What Does Non-Rape Culture Look Like?

[Dravin]

Good distinction. It seems like a person can go in and out of objectifying as well as in and out of feeling objectified by the same person and the same actions. For example, I may pat my wife on the bum in the kitchen one day and she feels like I am objectifying her, then another day she feels like I am being an affectionate husband.

Yep, relationships are messy. If you're looking for some universal behavior that will be appreciated by everyone at all times it doesn't exist outside of nebulous concepts like showing respect or what have you. Sometimes I appreciate when my wife buys me treats at the store because I like to eat sweet things, sometimes I'd wish she'd not because I'm trying to be good and I'm feeling particularly vulnerable to the allure of donuts that day.

And how do you handle when your not "in the mood" and your spouse is?

There is no universal answer I have to give. Not only will it vary per couples but there is no, "I always do X." in my relationship concerning this. I play it by the specific circumstances. Even a couple that buys into the concept of "spousal duty" will likely call it quits if the other person is vomiting with high fever. Personally I'm not one for obligations of "spousal duty", if I'm feeling like I want an orgasm my spouse is not required. If I'm wanting physical closeness sex is not required. This is not to say like many aspects of relationships there isn't a give and take of compromise but that's not the same thing as, "If my spouse is randy I am obligated as their spouse to have sex with them."

Is it objectification by my wife if she is in the mood and I'm not, but I go along with it anyway because I love her and want this for her?

Is she viewing you as a sexual object? Are you simply the equivalent of a fancy vibrator without concerns, needs, or feelings? Then yes, she's objectifying you. If she's viewing you as a human being who has their own sexuality she'd like to share in, then no, she's not.

Is it objectification if she is in the mood and I'm not and I say so and she pressures me into it?

If she's pressuring you into it because she doesn't care about your wants, mood and own desires because she simply wants to use you to have sex, I'd say yes. People get a say in if they have sex or not, sex objects are expected to simply perform when desired.

I feel like this line of objectification is a thin and moving one.

The root of objectifying someone is how you think. You can have the same behavior and in one instance it is objectification and in another it is not based on how the person performing the behavior is viewing you. It's akin to how if I don't hire someone because they are black it is racism, if I don't hire someone because they aren't qualified it isn't racism. In both cases the same thing happened, someone wasn't hired, it is the thinking behind the behavior that makes the pudding. Sure, there are cases in which behavior telegraphs, or at least we tend to feel it does, someone's thought processes but they aren't necessarily the same thing.

[Red Ryder]

I think the thing that ties these together is that objectification of women is a central component of rape culture, and finding something sexual is objectifying. So if one is sexually attracted to a woman they have objectified her and thus are a supporter of rape culture. I am probably just misunderstanding or oversimplifying something here, but that's my take.

I have to agree that objectification is part of rape culture but I disagree that being sexually attracted to (a human) is objectification and thus a supporter of rape culture.

Sexual attraction is an inherent biological function and doesn't automatically qualify as objectification. Dravin's post is an excellent example.

[wtfluff]

Your comment on the most important thing a husband can give being a worthy priesthood holder and returned missionary really hit home for me. And I'm not those anymore for my wife, so she would like to return me.

And... There you go. Now you know what objectification feels like.

[MerrieMiss]

Your comment on the most important thing a husband can give being a worthy priesthood holder and returned missionary really hit home for me. And I'm not those anymore for my wife, so she would like to return me.

And... There you go. Now you know what objectification feels like.

Definitely, it cuts both ways. And I think this is something that is so harmful about the way the church teaches its members to find spouses and its emphasis on gender roles. We look for checklists, someone who fulfills what we deserve because of the commandments we kept. We aren't really people to each other. And when those checklists don't work anymore, it's a dealbreaker because we married a thing, a checklist, not a person.

Although Linked is still a returned missionary. Can't take that one away.

[Give It Time]

Your comment on the most important thing a husband can give being a worthy priesthood holder and returned missionary really hit home for me. And I'm not those anymore for my wife, so she would like to return me.

And... There you go. Now you know what objectification feels like.

Definitely, it cuts both ways. And I think this is something that is so harmful about the way the church teaches its members to find spouses and its emphasis on gender roles. We look for checklists, someone who fulfills what we deserve because of the commandments we kept. We aren't really people to each other. And when those checklists don't work anymore, it's a dealbreaker because we married a thing, a checklist, not a person.

Although Linked is still a returned missionary. Can't take that one away.

This is so true. I married a checklist. I'll admit it. He wouldn't like my saying this, but he married a checklist, too. No wonder we didn't work out.

