Middle-aged men do squeal (or…something) over teenage girls. Entire magazines and industries are founded on that. Think of that Viagra ad with Bob Dole and Britney Spears. That should make someone want to hurl.
I think it’s a bit weird about the Twi-moms and baby Taylor Lautner, but it’s only the role reversal that is causing comment, not the situation. The situation happens all the time.
You have me halfway convinced, but I have to disagree to some extent. Underage boys ARE vulnerable to older women and our society doesn’t acknowledge it.
An older boy who is sexually abused by a woman is told he is lucky and given a high five. Never mind that he didn’t choose the time, the place or the person to have sex with. He was manipulated and coerced.
Even seventeen year old boys and their bodies should be treated with respect, not as men who are just looking to get laid.
I suspect that most FMHers are reading and enjoying the Twilight series, which is why I can’t remember reading much about the unfortunate and uniquely sexist nature of the books. If a man wrote Twilight, New Moon, and the rest, I am sure that these stories would not enjoy the same fan base.
jks, you’re right of course. It’s a double standard that encourages boys to have sex with as many women as they can get, and doesn’t take seriously the emotional trauma boys may feel at being manipulated into having sex. (are they even “allowed” to feel manipulated into having sex?) We do have to consider the mechanics of these sexual relationships, though - the boys actually have to affirmatively, physically perform to consummate the emotional manipulation - whereas it’s a bit different for girls.
sam - ha! as if women writers had a corner on the sexist fiction market. Reminds me this exchange with Jack Nicholson’s character (who writes romantic fiction for women) in “As Good as It Gets”:
Secretary: How do you write women so well?
Melvin Udall: I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability.
#4 And that right there shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the male sexual response. *It* is not under conscious control. It never was, never will be. What we do with *it* can and should be under control. But take a male’s ability to decide away (through coercion, drugs, restraint) and *it* can still perform without any conscious input and even *against* conscious input at times.
I should add that this is particularly true for teens. And that logic is what is explicitly used by the older female in this case… “See? You want this.”
ECS: “[T]here’s definitely something different about middle-aged women squealing over a teen-aged boy than middle aged men squealing over a teen-aged girl.”
So do liberated LDS women see the first as good, clean fun, but the second as simmering immorality, harbinger of infidelity? Attempts to defend this double standard are entirely unconvincing. It reflects the strange mindset that, somehow, immorality only applies to men.
I think we have discussed the problematic sexism inherent in the Twilight books here. I believe it was post by Artemis quite a long while back, too lazy right now to look for it. But boiled down, Bella is a passive object of male attention, and Edward is a creepy stalker. But just as with everything in life, it’s not entirely that simple.
I do tend to be a bit snobby about these books/movies which is probably hypocritical of me since I do enjoy myself a good trashy romance novel sometimes, and that is basically what this book is, just aimed toward teenagers with a strong abstinence only message. But there is obviously something in them that strikes a cord with a wide variety of women and girls.
I tend to agree with ECS on the whole that the Twilight Moms are less creepy and predatory than it would be in reverse. Which isn’t to say that boys can’t be prey sometimes to women, but the vast vast vast majority of the time it is the reverse. Maybe sexist, but it’s the truth we live with.
ECS: It’s a double standard that encourages boys to have sex with as many women as they can get
I’ve seen several folks argue that it is evolution/nature that encourages males to have sex with as many women as they can get rather than some social double standard.
(Just a random thought — I don’t really have a passionate opinion about that subject)
Dave - yes, I’m not defending the “standard” - just noticing there is one. I grew out of the stage of lusting after celebrities after my subscription to TigerBeat expired in 1991, but apparently many grown ups never grow up.
I like the story, at least the parts about the actual vampires, werewolves, etc. That said, these books and movies are way too easy of a target. Meaning not only are they are incredibly poorly-written/filmed and fraught with eye-roll inducing melodrama, but also because together they form an empty canvas for all the sexist, classist, racist, etc hobbyhorse themes everyone loves to kvetch about instead of doing actual work (like grading papers. ugh).
Geoff - true, true. I guess it’s a question of whether society indulges those natural propensities rather than thwarts them. Which reminds me of my favorite part of the movie when Bella tells Jacob to just stop being a werewolf, and Jacob responds that it’s not a “lifestyle choice”. Ha!
I read all the books, and enjoyed them as fluff (sometimes it’s fun to read just read fluff and not have to think too much!). However, I do find the twilight mom phenomenon creepy.
My personal opinion is that it’s a case of bored middle-aged women who want to pretend that they’re still teenagers. It seems odd to me that grown women, LDS women even (or especially?) think that ogling teenage boys is okay. Granted not everyone is doing that, but when I see discussions about how hot whichever character is, and pictures of their bare chests posted on facebook, it’s hard to convince me that it’s purpose is not pornographic.
I’d be pretty mad if my Mister was doing something similar with a partially dressed actress.
(and I know I posted this in the other twilight thread, but I think he makes a good point comparing taylor lautner in NM to Megan fox in transformers shenpawarrior.
#6 SO TRUE. I literally have a friend who was raped by a girl he barely knew while he was SLEEPING. He woke up in the middle of it… and yes he is a very deep sleeper. Needless to say, NOT ok and NOT his fault (even though his priesthood leadership didn’t see it that way, ugh). Which in turn lead him down a very self distructive route for a while.
I think that any adult swooning over a teenagers is a bit warped. Admiring their looks? Ok, I can see that. Heck I admire pictures of myself at that age! I was so cute and didn’t even have a clue. The panties thing is downright disturbing though.
“We do have to consider the mechanics of these sexual relationships, though - the boys actually have to affirmatively, physically perform to consummate the emotional manipulation - whereas it’s a bit different for girls.”
I think you need to do some more research on sexual abuse. When we are talking about someone older preying on someone younger. Sexual abuse often comes without a lot of physical force for both boys and girls. Sexual abuse can come with orgasm and other physical response for both girls and boys. It is ignorance like what you stated above that hurts the victims of childhood sexual abuse. They feel guilty and they feel like it is their fault. People with attitudes like yours tell them that they could have “stopped it” at any time. They could have said something, they could have done something. And surely if they hadn’t wanted it their bodies wouldn’t have responded in a sexual way so it must be their fault. THIS is the trauma that many victims of sexual abuse (both boys and girls) must deal with.
It takes a boy accepting one gift (or email) that his parents didn’t know about and he is suddenly vulnerable to manipulation from an adult to do as he is told and feel like he doesn’t have anyone to turn to.
Yes, I am talking about 9 year olds and 11 year olds and 13 year olds and 15 year olds and even older, especially if the abuse or grooming started when he was younger.
It is time to STOP telling undereage boys that they wanted it and giving ADULT women a pass on respecting the lines that shouldn’t be crossed when it comes to sexual abuse.
I know you asked a question, but I agree with your point entirely. And the adult women swooning over Jacob creep me out. Seriously. Complete double standard. Lusting after a minor is, IMO, immoral,no matter the gender.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — November 30, 2009 @ 4:11 pm
jks, you’re projecting. “Attitudes like mine” are that people should keep their hands to themselves.
I think it’s naive to assume that all or even most cases of sexual abuse do not involve some sort of emotional manipulation. Most of the time, rapes don’t just happen to people. It’s not usually someone breaking into your house at night and pinning you down so you can’t fight back. In most cases, the aggressor does something or says something to weaken the victim emotionally, trick them into saying or thinking something that could be twisted later to show that it was really the victim’s fault when, in fact, it was not.
The idea that the victim “must have wanted/liked/encouraged it” because they didn’t assertively prevent it from happening is a damaging idea that continues to plague both men and women with undeserved guilt and self-loathing.
Sorry. Just had to throw my two cents in.
The older woman who confronts an underage boy in a sexual way, as with the panties lady, is offensive to me. Similarly, if a strange man, even a man my age, asked me to sign his boxers, I would be offended. People are people and shouldn’t just be reduced to “eye candy” that doesn’t have any feelings.
ECS, these women crack me up. Seriously, I just sit back and think, well ya he has a nice body, but really…. is something missing in your life that a 17 year old gives you… well…makes you crazy enough to pull off your underwear?
Don’t get me wrong, he worked hard for that body, and he looks good on screen, but… but… but… really? Underwear? Teenage daughter? Mom’s gone crazy…
(fyi, I love the books and have seen both movies, still a sane 31 year old that keeps her underwear on… of course, it would be weird to say “Hey Taylor, sign these grannie panties…” )
I just watched Twilight a few days ago, and will be watching New Moon tomorrow with my daughter. I’ve decided I’m on Team Alice, because she’s just adorable (the character and the actress playing her) and Bella is just annoying. I’ve read the books, and will watch the movies, but I’m not sure I’ll do either more than twice. I see what the people who love the series love about it, and I see what the people who hate the series hate about it. They’re both right, but I don’t love or hate it. New Moon was the worst book in the series, so I expect it could be the worst film in the series as well. But I’ve loved Dakota Fanning since she was on CSI, right before she was in I Am Sam, so I would tend to watch this anyhow.
4 — Seconding jks here. Male rape victims do not have to cooperate or wish to cooperate in any fashion to be raped. Force, coercion and manipulation can be brought to play in ways that would be very familiar to female sexual assault survivors. The differences in experiences between male and females who have experienced sexual assaults exist, but aren’t as fundamental as you seem to want to believe.
And your point about men as predators and women as prey is just way, way, overgeneralized and plays with too many stereotypes. Would it be okay for me to be lusting after my EQPs fourteen year old daughter who is a black-belt because she could kick my butt without working up a sweat? How about when she’s seventeen? What if she outweighed me and was taller than I am?
I don’t think any of it would be okay, and I think the lustiness about minor characters is creepy. And I don’t care for the most manifest case of the double standard I can think of — Mary Kay Letourneau, and all the women who thought it was so sweet and romantic the way she got pregnant (twice) by the student she started molesting when he was 13.
