense it is seen as righteous for a victim to 'own' the words or actions of their oppressor. An example would be that that is often used as a justification for black people to use the N-word.

So for women now to objectify themselves and make comments about each other that would be considered misogynistic is seen as part of their liberation. It's like a recent Peterson interview where he pointed out the double standard that the patriarchy is seen as evil, yet it's perfectly okay for a woman to take such patriarchal roles and act in the same way an oppressive man would.

But then the next layer of the onion is that underneath, Grande et al. are not even thinking about it in that way. They've fallen into a cognitive dissonance where the over-sexualised and objectified persona is not so much seen as a protest or rebellion in order to 'own' their oppression; they just really do embody that persona because, well, I guess they've been conditioned to know that it will bring them the attention, riches, fame, popularity, social status, etc., that they want.

Well, this is like an outline of the way I see it. I think there's something in it or more to it, and it could probably be made into a better and clearer and more coherent argument and explanation.

 

[DianaRose]

It's all part of the postmodern mindjob, in this case with feminism and sexuality.

Firstly, the postmodern standard for morality is solely based on one's level of perceived privilege. On that scale, Grande outranks the guy who made the comment because he is male and she is female. So she is entitled to do what she wants relative to him. If he says something like that, it's wrong because he's male.

However, it gets worse in the sense it is seen as righteous for a victim to 'own' the words or actions of their oppressor. An example would be that that is often used as a justification for black people to use the N-word.

So for women now to objectify themselves and make comments about each other that would be considered misogynistic is seen as part of their liberation. It's like a recent Peterson interview where he pointed out the double standard that the patriarchy is seen as evil, yet it's perfectly okay for a woman to take such patriarchal roles and act in the same way an oppressive man would.

But then the next layer of the onion is that underneath, Grande et al. are not even thinking about it in that way. They've fallen into a cognitive dissonance where the over-sexualised and objectified persona is not so much seen as a protest or rebellion in order to 'own' their oppression; they just really do embody that persona because, well, I guess they've been conditioned to know that it will bring them the attention, riches, fame, popularity, social status, etc., that they want.

Well, this is like an outline of the way I see it. I think there's something in it or more to it, and it could probably be made into a better and clearer and more coherent argument and explanation.

Though I absolutely agree on your take, I think you're being too generous with Grande and her ilk. I have trouble believing that celebrities like Grande have such depth of intelligence or thinking capacity. They seems like terribly narcissistic individuals living in their own glasshouse, always eager to dive on any trends that will facilitate their own self-aggrandisement.

What I wondered when looking back at this episode is how insulated from real life Grande is. The comments of the fan were awkward and maybe a little rude. However, she called him a "young boy" which suggest that he was a teenager. Secondly, this probably teenage boy was meeting his idol. His comments looked to me like someone who wants to be cool but ends up being awkward. Lastly, in view of her surroundings, I seriously doubt that Grande hasn't heard this type of language and seen far worse from fellow artists and other people in the industry. The question is, does she call them out too? I think we all know the answer to that one.

Considering the above, I would have probably laughed if something like that ever happened to me and that's what Grande entourage probably did which might have set her off. Her post on Twitter feels like the tantrum of a little diva. I can't wrap my mind about how such an insignificant encounter could result in a 24-year-old millionaire acting like someone mugged her. That she felt entitled to post about this on social media to teach us lesser beings about morality reflects her egocentrism. I do wonder what her lifestyle is like, do people ever say no to her? Somehow, I doubt so.

What's scary is how easily people fell for such nonsense.

 

[T.C.]

Though I absolutely agree on your take, I think you're being too generous with Grande and her ilk. I have trouble believing that celebrities like Grande have such depth of intelligence or thinking capacity. They seems like terribly narcissistic individuals living in their own glasshouse, always eager to dive on any trends that will facilitate their own self-aggrandisement.

Did you read the whole post?

But then the next layer of the onion is that underneath, Grande et al. are not even thinking about it in that way. They've fallen into a cognitive dissonance where the over-sexualised and objectified persona is not so much seen as a protest or rebellion in order to 'own' their oppression; they just really do embody that persona because, well, I guess they've been conditioned to know that it will bring them the attention, riches, fame, popularity, social status, etc., that they want.

What I wondered when looking back at this episode is how insulated from real life Grande is. The comments of the fan were awkward and maybe a little rude. However, she called him a "young boy" which suggest that he was a teenager. Secondly, this probably teenage boy was meeting his idol. His comments looked to me like someone who wants to be cool but ends up being awkward. Lastly, in view of her surroundings, I seriously doubt that Grande hasn't heard this type of language and seen far worse from fellow artists and other people in the industry. The question is, does she call them out too? I think we all know the answer to that one.