[Red Ryder]

TBM hat on:

My wife married an RM, a priesthood holder, a paycheck provider, and a ticket to the CK.

I married a uterus with nice child bearing hips, beautiful eyes, and fantastic boobs!

See how we both objectified each other at such an impressionable young Mormon age. Of course we only new each other for about 4 months and were very immature virgins. lol:

[trophywife26.2]

I AM SO PROUD OF THIS CONVERSATION!

I needed to yell that. Phew! Haha that's over now.

Everyone is hitting slam dunks here going point and counterpoint imho and being respectful and open to learning.

One thing I thought of about fantasy/masturbation is I don't even know if I think I'd consider it objectification to role play the Channing Tatum scenario. To me it really depends if partner A is considering the partner B (playing Tatum) as just a sex toy or as someone who will respond with joy, pleasure, pain, etc. And reacts accordingly. It's awkward in my opinion for partner B and could make partner B feel objectified but I don't know that I think that Tatum is the one being objectified? To me it seems more partner b is being objectified as a toy to act out partner A's fantasy about Tatum. Agree or disagree?

Different scenario:

Let's say a young teen is aroused by another teen and later decided to use that feeling/thought to masturbate later. Is that objectification? I think it really depends if the fantasy is a fantasy of consent or a fantasy of action on an inanimate object.

This takes us to the arena of playing thought police though does it not? Complicated stuff here. Can't wait to hear what else comes up.

[Red Ryder]

Who is Channing Tatum?

And why are we (Mormons) all so sexually pent up? Maybe fantasies, sex, and sexual attraction are all normal things that we should just embrace and not worry about whether we cross into objectification and if/when/how so. We should be allowed to keep our thoughts and perversions private within the walls of our own heads, between ourselves, our lovers, and our bed sheets (or couch cushions for you freaky deaks)!

Different scenario:

Let's say a young teen is aroused by another teen and later decided to use that feeling/thought to masturbate later. Is that objectification? I think it really depends if the fantasy is a fantasy of consent or a fantasy of action on an inanimate object.

This takes us to the arena of playing thought police though does it not? Complicated stuff here. Can't wait to hear what else comes up.

It's not objectification. It's use of imagination. We've all done it to some extent. From hanging posters on our teenage bedroom walls of Jane Fonda, Pamela Anderson, Brad Pitt, or Ronald Reagan. It's the same reasonating force that allows us to self identify with songs like "Stacy's Mom". Our brains are wired to feel sexual attraction which is often fueled by our own imaginations and ability to consciously think out loud within our own heads. This is a unique trait that only humans have. Animals don't have this ability. Orcas don't fantasize about rolling around on the ocean floor with hump back Kardashian whales. It's also the trait that when wrongly nurished creates psycho sex fueled maniacs like Brian David Mitchell, Ted Bundy, and Joseph Smith. Fortunately most people aren't monsters, sickos, or rapists. Perhaps in those examples, an argument could be made that a genetic flaw like an addiction gene or miss-wired nuerotransmitter is cause. I dunno.

It makes sense to me that some form of objectification is necessary in order to maintain a healthy sexuality.

[Thoughtful]

TBM hat on:

My wife married an RM, a priesthood holder, a paycheck provider, and a ticket to the CK.

I married a uterus with nice child bearing hips, beautiful eyes, and fantastic boobs!

See how we both objectified each other at such an impressionable young Mormon age. Of course we only new each other for about 4 months and were very immature virgins. lol:

Well, but then again consider that for the man in this scenario, it's about things he has done, attained/ maintained. For the woman, it is about features largely out of her control. So I'd argue that being selected for features you can control is somewhat less objectifying than mere physical characteristics.

Like, I know I'm beautiful, so if a random guy says so, I'm like buzz off... but if you compliment my brain, accomplishments, my work...*swoon*

But you could counter argue that women are selecting for traits that indicate power. ("Everything is about sex, except sex, sex is about power")

And I'm hearing a song from Evita in my head about social climbing.

[wtfluff]

This takes us to the arena of playing thought police though does it not? Complicated stuff here. Can't wait to hear what else comes up.

"Thought Crimes" has popped into my head many times whilst perusing this thread...

[trophywife26.2]

We cannot hold people accountable for thought crime nor would I want to.

But it's interesting because thoughts of those in power lead to action and policy that has effect on those without power.

I don't know what a society looks like when rape culture is just a fringe thing a few extremists engage in that the rest of us find concerning. This thread has made me want to do more research though.

[MoPag]

because I think a decent thread can be salvaged,

This turned out to be an awesome thread! Thank you Linked for starting this thread and for everyone who contributed. I love learning from my NOM brothers and sisters.