I think it is really disgusting that women are acting in this boorish and disrespectful manner. The poor boy is being objectified and that is excuseless on the part of the women. Lusting after him in their hearts is a sin irrespective of whether they are actually contemplating how to force themselves upon him. He is just a boy!
Comment by StillConfused — November 30, 2009 @ 5:30 pm
nope its creepy. Some of the gals I know who go on and on about how hot Taylor is have boys his age and would be livid if I asked their sons to sign my undies. Its a gross and weird and in no way more acceptable. He looks like a kid to me and I am only 32. When I look at teenage boys, I think of my sons in 10 years, not exactly a sexual image. ewww.
Comment by ..just call me cassandra — November 30, 2009 @ 5:34 pm
How can women tell men it’s not okay to objectify us, if we then justify us objectifying them?
How can we say-the boy is not totally innocent and the victim in a rape if we want that said wehn we are the victim? What if our bodies do respond? Does that make us less the victim? Should a guy feel guilty becasue he responded? Should a guy feel guilty because he didn’t hit a girl, or fight her off-when he may have been totally shocked!?
How can we justify focusing SO muich on the Jacob’s abs, then demand men give us a break about our bodies?
I have this awful image in my mind of a man taking off his underwear for someone to sign…YUCKO.
I’m not talking here about noticing the guy has a good looking stomach, but the 388 thoughts after that, the third poster, the panties…good heavens. I get noticing something beautiful, I don’t get not having the maturity to then look away. Watch the movie, but then if you rival stephanie meyers in adjective use describing his rock hard abs, statuesque, blah blah blah blah.. ya get a day job.
Grown ups need to be grown ups…either way. Don’t prey on children, it’s disgusting. Don’t oogle them, don’t focus on attraction and looks…it’s time to move on to something lasting like love with someone your own age.
The books themselves…brain candy. The first movie was hilarious in all the wrong places…the make up, the special effects, the drama. Again it was a popcorn movie. It’s the fans that make it disgusting.
Yesterday our Stake President spoke to the men and women in a combined meeting about pornography again. This time however, it was pointed out that women are having a problem with it too. I couldn’t help but wonder if New Moon was being lumped in as part of that problem.
Grown ups need to be grown ups…either way. Don’t prey on children, it’s disgusting. Don’t oogle them, don’t focus on attraction and looks…it’s time to move on to something lasting like love with someone your own age.
I think that’s a pretty good summary
Comment by Stephanie — November 30, 2009 @ 7:35 pm
I thoroughly enjoy the Twilight series as fluff as well. I am not ashamed to admit that I enjoy the shirtless boys, either. I would never act on it, but find nothing wrong in appreciating a nice physique on a young man. It’s a shirtless teenage actor, people. I don’t think that qualifies me as a sex offender and think the word “prey” is a bit of an exaggeration.
Finally, let’s keep some perspective on what the vast majority of grown women are doing here. They aren’t throwing themselves at this kid, they are admiring a very nearly adult male body that has been built up to look adult (that’s the story line in the book, too. He’s supposed to age super fast and be the equivalent of a 25 year-old man). It’s this kind of overreaction that makes people roll their eyes at legitimate criticisms of the hyper-sexualization of media
Eris, I think there’s a difference between oogling the character/actor in a film (all good fun) and an adult woman oogling a teen boy in person.
Although, you know, that mom was probably just being silly and having fun for her daughter’s benefit. I sometimes do silly juvenile things to have fun with my kids (but nothing like taking off my panties, er Gs, for an autograph).
Comment by Stephanie — November 30, 2009 @ 10:32 pm
Oh yeah, I can see it now. Hey kid, wanna sign my sacred Mormon underwear? Huba Huba!
i would likely guess that she was just having fun as well. And again, I say we should make sure to note that this is one woman and the rest of us ooglers have been perfectly sane in our behavior.
#28, I don’t want to “attack” at all. Especially because I appreciate your contributions so much.
But.
There is some sort of mental block in my mind that will not allow me to think of an underaged boy (no matter how old he LOOKS) in sexual ways. I would hope that other decent folks would do the same.
One of my teen daughterS (barely 14) has a beautiful physique -one of a full grown (very in-shape) woman. I hate the thought of men excusing their inapproptiate lustful thoughts about her just because she looks much older.
I dunno - a minor is a minor. And there are plenty of good looking adults if you’re into that kind of thing. Personally, I’m a married woman who feels that sexual thoughts (or at least dwellings - we can’t exactly control every little thought that pops in our head) about anyone other than my husband is unfaithful. But, if I were single, I would feel creepy to be thinking anything lustful about a minor. It just feels wrong on so many levels.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — November 30, 2009 @ 11:19 pm
If you’re old enough to be his mom, (or her dad) that’s just icky.
There’s nothing vulnerable at all about a half-naked seventeen year old boy proudly displaying his powerful biceps and huge, um, ego. Naked women are prey, naked men are the predators.
So, regardless of what roles they play, and no matter what goes on, to you, women will always be the prey and men will always the predators. That is some serious BS.
Men ogling teenage girls are predators, OK. But, older women ogling a shirtless teenage boy are not prey, that’s ridiculous.
By the way, I am loving the Twilight Mom phenomenon. It’s actual proof of what I have known all along. Women are just like men.
So men have been demonized and vilified for being so “superficial,” “perverse,” for treating women as “sex toys.” Poor women, they have to work so hard to look good for the superficial pigs…er men. But we can see it is all the same with the much more “rational,” and much more “reserved,” and much more “mature” women huh.
A buff shirtless man (boy or whatever) and they go nuts. It’s ok, it is not pathetic. That is possibly what humans like due to their biological needs: a shape that looks healthy, sexually attractive and fertile. Women just need to stop being hypocrites and learn that when it comes to sex and physical attraction, they want the same things men do.
Don’t worry women, we, the men, have known all along… and for the record, it is not wrong. In an obesity riddled society, it is only natural that humanity is trying to survive, trying to mate with the genetic profiles that will make the human race last longer.
LawyerLady,
No “attack” perceived and I can understand the sentiment. As a girl who looked full-grown at age 13, I sympathize with your concerns. But I remain unconvinced that it is inappropriate for me to enjoy the physical appearance of a 16 year-old actor who engaged in a full year’s worth of hard work to look like a full-grown man.
Further, and this may be a bit of a thread-jack, I can’t commit to the “any lusting is unfaithful” argument. I think it is unreasonable to ask living, breathing, sexual beings - which we all are - to refuse to acknowledge physical beauty. I don’t feel creepy at all saying that the human body is attractive and that I appreciate it; both male and female.
Finally, a quick question for those arguing if you’re old enough to be their parent, it’s creepy: when does that rule break down? Lots of people marry someone who would fit that description. I am related to quite a few of them. In fact, my parents have the same age difference as I do with Taylor Lautner. So in 1 year will it no longer be creepy because he is 18, or is it going to be wrong forever (not that I’m asking for any practical or long-term planning; just curious)?
Wait…do we accept that there is some male thing that evolution has programmed into men to be more promiscuous than women? Is that science really? Or is it just a stereo type of human behaviour that science tries to explain?
I know you (Geoff) said you didn’t feel strongly, but really, why do we hands down accept that it’s fact that men have an evolutionary reason to have sex with as many women as they can get? This is JUST a theory about human behavior and evolution, but it is merely a theory.
The support for the theory I have always heard is that men are capable of spreading more seed more quickly than women are. But that doesn’t mean that evolution has encouraged them to do so. I mean I have also been fed the theory that women are attracted to strong men for evolutionary reasons (they are good protectors and suppliers) but why would women be programmed to go for the strong guys if the guys are not programmed to stay with and protect/feed the family? You know, cause they gotta be off dropping seed to all the women they can?
Women also can desire multiple partners etc. I think it’s a society thing and a conditioning thing in how we think. I don’t think monogomy is anymore easy for us girls than it is for men if we choose to feed our lusts elsewhere.
I am just saying, I am suprised that everyone here just accepts the theory that men are wired that way.
Eris, yes it becomes less creepy when a child becomes a legal adult.
Can we just let kids be kids? When a girl is screaming for a 17 year old heart-throb she is more likely to want to go out on a date and maybe kiss him. She wants to imagine him being her boyfriend. I think that the 17 year old kid can handle that.
Asking him to handle adult women and their panties is a little much. Asking him to handle even more than that and not taking his age into consideration is wrong.
I just think that 17 year old girls and 17 year old boys should not be treated as sex objects just because they are in a movie and they are good-looking.
jks, I guess my biggest problem with this discussion is the generalization from one crazed woman (and yes, I understand there are probably a few more) to then saying that any enjoyment on the part of middle-aged women is inappropriate.
I am also constantly amazed at our dependence on the chronological age of a person in discussions such as these. I think it ridiculous to argue that 17 year olds as sex objects is not ok, but 18 year olds are. I don’t know how else to make the legal distinction, but in questions such as this it seems less helpful.
Again, please don’t misread me to be approving of truly inappropriate behavior (of which I would include physical contact of any kind and the giving of underthings). But blanket condemnation of women enjoying a movie feels excessive.
I am not ashamed to admit that I enjoy a good shirtless woman. I would never act on it, but find nothing wrong in appreciating a nice and shapely physique on a young woman. She’s just a shirtless actress/model, people.
/sarcasm
I’m not bothered by the twilight phenomenon, but I am bothered by the clear double standards. In the OP:
there’s something uniquely vulnerable about a half-naked young girl. There’s nothing vulnerable at all about a half-naked seventeen year old boy proudly displaying his powerful biceps and huge, um, ego. Naked women are prey, naked men are the predators.
The 40 year old women ripping their panties off and begging Taylor Lautner to sign them are offering themselves up as prey. Which is pathetic, not predatory…they’re harmless.
You’ve described most of my male friends who frequent strip clubs. Not predatory, not going to act on anything, but yes, pathetic. And the idea that men are much, much more likely to be predatory? It’s hard to see that gulf when many of the latest reports of sexual exploitation here in Utah involve female teachers taking advantage of young male students.