Considering the above, I would have probably laughed if something like that ever happened to me.

And that's the reaction that a real strong, empowered, educated woman of the world should be having, really. Rather than being horrified, to laugh at the man and perhaps give some comment back in return. But then, such a woman would miss out on the opportunity to create some drama and get more attention.

Her post on Twitter feels like the tantrum of a little diva. I can't wrap my mind about how such an insignificant encounter could result in a 24-year-old millionaire acting like someone mugged her. That she felt entitled to post about this on social media to teach us lesser beings about morality reflects her egocentrism. I do wonder what her lifestyle is like, do people ever say no to her? Somehow, I doubt so.

What's scary is how easily people fell for such nonsense.

Agreed. Thinking isn't in fashion with people these days, but virtue signalling and being a victim is, because it's easy. That's all she was doing by bringing this into the public domain: she was jumping on the bandwagon of what's politically fashionable.

The term 'fashion victim' has never been more fitting!

 

[ELT]

Nowadays merely being nice is considered flirting. Just compliment a lady or hand her something to help her out. An effect of the Hallmark channel? What really irks me is when I make a joke and people start telling me "she's taken". Can I not make a simple joke without sending people the wrong message?

It hapenned the same to me recently. After reflecting and asking myself if I was at fault (through unconscious projective identification for instance) and once being aware of my acts, I noticed that it wasn't necessarily me sending the wrong message this time, but rather her picking it up in the wrong way, misinterpreting it. I keep being as aware as possible about the times I'm actually sending seductive signals as an old running program for self-gratification, it mostly happens involuntarily nowadays.

After all, when someone catches our attention, a true connection won't need seduction to be created. It will be naturally fueled by the respective interests in one another, stepping from the merging curiosity of both individuals.

 

[Menna]

I think it's fair to say that Ariana Grande brought up a very important topic. Simply because I doubt there is a girl who has never been in that very situation of disrespectful (and disgusting) objectification. The above comment by c.a. illustrates very clearly how it feels, thanks for describing the situation.

It's funny how straight men go insane when they are being objectified by gay men but when they do the same to women - she was asking for it because of what she wore, what she said, how she danced or simply because she was sipping on an alcoholic drink.

Unless you were wearing tight shorts, I doubt the situation you described was provoked by your outfit or behaviour. And let me reassure you women get objectified regardless what they wear. I can reassure you of this because I myself am a woman who had men shouting at her from their car in the street when I was running to the corner shop to do my grocery shopping in ripped jeans, sneakers and a baggy t-shirt.



Menna, if this is what you think of celebrities, I would be really amazed if your opinion of women in workplaces, clubs or pubs is any different. Please don't try to convince me I am incorrect, I have heard arguments very similar to what you wrote expressed by my men I know about women they know. I could give you a long speech about what I find hurtful and really disappointing about what you wrote. This topic could be argued till the end of time and I somehow doubt anything I said would make you change your mind.

I would however like to point out that you have a shirtless photo of yourself as your avatar. It makes me wonder whether you don't see anything wrong with objectification because you don't mind being objectified yourself. This is absolutely fine of course, there are women who enjoy this kind of attention too. But there are also people of both sexes who simply do not welcome it. I myself prefer to be assessed wholistically and if someone isn't capable of it, it says a lot about them, not about me.

Hopefully the below post will give you a different perspective:

_

https://www.facebook.com/abrine/posts/10153959293409401

By the way, every girl I shared it with LOVED it and the post went viral when it was first published.

Ok I won’t try to convince you lol.

What you do becomes you in some way shape or form was and is my point. Sexuality to sell tickets and make money and attention. Doesnt make anyone a “bad person” or anything like that but there is cause and effect no. I am telling you what I think about the human condition and life not what I think about women. Replace this example with an athlete. I bet that athlete has a level of dedication intensity and superficiality that comes along with doing something day in and day out or a lot of the time. I bet truck drivers have bad lower back and other health problems from sitting all the time I bet there are cops that are more aggressive than if they were teachers cause of the pond they swim in. What I am saying is based on life experience human psychology and influences…Take women out of it and my sentiments still stands… Keep telling me what I think and then tell me basically not to respond it’s an enjoyable experience for everyone.

If you chain a dog up and put food just out of its reach im sure it BECOMES aggressive does that mean it’s a bad dog? Or is it par for the course. My point is more about life and what it does to humans than what I think of genders