Again, have fun and enjoy the shows. But do not dismiss your behaviour as pathetic, while males doing the same thing are scary and predatory. Show some consistency.
wow, I can’t believe this is post is on FMH. Was it tongue in cheek? Many people have already pointed out the double standard…but come on. Women fawning over teenage boys is ok? Men are always predators women are prey? Seriously??? This has to be a joke. I have to agree with mahuph and Manuel and jks and Lawyer Lady…there is a blatant double standard here and its totally pathetic.
very nearly adult male body that has been built up to look adult
Eris, this is your justification? Really? Replace male with female and have a man say it and you would all be (rightly) condemning him for being a creep that likes teenage girls. My 15 year old sister and her friends easily look like adults, that doesn’t make it ok for adults to oogle them and flirt with them. And no one is condemning women enjoying the movie - they are condemning women for enjoying the bare chest of a teenage boy.
I see this double standard in other stuff as well - like in Glee one of the HS students is constantly having sex with “moms”. I think it is playing into the fantasies of the women watching the show, and I think its gross.
How can women tell men it’s not okay to objectify us, if we then justify us objectifying them?
Thank you very much. As the parent to both a daughter AND a son, I try to be very careful about not judging anyone purely on their physique. You never know just WHAT is going to stick in a child’s head.
When I worked in a toy store, I read an article about how people get so upset about how Barbie’s have unrealistic proportions, but nobody complains about the male action figures giving boys unrealistic ideals. It’s stuck with me nearly 10 years later, and affects how I relate to a lot of things.
That said, we were in a book store with my 55yo MIL last week, and she said to my 11yo daughter, “Don’t you think Jacob is just dreamy?” Not 2 seconds later my 7yo son saw a large stack of Twilight merchandise. He says “MORE TWILIGHT! Do people really buy this junk?!” and just kept walking…I kept most of the laughter on the inside.
My daughter has no idea who Jacob is, so was trying to figure out who her married grandmother had a crush on, if not her grandfather. Weird!
Eris, it is and will still be as creepy for older women to be “ogling” Taylor Lautner when he becomes a legal adult. Less legally messy, but just as creepy. Turning 18 only makes him an adult in the legal sense- and only partway, because there are still some laws that will apply until he’s 21, and others until he’s 25. As far as brain development goes, 25 is when he’ll properly be an adult. Socially speaking, there technically isn’t a line with creepy on one side and acceptable on the other, but we all know it’s there… and older women sexually objectifying a boy, no matter how hard he worked to get an “adult body” is definitely on the creepy side.
37 — Lusting is not just noticing that someone is attractive. Lusting goes well beyond that. I just watched Faith Hill’s Christmas concert from last year, and I noticed that she’s stunningly beautiful. If I were lusting, I would be focusing on her body parts and deciding what I would like to be doing with them. The difference between the two is non-subtle. You can argue with Jesus about the difference between looking on someone to lust after them and committing adultery with them in your heart — he didn’t exactly stutter on the point.
Saw the movie. It was frustrating to watch and listen to most of the dialogue, but I kept watching because the story was a little bit interesting.
I didn’t think the men/boys were really sexualized all that much. They had their shirts off and were all muscles, but the camera didn’t linger on them. Now that I think about it I’m not even sure I saw a nipple… if I did it was only a quick flash! Of course I wasn’t paying close attention, so maybe women actually noticed these things more.
I have to agree with Blain. Merely noticing or appreciating attractiveness isn’t the same as lust. While I certainly noticed the shirtless New Moon men as being nicely built, that’s where it ended for me. I was amused in the theater when the young ladies were screaming every time Taylor Lautner appeared (I can remember doing the same over some of my favorite rock stars at concerts, when I was a young thing)…but not as amused by the older female fans asking to have him sign their underwear. That’s just inappropriate and should not even be in the mind of a mature woman. It’s easy enough to grasp that if the woman in question would appreciate her girlfriend asking her own teenage son to sign her underwear. Yuck, yuck and more yuck.
Early in the series, I visited the Twilight moms website, figuring that there would be a different sort of discussion about the books- the story line etc. Instead, I was discouraged that it seemed I’d stumbled upon a majority of women who are having some trouble growing up. I understand revisiting and identifying with the emotional upheaval of youth and first love (I felt some of that myself while reading the series), but engaging in the fantasy that is more appropriate to the teen level just turned me off. I was far more interested in the psychology of it and how it would play into some good discussions with my girls in YW and at home.
I see this double standard in other stuff as well - like in Glee one of the HS students is constantly having sex with “moms”. I think it is playing into the fantasies of the women watching the show, and I think its gross.
If this is truly a new “trend” or whatever, I find it disturbing. I don’t know anything about Glee, but I’ve enjoyed a few high school movies that remind me of my teen days - when I was a teen. The idea of grown women lusting after teens is very disturbing and predatory. Just as I don’t want my daughter growing up with men lusting after her, I don’t want my sons growing up with women lusting after them either. Let’s just let them be kids.
I guess I just haven’t been in the loop about the “Twilight Moms”. That picture linked to in #41 is just too much.
EWWW…we are women!! we get the rights to be just as gross as men. BUT, we are weak so it’s okay, we promise we won’t hurt you, and it can’t be as gross as men because we’re so weak a delicate. You’re so strong and argasmic you’ll enjoy it anyway. We’ll just treat you like a piece of meat. You don’t mind you thing do you [bats eyelashes]?
I don’t care how innocent a 30+ yo man is. I don’t care how much he swears up and down he would never act on it and is just admiring beauty. If I caught him looking at my matured 13 yo I would have a strong desire to castrate him. If I saw a woman looking at my son I would have a similar desire.
I do think we (the larger we) need to grow up and understand beauty and love. At some point beautiful is that your man is a great cook, or does the dishes or is so great with the children…not just his body. At some point self control and respect and determination are beautiful. Should he be healthy, yes, but I don’t think my husband has the time to get his six pack back…i don’t want him in the gym that much, we have real things that we need to do. If we raise children to think beauty is skin deep we may find them marrying a disgusting person who photographs well-but hey as long as their attracted to them right? Do we clap longer for abs man then for a great teacher? Do we pay more to see a pretty face then to support a great person working for an amazing cause?
“Normal” people who justify oogling allow perverts to feel more justified in their actions.
For me it’s not so much New Moon, i don’t think it’s this crazy over sexualized movie. It’s just made this aspect of our societal attitude towards relationships and people come into focus.
I realize that this post may trigger thoughts about sexual abuse, and I’m sincerely sorry for the pain that sexual abuse causes so many women and men (including some of you reading this). This is a separate issue, however, and so (SO) far from my meaning in this post. Let me say this, the only “harm” caused by 40 year old women waving their panties around is to say that 40 year old women waving their panties around is sexual abuse.
Some of these comments make me think of the line, “The Lady doth protest too much, methinks”. Taylor Lautner is a beautiful boy, and I hope he has family and friends who love and support him through this heady time of werewolves and vampires. That is all.
I think grown women acting like fools over teenage boys is just as Lisa described- pathetic. Could their interest be predatory? Maybe. I’m thinking of some of the cases where older women have run off with boys- like the teacher who had two children by her student, which I found every bit as revolting as I would any reversal of genders. Maybe moreso, since I think I have an internal bias of believing women should protect children. (Which is sexist of me to think we women have a greater responsibility to do so.)
When I was in high school, there was a female teacher who flirted with the handsome boys in our class. I thought it was beneath her dignity and professionalism, personally. The boys exploited it pretty shamelessly, though and they loved to act as if they found her attractive if it got them an extension on an assignment or a better grade. It was really obvious that the male gym teacher at school was a total perv…not appreciating beauty at all, but leering in a way that made every female feel undressed. He was an ick factor 10.
I guess it’s all part of the same issue on a wide spectrum…I just cannot imagine what would posess a supposedly mature woman of 40 to present her underwear for signing to a teenage boy- or a grown man, for that matter. It’s just inappropriate at any age level, really, but downright disgusting in a woman of an age to know better.
“The Lady doth protest too much, methinks”. That made me laugh, ECS. And I’m pretty sure I know what you mean. Still chuckling…
I also can see that your post had zero to do with child sexual abuse. But, I do stand by my opinion that a middle age woman swooning over a boy is just, well, weird. And it disturbs me.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 1, 2009 @ 11:42 am
I guess I am taking the largest beating here, so I will address the main points I have heard. First, I am talking about a 17 year-old young man here, not a 13 year-kid. That is a HUGE difference! At 13, I looked much older and yes, it would be creepy for a grown man to oogle me. At 17… let me see….. I was dating the man I would eventually marry (and he was 23). I see the difference between 13 and 17 and am surprised so many others do not (or assume I don’t).
Once AGAIN, let me say that the behavior of a very few grown women who do not know how to control themselves is not representative of the many of us who go to a movie and see a very attractive young man and enjoy it. To pin that kind of behavior on everyone over 22 who goes to this movie or admits to giggling at those werewolves is just unfair.
Finally, I think many of the comments here are engaging in a slippery slope fallacy. Just because I cop to thinking Taylor Lautner is hot doesn’t mean I am “lusting” or “imagining what I would do with him” or going to throw my panties at him. And it certainly doesn’t make me “pathetic” or a pedophile. These types of arguments, to me, seem to diminish the horror of true acts of pedophilia and inappropriate sexual aggression between adults in positions of power and young people.
There is a debate about whether the phenomenon is silly. I’d love to have it and I will happily defend my enjoyment of this ridiculous series. But we are lacking in perspective in this discussion.
Looks like there has been a lot of discussion about the objectification/sexualization aspect of this, and that’s certainly an important one. I wonder if there has been any thought as to the body image issue aspect? Many people condemn the constant bombardment of very specific and frequently unrealistic body images on our young women by the media. It is claimed (rightly, I believe) that this cultural prescription of very specific body types and actions–and the response to these body types by men–contributes to an increasingly negative self-image among women who don’t fit that certain body type. Isn’t this phenomenon of glorifying the young, hairless (except in werewolf form, I suppose) men with well-developed biceps, abs, and glutes doing the same thing to men? Is that acceptable, or is this well deserved payback?
I happen to agree with almost everything you say here. And I’d be pretty pissed if someone was insinuating that I was anything like a pedophile as well. I think the context of this debate has slowly drifted into off-topic subjects (as often happens) such as sexual abuse and pedophilia. And you are more than right that a woman “appreciating” a 17 year-old boy’s physique should not be equated to those things.
Here’s my (hopefully balanced) take, though. I saw the movie too. I’m not blind and I’m not devoid of judgment so, of course, I saw Taylor and noticed he was in great shape. And I’m sure I even had the thought, “Wow, that kid has really worked out since the last movie”. I heard all of the gals (not sure if it was just the teenagers or if moms were included) oohing and aahing and it made me giggle. But then that was it.
I think when you use the term “hot” to describe him, that is where I cringe just a bit. “Hot” just connotes something more than mere observation and acknowledgement, IMO. Would you be okay if Bella was in a mini-skirt and very revealing blouse and your husband thought she was hot? If your answer is “yes”, then we’re just very different in this regard.
Look, I’ve been reading your comments for a very long time on this sight and I have never gotten the impression that you are anything but a decent, smart, kind, person who also seems to be a dedicated wife and mother. So, I am certainly not saying anything about your character here. I’m obviously not privy to your thoughts, but the use of the word “hot”, just gives me a little different impression of your thought processes in this regard, rightly or wrongly.
And, a lot of folks aren’t really directing their disapproval at you, specifically, but just to some of the more extreme behaviors that (at least in these parts) are running rampant among many middle-aged women. And many of those attitudes and behaviors ARE pathetic and disgusting. I’ve just never been a fan of double standards and I really think that if most or all of the men in a movie audience audibly responded to a 17 year old girl who showed some skin, we’d get a little (or a lot) uncomfortable and cry “perv!” Again, why is it okay for women but not men? I simply don’t get it.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 1, 2009 @ 12:47 pm
Hmm…
So, I confess that about 85 percent of the reason that I bothered to see New Moon was Taylor Lautner. Granted, I’m 22 and single, so its not quite the same…
So, certainly some of the Twilight moms are out of control. Especially the woman who wanted to have Taylor Lautner sign her underwear. That’s just pathetic…. but it would be pathetic no matter how old he were.
That said, I don’t know that there is anything all that wrong with appreciating someone who looks REALLY good - male or female. Taylor Lautner definitely still looks young, but he doesn’t look like a kid. He’s in that window, between late teens and mid-twenties, where most people look their best. it’s definitely in our nature to think that young, physically fit people are sexually attractive, because, well, they are. The same is true for attractive, sexually mature young women.
While objectification of others is never a good thing, I don’t think we should pretend that our attraction to people who look really good is unnatural or creepy. As long as there are appropriate boundaries for our application of attractiveness, I think it is, for the most part, harmless, no matter the person’s gender.
Isn’t this phenomenon of glorifying the young, hairless (except in werewolf form, I suppose) men with well-developed biceps, abs, and glutes doing the same thing to men? Is that acceptable, or is this well deserved payback?
I think beautiful bodies, whether male or female, will always be praised. And they will always continue to be the central characters of fantasty storylines. This is what humans like to fantasize about because this is what humans like and are attracted to, it’s pretty much innevitable.
This is a lesson to be learned. The Twilight Mom phenomenon is interesting because it exposes this very fact, what many conservative women would like to deny. They are attracted to the young, healthy, in shape, alpha male types of bodies, and this attraction is an important part of their sexuality. This isn’t just a “few crazy immature women who failed to grow up.” The movie has generated record breaking revenues fueled in great part by the money of these older women.
The double standard is undeniable. Can you imagine if there were online clubs of older men dedicated to “admiring” the body of Miley Cirus (whom I believe is also 17), and if large masses of older men piled up to get a glimpse of her? (I cannot think of another teenage girl with comparable celebrity status). All these women that defend their “not lustful at all” admiration of a teenager’s physique would be outraged.
Women loudly complain about the bombardment of unrealistic female Barbie doll like images and their negative effects on women’s self esteem. Men don’t complain as much, but a similar phenomenon occurs for them.
As men, we grow up with the same stigma. We see women throwing themselves at the good looking guys in high school, the quarterback, the bad-ass popular kid, the guy with daddy’s car, etc etc etc. We hear of how hot Brad Pitt is, we are bombarded with images like Superman, a handsome muscular blue eyed 6′6″ superstrong flying man clad in spandex with his bulging red underwear over his blue tights. Or who can forget He-Man and his naked muscular body covered only by a loin cloth and a metallic chest strap?
These images definitely have an impact on the minds of the young. Girls are affected with eating disorders while more and more boys try steroids. They do so to live up to the expectations this media figures create for them.
I think there is a primal responsibility while raising the young, to let them know what is real, what is beautiful, what is attainable, and teach them how to obtain it. I don’t think beauty is out of the reach of anyone. But it has to be attained the right way. And it has to be taught the right way. Living in denial that beauty is not important, or that it can only consist of non-physical aspects, is the first mistake some parents make, and the first sign for their children to think to themselves “ok, mom and dad are clueless, thus their opinion on this matter is useless.”
Being in denial of what women and men are attracted to is what’s wrong. And telling children that these images aren’t important is pretentious. Rather, we must create a positive with what we have. If young men and women are inevitably influenced by these icons, nothing will stop them from trying to emulate them or look like them. We must acknowledge them and guide them in doing so in a healthy way.
It’s time for women to stop demonizing men who want their wives to look good, and who think Angelina Jolie is an icon of female beauty. Because for every man who lusts after Angelina, there may be a woman who lusts after Brad Pitt.
If the wife longs for a man in shape, why can’t the husband make an effort to get in shape? If the husband wants a wife in shape, why should that be wrong? or why should that be unfair?
It’s time for all to get in shape, increase their self esteem, enjoy being with each other and stop the endless overly defensive attitudes that people must like us flab and all. They don’t have to like us, and we can do something about it.
50 — I don’t know that I’d go so far as calling it sexual abuse, but I would say it’s inappropriate sexual behavior with a minor. It’s not illegal, but it’s wrong.
53 — My major participation in the sexual abuse aspect of this thread has been to address some belief problems I’ve seen that unintentionally support the sexualization and sexual abuse of children. I’ve spent too much time with child sexual assault survivors, and sexually aggressive youth, to watch those things go by unchallenged. As with almost everything else I’ve seen linked to gender, there are some differences between men and women, some of which might be socialized and some of which might not, but there are also significant similarities between the genders. I am not a fan of the idea that gender alone makes someone a predator or prey, nor am I a fan of the beliefs that minimize the suffering of male victims of abuse and the culpability of their abusers. That is pretty much where I’m at with that part of the thread. I recognize it’s an OT thread, but that’s life in the blogosphere — threads go where they want to.
I do not have a problem with grown women enjoying these stories, and I don’t think every grown woman who does is using this as in a pornographic fashion. I do think it’s worth pointing out that some women are using this in a pornographic fashion, and that that is dangerous. Lust hits are very exciting, and pornography addiction is not a small problem, nor are its impacts minor. Too many female porn/sex addicts have to push against the belief system I mentioned above, which make it harder for them to receive help when they seek it.
So, again, I would oppose those who say all Twilight moms are creepy, lusting or addicted. But I would say that those who are are something to be concerned about, and would discourage people from saying things that collude with their denial.
Lawyer Lady, perhaps “hot” does connote something more than I meant. I do not believe it means more than “very attractive” or “super-duper good looking” but that’s my understanding of the term.
In this case, I mean it in the sense of “Wow. That is a very attractive human being and I enjoy looking at him. In fact, I will pay $6.75 to see a movie with him in it.” I don’t know what other term to use, but am willing to accept suggestions.
As often happens, it looks like we’re actually pretty close in our thinking on this subject. Darn semantics confusing things again! I’ve always thought “hot” was more along the lines of “sexy”. And then, “sexy”, having “sex” as it’s root, just brings on a whole other meaning.
I am getting pretty old, though, so who knows?. I remember my Dad using the word “foxy” when I was a teen and I died laughing. He was talking about Stevie Nicks, so I assume it was somewhere along the lines of “hot”, too.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 1, 2009 @ 1:51 pm
I think of it this way “The 42 year old ____ leered at the 16 year old ______ and hooted and cheered when ____ took ____ clothes off.” It is is icky no matter what gender terms fill in that gap. If it is a 42 yr old man, cheering at a nude (or at least partially) teen age boy it is bad, if it is a 42 yr old woman hooting and making catcalls at a 16 yr old girl is is bad.
Britt, could you please point out my support of a double-standard here? I don’t remember saying it was ok for women but not men. I’ve said a lot, so it may have slipped out accidentally, but I doubt it.
Lawyer Lady, I guess it may be closer to “sexy” but I don’t connote “hot” with “sex.” But Stevie Nicks? She is definitely foxy!
I can’t believe I’m actually agreeing with Blain and sam and britt ;), but seriously, I’m very surprised to see a post supporting a double sexist standard on a feminist site (sexual abuse discussion aside). Is this tongue-in-cheek, E?
This is my bottom line, too:
How can women tell men it’s not okay to objectify us, if we then justify us objectifying them?
I’m comparing this situation to the furor over the Liebowitz photo of Miley Cyrus. Remember that?
Embarrasing admission; I’m not sure if I’m squicked out by the new moon and twilight boys because they’re just kids or because I simply find them deeply unattractive. Eeeeech, that Rolling Stones cover. I highly recommend folding the magazine in half.
Regardless, there’s definitely something different about middle-aged women squealing over a teen-aged boy than middle aged men squealing over a teen-aged girl.
* First of all, (real) men don’t squeal*.
* Second of all, the disgust over middle-aged men lusting after young girls is probably motivated by middle-aged men being much (MUCH) more likely to act out as sexual predators than middle-aged women.
* Third of all, there’s something uniquely vulnerable about a half-naked young girl. There’s nothing vulnerable at all about a half-naked seventeen year old boy proudly displaying his powerful biceps and huge, um, ego. Naked women are prey, naked men are the predators.
The 40 year old women ripping their panties off and begging Taylor Lautner to sign them are offering themselves up as prey. Which is pathetic, not predatory. So I say don’t get your knickers in too much of a twist over the Twilight Moms, they may be ridiculous, but they’re harmless.
djinn, I don’t get it either. I’m only a few years older than this Taylor kid, but that’s exactly what he looks like to me - a kid. I really don’t get the attraction. But then, I’m much more attracted to brains than brawn.
Right or wrong, actors are commodity where much money is invested in marketing them, frequently as sex symbols.
Celebrities have participated in using underwear(or the lack of them) as a marketing tool.
The movie was shot in Vancouver. The age of consent in Canada, I believe, is 16. A 17 year old actor on location could legally have consensual sex with all the 80 year old perverts he or she wants. (Have any of you seen Harold and Maude?)
There is a certain segment of a certain industry built on the concept of barely legal.
Comment by Suzanne Neilsen — December 1, 2009 @ 8:32 pm
63 — In the usages I’ve seen, “hot” definitely has a sexual undertone to it. As in “makes me hot and bothered.” FWIW
64 — I hope agreement with me wasn’t too traumatic. I’m sure will be disagreeing again soon.
Hey, I have another question about the “hot and bothered” comment. If I say “hot and bothered” I am describing my state of inner-desire. If I say “that’s hot” as used in popular context, that is describing a state of cool or attractiveness. Doesn’t the current social use of the term “hot” - to use Paris Hilton as my prime defender (that has to be a first on fMh!) - remove some of its sexual connotation.
You are right Eris…here is where I think the double standard comes out…replace the male with female in your posts…are you okay with men with this attitude? maybe you are…
am not ashamed to admit that I enjoy the shirtless boys, either. I would never act on it, but find nothing wrong in appreciating a nice physique on a young man. It’s a shirtless teenage actor, people. I don’t think that qualifies me as a sex offender and think the word “prey” is a bit of an exaggeration.
Finally, let’s keep some perspective on what the vast majority of grown women are doing here. They aren’t throwing themselves at this kid, they are admiring a very nearly adult male body that has been built up to look adult (that’s the story line in the book, too. He’s supposed to age super fast and be the equivalent of a 25 year-old man). It’s this kind of overreaction that makes people roll their eyes at legitimate criticisms of the hyper-sexualization of media
Britt, I recognize my own words and I don’t have a problem with exactly what I described if it were reversed. I think we take this way, way, way too far and seem to be demanding that everyone walk around pretending that the body is not beautiful and that we are evil for admiring it.
Yes, he is 17. I put that age in a gray area. 13, 14, 15, or 16 would be different. 17, almost 18 even, to me is closer to adulthood than childhood in many ways for many people. Just not as bothersome to me. Again, I come from a long line of early marriers and feel like drawing and arbitrary “this age is ok and grown up, but this one is not” is just not realistic unless you are talking about 14 versus 22.
And once again, I am talking about admiring an attractive body, not engaging in ridiculous behavior.
82 — I don’t see how you can use the word to describe a person and leave the sexualized portion aside. I don’t recall using the term to describe a person. I also don’t use “sexy” very much. I don’t see a problem with saying “attractive” or “pretty” or “cute” or “nice looking,” I think they speak to a relatively objective understanding of someones appearance. “Hot” or “sexy,” speaks at least as much to the observers internal process and desires, or, perhaps, to the sexual availability they perceive from how the person is presenting themselves.
I watched the movie yesterday, and found Alice, again, to be adorable — I loved the banter between her and Jacob. But I don’t see her in a sexual context because that’s not where I let my head go. Which I’m rather pleased with, actually.
I think the way the film is presented, the women aren’t objectified, which helps. The guys flagrantly were: “Oh, your head is bleeding. Let me take off my shirt.” “Oh, I’m going to step out into the square at noon so I can be killed. Let me take off my shirt.” “I’m a werewolf-guy. We don’t wear no stinking shirts.” My daughter (20) and I just busted out laughing at the first one of those because it was ridiculous. I would rather not see Dakota Fanning or whoever plays Alice in that kind of sexualized setting, and I’m glad I didn’t.
I get the distinction you’re speaking of in 84. I’m pointing to a slightly finer distinction than that. It’s not particularly about double standards — it’s about lust, and avoiding it.
Oh please Origen. The books and movies are fluff. And sometimes that is just what we need. I don’t see anyone here claiming them to be the equivalent of Austen or Chabon or Hitchcock or Bergen. They are fun, so don’t ruin it by telling me I have no concept of quality literature or cinema.
Blain, glad you liked the movie. I felt this discussion needed more empiricism, so I went to see it again today. I feel much better about contributing to our very scientific discussions here.
I’ve been thinking about this for some time and I have been trying to decide if the middle aged women are doing the same thing as the middle aged men who go googly over a nice body.
How many years have Women, girls, ladies been objectified as sex objects/symbols? Boobs, legs, nether regions, butt….? Pretty sure loads more than a stupid twilight mom asking a boy to sign her panties. (which is still so lame) but to say it’s the same thing… I just can’t wrap my brain around it. It’s just so not ..
And that RS cover is nothing compared to Miley posing topless… see that’s my point… she has to expose skin, her bare back, oh… and maybe is there a little hint at a breast.. and the photo appeared as though she just finished having s*x, with her hair all tousled like that, but Taylor is throwing a football with a wet t-shirt on, showing his large bicep. It didn’t show him in his underwears, on a bed, rolling around in the sheets, hinting at the fact that he had just been doing the naughty with Miley…
Women have it much worse then the men do.
(But honestly let’s face it… women have much prettier, softer body parts than men do so I can see why they like to look at us)
… still, it’s so not the same thing… I think Miley’s parents should be slapped for allowing their much younger daughter, to pose in such a sexual way. Taylor’s eh… until you show me nether region skin it doesn’t even compare. I think these moms are so not doing the same damage… I just can’t see it.
I am not at all saying it’s the same thing-a woman topless v. a man…but why should we excuse objectifying anyone? Saying women have it worse doesn’t excuse objectifying the guy.
That goes back to the old women should get the right to be as bad as men and get away with it stuff that I detest so much. Why not set a standard for both sexes that does not allow objectifying people?
Eris, I’m not saying new moon in itself is so awful. I’m really not.
I’d just rather not objectify ANYONE at any age. Here we have a legal child being objectified by someone who could be his mom.
I’m not against actual relationships with age differences. It’s virtual starings at for personal pleasure that creep me right on out.
britt
Isn’t it a function of Hollywood to objectify actors. It maybe inherent in the system of marketing entertainment.
So everyone, which is worse–
Admiring and/or ogling a 15 year old actor who presents as 25, or admiring and/or ogling a 25year old actor who presents as 15?
Comment by Suzanne Neilsen — December 2, 2009 @ 7:59 pm
That’s a good question, Suzanne, that puts it into perspective. It depends on who you are ogling. I said in a previous comment that I don’t think it’s wrong to ogle the character in the movie (25), but I do think it is wrong to go ogle the teenage actor himself. Similarly, I don’t think it would necessarily be wrong to go ogle a 25 year old actor (maybe a bit pathetic, but not wrong), but there definitely would be something wrong (and creepy) about ogling a teenage character in a movie.
So, with Twilight (which I haven’t seen), I’m guessing that the appeal is seeing the fantasy in the book (with an adult character) play out on the screen. I don’t think it makes women pervs who go to the movie and admire that.
I simply can’t get pleasure out of a shirtless kid. Aside from the fact that we’d be screaming all sorts of nasty accusations at a middle-aged man admitting he enjoyed staring at a 16-17 scantily clad girl (again, double standard), teen boys (even if they’re built just don’t do it for me. But then again, that’s just me…
And, I agree with Chandelle - brains and personality go a lot further with me anyway.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 8:53 pm
No, I think Suzanne Nielsen was just posing an interesting question back up in #91.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 9:02 pm
I really need to stop talking about things I don’t know anything about. Sorry. But, one last thing: I just looked it up, and it says that Jacob is 16 years old but his body is a mature adult body of 25. That complicates things! So, is it okay to lust after a 16 year old character who looks 25 but is really a 17 year old actor? Um, too weird for me.
Stephanie, he is 17 IRL. On screen he plays a 16 yo, who then matures quickly beyond his 16 yo body, and by the way it is described he is supposed to look more like a 25 yo. His body is very built.
Still not the same as ogling a girls tits and tight ass, and legs. The boy has muscles what in the world is wrong with that? He doesn’t show his p*nis, or butt, or anything that most women have to show on screen, so if we are going to play the fair card then that needs to stop too! And, when you see him bare chested he is wearing the longest shorts I’ve seen… which is something else that women don’t get to do on screen…they have to wear skimpy shorts that show half their ass hanging out.
“tits and tight ass” - now there are some words I never thought I’d see on this website!
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 9:22 pm
Phew! I’m so glad someone finally said that so now I can close the comments.
I’ve learned my lesson. No more Stephenie Meyer (until I sneak into the Breaking Dawn movie, so I can legally ogle Jacob the werewolf since he will be at least 18).
Middle-aged men do squeal (or…something) over teenage girls. Entire magazines and industries are founded on that. Think of that Viagra ad with Bob Dole and Britney Spears. That should make someone want to hurl.
I think it’s a bit weird about the Twi-moms and baby Taylor Lautner, but it’s only the role reversal that is causing comment, not the situation. The situation happens all the time.
Comment by Katie P. — November 30, 2009 @ 1:52 pm
You have me halfway convinced, but I have to disagree to some extent. Underage boys ARE vulnerable to older women and our society doesn’t acknowledge it.
An older boy who is sexually abused by a woman is told he is lucky and given a high five. Never mind that he didn’t choose the time, the place or the person to have sex with. He was manipulated and coerced.
Even seventeen year old boys and their bodies should be treated with respect, not as men who are just looking to get laid.
Comment by jks — November 30, 2009 @ 2:24 pm
I suspect that most FMHers are reading and enjoying the Twilight series, which is why I can’t remember reading much about the unfortunate and uniquely sexist nature of the books. If a man wrote Twilight, New Moon, and the rest, I am sure that these stories would not enjoy the same fan base.
Comment by sam — November 30, 2009 @ 2:26 pm
jks, you’re right of course. It’s a double standard that encourages boys to have sex with as many women as they can get, and doesn’t take seriously the emotional trauma boys may feel at being manipulated into having sex. (are they even “allowed” to feel manipulated into having sex?) We do have to consider the mechanics of these sexual relationships, though - the boys actually have to affirmatively, physically perform to consummate the emotional manipulation - whereas it’s a bit different for girls.
Comment by ECS — November 30, 2009 @ 2:31 pm
sam - ha! as if women writers had a corner on the sexist fiction market. Reminds me this exchange with Jack Nicholson’s character (who writes romantic fiction for women) in “As Good as It Gets”:
Comment by ECS — November 30, 2009 @ 2:34 pm
#4 And that right there shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the male sexual response. *It* is not under conscious control. It never was, never will be. What we do with *it* can and should be under control. But take a male’s ability to decide away (through coercion, drugs, restraint) and *it* can still perform without any conscious input and even *against* conscious input at times.
Comment by Lon — November 30, 2009 @ 3:01 pm
I should add that this is particularly true for teens. And that logic is what is explicitly used by the older female in this case… “See? You want this.”
Comment by Lon — November 30, 2009 @ 3:05 pm
ECS: “[T]here’s definitely something different about middle-aged women squealing over a teen-aged boy than middle aged men squealing over a teen-aged girl.”
So do liberated LDS women see the first as good, clean fun, but the second as simmering immorality, harbinger of infidelity? Attempts to defend this double standard are entirely unconvincing. It reflects the strange mindset that, somehow, immorality only applies to men.
Comment by Dave — November 30, 2009 @ 3:07 pm
I think we have discussed the problematic sexism inherent in the Twilight books here. I believe it was post by Artemis quite a long while back, too lazy right now to look for it. But boiled down, Bella is a passive object of male attention, and Edward is a creepy stalker. But just as with everything in life, it’s not entirely that simple.
I do tend to be a bit snobby about these books/movies which is probably hypocritical of me since I do enjoy myself a good trashy romance novel sometimes, and that is basically what this book is, just aimed toward teenagers with a strong abstinence only message. But there is obviously something in them that strikes a cord with a wide variety of women and girls.
I tend to agree with ECS on the whole that the Twilight Moms are less creepy and predatory than it would be in reverse. Which isn’t to say that boys can’t be prey sometimes to women, but the vast vast vast majority of the time it is the reverse. Maybe sexist, but it’s the truth we live with.
Comment by fMhLisa — November 30, 2009 @ 3:07 pm
ECS: It’s a double standard that encourages boys to have sex with as many women as they can get
I’ve seen several folks argue that it is evolution/nature that encourages males to have sex with as many women as they can get rather than some social double standard.
(Just a random thought — I don’t really have a passionate opinion about that subject)
Comment by Geoff J — November 30, 2009 @ 3:17 pm
Dave - yes, I’m not defending the “standard” - just noticing there is one. I grew out of the stage of lusting after celebrities after my subscription to TigerBeat expired in 1991, but apparently many grown ups never grow up.
I like the story, at least the parts about the actual vampires, werewolves, etc. That said, these books and movies are way too easy of a target. Meaning not only are they are incredibly poorly-written/filmed and fraught with eye-roll inducing melodrama, but also because together they form an empty canvas for all the sexist, classist, racist, etc hobbyhorse themes everyone loves to kvetch about instead of doing actual work (like grading papers. ugh).
Comment by ECS — November 30, 2009 @ 3:18 pm
Geoff - true, true. I guess it’s a question of whether society indulges those natural propensities rather than thwarts them. Which reminds me of my favorite part of the movie when Bella tells Jacob to just stop being a werewolf, and Jacob responds that it’s not a “lifestyle choice”. Ha!
Comment by ECS — November 30, 2009 @ 3:21 pm
I read all the books, and enjoyed them as fluff (sometimes it’s fun to read just read fluff and not have to think too much!). However, I do find the twilight mom phenomenon creepy.
My personal opinion is that it’s a case of bored middle-aged women who want to pretend that they’re still teenagers. It seems odd to me that grown women, LDS women even (or especially?) think that ogling teenage boys is okay. Granted not everyone is doing that, but when I see discussions about how hot whichever character is, and pictures of their bare chests posted on facebook, it’s hard to convince me that it’s purpose is not pornographic.
I’d be pretty mad if my Mister was doing something similar with a partially dressed actress.
(and I know I posted this in the other twilight thread, but I think he makes a good point comparing taylor lautner in NM to Megan fox in transformers shenpawarrior.
Comment by Alliegator — November 30, 2009 @ 3:55 pm
#6 SO TRUE. I literally have a friend who was raped by a girl he barely knew while he was SLEEPING. He woke up in the middle of it… and yes he is a very deep sleeper. Needless to say, NOT ok and NOT his fault (even though his priesthood leadership didn’t see it that way, ugh). Which in turn lead him down a very self distructive route for a while.
I think that any adult swooning over a teenagers is a bit warped. Admiring their looks? Ok, I can see that. Heck I admire pictures of myself at that age! I was so cute and didn’t even have a clue. The panties thing is downright disturbing though.
Comment by April — November 30, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
“We do have to consider the mechanics of these sexual relationships, though - the boys actually have to affirmatively, physically perform to consummate the emotional manipulation - whereas it’s a bit different for girls.”
I think you need to do some more research on sexual abuse. When we are talking about someone older preying on someone younger. Sexual abuse often comes without a lot of physical force for both boys and girls. Sexual abuse can come with orgasm and other physical response for both girls and boys. It is ignorance like what you stated above that hurts the victims of childhood sexual abuse. They feel guilty and they feel like it is their fault. People with attitudes like yours tell them that they could have “stopped it” at any time. They could have said something, they could have done something. And surely if they hadn’t wanted it their bodies wouldn’t have responded in a sexual way so it must be their fault. THIS is the trauma that many victims of sexual abuse (both boys and girls) must deal with.
It takes a boy accepting one gift (or email) that his parents didn’t know about and he is suddenly vulnerable to manipulation from an adult to do as he is told and feel like he doesn’t have anyone to turn to.
Yes, I am talking about 9 year olds and 11 year olds and 13 year olds and 15 year olds and even older, especially if the abuse or grooming started when he was younger.
It is time to STOP telling undereage boys that they wanted it and giving ADULT women a pass on respecting the lines that shouldn’t be crossed when it comes to sexual abuse.
Comment by jks — November 30, 2009 @ 4:02 pm
Dave, #8
I know you asked a question, but I agree with your point entirely. And the adult women swooning over Jacob creep me out. Seriously. Complete double standard. Lusting after a minor is, IMO, immoral,no matter the gender.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — November 30, 2009 @ 4:11 pm
jks, you’re projecting. “Attitudes like mine” are that people should keep their hands to themselves.
Comment by ECS — November 30, 2009 @ 4:11 pm
jks-I absolutely agree.
I think it’s naive to assume that all or even most cases of sexual abuse do not involve some sort of emotional manipulation. Most of the time, rapes don’t just happen to people. It’s not usually someone breaking into your house at night and pinning you down so you can’t fight back. In most cases, the aggressor does something or says something to weaken the victim emotionally, trick them into saying or thinking something that could be twisted later to show that it was really the victim’s fault when, in fact, it was not.
The idea that the victim “must have wanted/liked/encouraged it” because they didn’t assertively prevent it from happening is a damaging idea that continues to plague both men and women with undeserved guilt and self-loathing.
Sorry. Just had to throw my two cents in.
The older woman who confronts an underage boy in a sexual way, as with the panties lady, is offensive to me. Similarly, if a strange man, even a man my age, asked me to sign his boxers, I would be offended. People are people and shouldn’t just be reduced to “eye candy” that doesn’t have any feelings.
Comment by AllieKay — November 30, 2009 @ 4:20 pm
ECS, these women crack me up. Seriously, I just sit back and think, well ya he has a nice body, but really…. is something missing in your life that a 17 year old gives you… well…makes you crazy enough to pull off your underwear?
Don’t get me wrong, he worked hard for that body, and he looks good on screen, but… but… but… really? Underwear? Teenage daughter? Mom’s gone crazy…
(fyi, I love the books and have seen both movies, still a sane 31 year old that keeps her underwear on… of course, it would be weird to say “Hey Taylor, sign these grannie panties…”
)
Comment by Sunshine — November 30, 2009 @ 4:36 pm
“Hey Taylor, sign these grannie panties…”
LOL
Comment by AllieKay — November 30, 2009 @ 4:51 pm
I just watched Twilight a few days ago, and will be watching New Moon tomorrow with my daughter. I’ve decided I’m on Team Alice, because she’s just adorable (the character and the actress playing her) and Bella is just annoying. I’ve read the books, and will watch the movies, but I’m not sure I’ll do either more than twice. I see what the people who love the series love about it, and I see what the people who hate the series hate about it. They’re both right, but I don’t love or hate it. New Moon was the worst book in the series, so I expect it could be the worst film in the series as well. But I’ve loved Dakota Fanning since she was on CSI, right before she was in I Am Sam, so I would tend to watch this anyhow.
4 — Seconding jks here. Male rape victims do not have to cooperate or wish to cooperate in any fashion to be raped. Force, coercion and manipulation can be brought to play in ways that would be very familiar to female sexual assault survivors. The differences in experiences between male and females who have experienced sexual assaults exist, but aren’t as fundamental as you seem to want to believe.
And your point about men as predators and women as prey is just way, way, overgeneralized and plays with too many stereotypes. Would it be okay for me to be lusting after my EQPs fourteen year old daughter who is a black-belt because she could kick my butt without working up a sweat? How about when she’s seventeen? What if she outweighed me and was taller than I am?
I don’t think any of it would be okay, and I think the lustiness about minor characters is creepy. And I don’t care for the most manifest case of the double standard I can think of — Mary Kay Letourneau, and all the women who thought it was so sweet and romantic the way she got pregnant (twice) by the student she started molesting when he was 13.
Comment by Blain — November 30, 2009 @ 5:27 pm
I think it is really disgusting that women are acting in this boorish and disrespectful manner. The poor boy is being objectified and that is excuseless on the part of the women. Lusting after him in their hearts is a sin irrespective of whether they are actually contemplating how to force themselves upon him. He is just a boy!
Comment by StillConfused — November 30, 2009 @ 5:30 pm
nope its creepy. Some of the gals I know who go on and on about how hot Taylor is have boys his age and would be livid if I asked their sons to sign my undies. Its a gross and weird and in no way more acceptable. He looks like a kid to me and I am only 32. When I look at teenage boys, I think of my sons in 10 years, not exactly a sexual image. ewww.
Comment by ..just call me cassandra — November 30, 2009 @ 5:34 pm
How can women tell men it’s not okay to objectify us, if we then justify us objectifying them?
How can we say-the boy is not totally innocent and the victim in a rape if we want that said wehn we are the victim? What if our bodies do respond? Does that make us less the victim? Should a guy feel guilty becasue he responded? Should a guy feel guilty because he didn’t hit a girl, or fight her off-when he may have been totally shocked!?
How can we justify focusing SO muich on the Jacob’s abs, then demand men give us a break about our bodies?
I have this awful image in my mind of a man taking off his underwear for someone to sign…YUCKO.
I’m not talking here about noticing the guy has a good looking stomach, but the 388 thoughts after that, the third poster, the panties…good heavens. I get noticing something beautiful, I don’t get not having the maturity to then look away. Watch the movie, but then if you rival stephanie meyers in adjective use describing his rock hard abs, statuesque, blah blah blah blah.. ya get a day job.
Grown ups need to be grown ups…either way. Don’t prey on children, it’s disgusting. Don’t oogle them, don’t focus on attraction and looks…it’s time to move on to something lasting like love with someone your own age.
The books themselves…brain candy. The first movie was hilarious in all the wrong places…the make up, the special effects, the drama. Again it was a popcorn movie. It’s the fans that make it disgusting.
Comment by britt — November 30, 2009 @ 5:49 pm
Yesterday our Stake President spoke to the men and women in a combined meeting about pornography again. This time however, it was pointed out that women are having a problem with it too. I couldn’t help but wonder if New Moon was being lumped in as part of that problem.
Comment by Cindy — November 30, 2009 @ 6:03 pm
Harmless? Perhaps. But SUPER LAME? Definitely.
Comment by Lupita — November 30, 2009 @ 6:44 pm
I think that’s a pretty good summary
Comment by Stephanie — November 30, 2009 @ 7:35 pm
I thoroughly enjoy the Twilight series as fluff as well. I am not ashamed to admit that I enjoy the shirtless boys, either. I would never act on it, but find nothing wrong in appreciating a nice physique on a young man. It’s a shirtless teenage actor, people. I don’t think that qualifies me as a sex offender and think the word “prey” is a bit of an exaggeration.
Finally, let’s keep some perspective on what the vast majority of grown women are doing here. They aren’t throwing themselves at this kid, they are admiring a very nearly adult male body that has been built up to look adult (that’s the story line in the book, too. He’s supposed to age super fast and be the equivalent of a 25 year-old man). It’s this kind of overreaction that makes people roll their eyes at legitimate criticisms of the hyper-sexualization of media
Attack at will.
Comment by Eris — November 30, 2009 @ 9:14 pm
Eris, I think there’s a difference between oogling the character/actor in a film (all good fun) and an adult woman oogling a teen boy in person.
Although, you know, that mom was probably just being silly and having fun for her daughter’s benefit. I sometimes do silly juvenile things to have fun with my kids (but nothing like taking off my panties, er Gs, for an autograph).
Comment by Stephanie — November 30, 2009 @ 10:32 pm
Oh yeah, I can see it now. Hey kid, wanna sign my sacred Mormon underwear? Huba Huba!
Comment by fMhLisa — November 30, 2009 @ 10:54 pm
Just tell them you have a really long name.
Comment by Derek — November 30, 2009 @ 11:00 pm
i would likely guess that she was just having fun as well. And again, I say we should make sure to note that this is one woman and the rest of us ooglers have been perfectly sane in our behavior.
Derek: Classic.
Comment by Eris — November 30, 2009 @ 11:06 pm
#28, I don’t want to “attack” at all. Especially because I appreciate your contributions so much.
But.
There is some sort of mental block in my mind that will not allow me to think of an underaged boy (no matter how old he LOOKS) in sexual ways. I would hope that other decent folks would do the same.
One of my teen daughterS (barely 14) has a beautiful physique -one of a full grown (very in-shape) woman. I hate the thought of men excusing their inapproptiate lustful thoughts about her just because she looks much older.
I dunno - a minor is a minor. And there are plenty of good looking adults if you’re into that kind of thing. Personally, I’m a married woman who feels that sexual thoughts (or at least dwellings - we can’t exactly control every little thought that pops in our head) about anyone other than my husband is unfaithful. But, if I were single, I would feel creepy to be thinking anything lustful about a minor. It just feels wrong on so many levels.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — November 30, 2009 @ 11:19 pm
If you’re old enough to be his mom, (or her dad) that’s just icky.
Comment by wistfulblue — December 1, 2009 @ 12:02 am
So, regardless of what roles they play, and no matter what goes on, to you, women will always be the prey and men will always the predators. That is some serious BS.
Men ogling teenage girls are predators, OK. But, older women ogling a shirtless teenage boy are not prey, that’s ridiculous.
Comment by Manuel — December 1, 2009 @ 12:08 am
By the way, I am loving the Twilight Mom phenomenon. It’s actual proof of what I have known all along. Women are just like men.
So men have been demonized and vilified for being so “superficial,” “perverse,” for treating women as “sex toys.” Poor women, they have to work so hard to look good for the superficial pigs…er men. But we can see it is all the same with the much more “rational,” and much more “reserved,” and much more “mature” women huh.
A buff shirtless man (boy or whatever) and they go nuts. It’s ok, it is not pathetic. That is possibly what humans like due to their biological needs: a shape that looks healthy, sexually attractive and fertile. Women just need to stop being hypocrites and learn that when it comes to sex and physical attraction, they want the same things men do.
Don’t worry women, we, the men, have known all along… and for the record, it is not wrong. In an obesity riddled society, it is only natural that humanity is trying to survive, trying to mate with the genetic profiles that will make the human race last longer.
Comment by Manuel — December 1, 2009 @ 12:23 am
LawyerLady,
No “attack” perceived and I can understand the sentiment. As a girl who looked full-grown at age 13, I sympathize with your concerns. But I remain unconvinced that it is inappropriate for me to enjoy the physical appearance of a 16 year-old actor who engaged in a full year’s worth of hard work to look like a full-grown man.
Further, and this may be a bit of a thread-jack, I can’t commit to the “any lusting is unfaithful” argument. I think it is unreasonable to ask living, breathing, sexual beings - which we all are - to refuse to acknowledge physical beauty. I don’t feel creepy at all saying that the human body is attractive and that I appreciate it; both male and female.
Finally, a quick question for those arguing if you’re old enough to be their parent, it’s creepy: when does that rule break down? Lots of people marry someone who would fit that description. I am related to quite a few of them. In fact, my parents have the same age difference as I do with Taylor Lautner. So in 1 year will it no longer be creepy because he is 18, or is it going to be wrong forever (not that I’m asking for any practical or long-term planning; just curious)?
Comment by Eris — December 1, 2009 @ 12:34 am
Hey ECS and Geoff,
#10
Wait…do we accept that there is some male thing that evolution has programmed into men to be more promiscuous than women? Is that science really? Or is it just a stereo type of human behaviour that science tries to explain?
I know you (Geoff) said you didn’t feel strongly, but really, why do we hands down accept that it’s fact that men have an evolutionary reason to have sex with as many women as they can get? This is JUST a theory about human behavior and evolution, but it is merely a theory.
The support for the theory I have always heard is that men are capable of spreading more seed more quickly than women are. But that doesn’t mean that evolution has encouraged them to do so. I mean I have also been fed the theory that women are attracted to strong men for evolutionary reasons (they are good protectors and suppliers) but why would women be programmed to go for the strong guys if the guys are not programmed to stay with and protect/feed the family? You know, cause they gotta be off dropping seed to all the women they can?
Women also can desire multiple partners etc. I think it’s a society thing and a conditioning thing in how we think. I don’t think monogomy is anymore easy for us girls than it is for men if we choose to feed our lusts elsewhere.
I am just saying, I am suprised that everyone here just accepts the theory that men are wired that way.
Comment by Zaissa — December 1, 2009 @ 12:37 am
Eris, yes it becomes less creepy when a child becomes a legal adult.
Can we just let kids be kids? When a girl is screaming for a 17 year old heart-throb she is more likely to want to go out on a date and maybe kiss him. She wants to imagine him being her boyfriend. I think that the 17 year old kid can handle that.
Asking him to handle adult women and their panties is a little much. Asking him to handle even more than that and not taking his age into consideration is wrong.
I just think that 17 year old girls and 17 year old boys should not be treated as sex objects just because they are in a movie and they are good-looking.
Comment by jks — December 1, 2009 @ 12:49 am
jks, I guess my biggest problem with this discussion is the generalization from one crazed woman (and yes, I understand there are probably a few more) to then saying that any enjoyment on the part of middle-aged women is inappropriate.
I am also constantly amazed at our dependence on the chronological age of a person in discussions such as these. I think it ridiculous to argue that 17 year olds as sex objects is not ok, but 18 year olds are. I don’t know how else to make the legal distinction, but in questions such as this it seems less helpful.
Again, please don’t misread me to be approving of truly inappropriate behavior (of which I would include physical contact of any kind and the giving of underthings). But blanket condemnation of women enjoying a movie feels excessive.
Comment by Eris — December 1, 2009 @ 1:55 am
I am not ashamed to admit that I enjoy a good shirtless woman. I would never act on it, but find nothing wrong in appreciating a nice and shapely physique on a young woman. She’s just a shirtless actress/model, people.
/sarcasm
I’m not bothered by the twilight phenomenon, but I am bothered by the clear double standards. In the OP:
You’ve described most of my male friends who frequent strip clubs. Not predatory, not going to act on anything, but yes, pathetic. And the idea that men are much, much more likely to be predatory? It’s hard to see that gulf when many of the latest reports of sexual exploitation here in Utah involve female teachers taking advantage of young male students.
Again, have fun and enjoy the shows. But do not dismiss your behaviour as pathetic, while males doing the same thing are scary and predatory. Show some consistency.
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs51/f/2009/329/a/6/Twilight_Moms_by_InLoveWitEdwardC.jpg
Comment by mahuph — December 1, 2009 @ 1:56 am
wow, I can’t believe this is post is on FMH. Was it tongue in cheek? Many people have already pointed out the double standard…but come on. Women fawning over teenage boys is ok? Men are always predators women are prey? Seriously??? This has to be a joke. I have to agree with mahuph and Manuel and jks and Lawyer Lady…there is a blatant double standard here and its totally pathetic.
Eris, this is your justification? Really? Replace male with female and have a man say it and you would all be (rightly) condemning him for being a creep that likes teenage girls. My 15 year old sister and her friends easily look like adults, that doesn’t make it ok for adults to oogle them and flirt with them. And no one is condemning women enjoying the movie - they are condemning women for enjoying the bare chest of a teenage boy.
I see this double standard in other stuff as well - like in Glee one of the HS students is constantly having sex with “moms”. I think it is playing into the fantasies of the women watching the show, and I think its gross.
Comment by julie — December 1, 2009 @ 3:15 am
#24 - Britt :
Thank you very much. As the parent to both a daughter AND a son, I try to be very careful about not judging anyone purely on their physique. You never know just WHAT is going to stick in a child’s head.
When I worked in a toy store, I read an article about how people get so upset about how Barbie’s have unrealistic proportions, but nobody complains about the male action figures giving boys unrealistic ideals. It’s stuck with me nearly 10 years later, and affects how I relate to a lot of things.
That said, we were in a book store with my 55yo MIL last week, and she said to my 11yo daughter, “Don’t you think Jacob is just dreamy?” Not 2 seconds later my 7yo son saw a large stack of Twilight merchandise. He says “MORE TWILIGHT! Do people really buy this junk?!” and just kept walking…I kept most of the laughter on the inside.
My daughter has no idea who Jacob is, so was trying to figure out who her married grandmother had a crush on, if not her grandfather. Weird!
Comment by Eryn — December 1, 2009 @ 3:55 am
Eris, it is and will still be as creepy for older women to be “ogling” Taylor Lautner when he becomes a legal adult. Less legally messy, but just as creepy. Turning 18 only makes him an adult in the legal sense- and only partway, because there are still some laws that will apply until he’s 21, and others until he’s 25. As far as brain development goes, 25 is when he’ll properly be an adult. Socially speaking, there technically isn’t a line with creepy on one side and acceptable on the other, but we all know it’s there… and older women sexually objectifying a boy, no matter how hard he worked to get an “adult body” is definitely on the creepy side.
Comment by Chiasma — December 1, 2009 @ 4:15 am
37 — Lusting is not just noticing that someone is attractive. Lusting goes well beyond that. I just watched Faith Hill’s Christmas concert from last year, and I noticed that she’s stunningly beautiful. If I were lusting, I would be focusing on her body parts and deciding what I would like to be doing with them. The difference between the two is non-subtle. You can argue with Jesus about the difference between looking on someone to lust after them and committing adultery with them in your heart — he didn’t exactly stutter on the point.
Comment by Blain — December 1, 2009 @ 5:19 am
Saw the movie. It was frustrating to watch and listen to most of the dialogue, but I kept watching because the story was a little bit interesting.
I didn’t think the men/boys were really sexualized all that much. They had their shirts off and were all muscles, but the camera didn’t linger on them. Now that I think about it I’m not even sure I saw a nipple… if I did it was only a quick flash! Of course I wasn’t paying close attention, so maybe women actually noticed these things more.
Comment by sam — December 1, 2009 @ 7:38 am
I have to agree with Blain. Merely noticing or appreciating attractiveness isn’t the same as lust. While I certainly noticed the shirtless New Moon men as being nicely built, that’s where it ended for me. I was amused in the theater when the young ladies were screaming every time Taylor Lautner appeared (I can remember doing the same over some of my favorite rock stars at concerts, when I was a young thing)…but not as amused by the older female fans asking to have him sign their underwear. That’s just inappropriate and should not even be in the mind of a mature woman. It’s easy enough to grasp that if the woman in question would appreciate her girlfriend asking her own teenage son to sign her underwear. Yuck, yuck and more yuck.
Early in the series, I visited the Twilight moms website, figuring that there would be a different sort of discussion about the books- the story line etc. Instead, I was discouraged that it seemed I’d stumbled upon a majority of women who are having some trouble growing up. I understand revisiting and identifying with the emotional upheaval of youth and first love (I felt some of that myself while reading the series), but engaging in the fantasy that is more appropriate to the teen level just turned me off. I was far more interested in the psychology of it and how it would play into some good discussions with my girls in YW and at home.
Comment by Kimberly — December 1, 2009 @ 8:30 am
If this is truly a new “trend” or whatever, I find it disturbing. I don’t know anything about Glee, but I’ve enjoyed a few high school movies that remind me of my teen days - when I was a teen. The idea of grown women lusting after teens is very disturbing and predatory. Just as I don’t want my daughter growing up with men lusting after her, I don’t want my sons growing up with women lusting after them either. Let’s just let them be kids.
I guess I just haven’t been in the loop about the “Twilight Moms”. That picture linked to in #41 is just too much.
Comment by Stephanie — December 1, 2009 @ 9:24 am
EWWW…we are women!! we get the rights to be just as gross as men. BUT, we are weak so it’s okay, we promise we won’t hurt you, and it can’t be as gross as men because we’re so weak a delicate. You’re so strong and argasmic you’ll enjoy it anyway. We’ll just treat you like a piece of meat. You don’t mind you thing do you [bats eyelashes]?
I don’t care how innocent a 30+ yo man is. I don’t care how much he swears up and down he would never act on it and is just admiring beauty. If I caught him looking at my matured 13 yo I would have a strong desire to castrate him. If I saw a woman looking at my son I would have a similar desire.
I do think we (the larger we) need to grow up and understand beauty and love. At some point beautiful is that your man is a great cook, or does the dishes or is so great with the children…not just his body. At some point self control and respect and determination are beautiful. Should he be healthy, yes, but I don’t think my husband has the time to get his six pack back…i don’t want him in the gym that much, we have real things that we need to do. If we raise children to think beauty is skin deep we may find them marrying a disgusting person who photographs well-but hey as long as their attracted to them right? Do we clap longer for abs man then for a great teacher? Do we pay more to see a pretty face then to support a great person working for an amazing cause?
“Normal” people who justify oogling allow perverts to feel more justified in their actions.
For me it’s not so much New Moon, i don’t think it’s this crazy over sexualized movie. It’s just made this aspect of our societal attitude towards relationships and people come into focus.
Comment by britt — December 1, 2009 @ 9:53 am
I realize that this post may trigger thoughts about sexual abuse, and I’m sincerely sorry for the pain that sexual abuse causes so many women and men (including some of you reading this). This is a separate issue, however, and so (SO) far from my meaning in this post. Let me say this, the only “harm” caused by 40 year old women waving their panties around is to say that 40 year old women waving their panties around is sexual abuse.
Some of these comments make me think of the line, “The Lady doth protest too much, methinks”. Taylor Lautner is a beautiful boy, and I hope he has family and friends who love and support him through this heady time of werewolves and vampires. That is all.
Comment by ECS — December 1, 2009 @ 10:10 am
I think grown women acting like fools over teenage boys is just as Lisa described- pathetic. Could their interest be predatory? Maybe. I’m thinking of some of the cases where older women have run off with boys- like the teacher who had two children by her student, which I found every bit as revolting as I would any reversal of genders. Maybe moreso, since I think I have an internal bias of believing women should protect children. (Which is sexist of me to think we women have a greater responsibility to do so.)
When I was in high school, there was a female teacher who flirted with the handsome boys in our class. I thought it was beneath her dignity and professionalism, personally. The boys exploited it pretty shamelessly, though and they loved to act as if they found her attractive if it got them an extension on an assignment or a better grade. It was really obvious that the male gym teacher at school was a total perv…not appreciating beauty at all, but leering in a way that made every female feel undressed. He was an ick factor 10.
I guess it’s all part of the same issue on a wide spectrum…I just cannot imagine what would posess a supposedly mature woman of 40 to present her underwear for signing to a teenage boy- or a grown man, for that matter. It’s just inappropriate at any age level, really, but downright disgusting in a woman of an age to know better.
Comment by Kimberly — December 1, 2009 @ 10:54 am
“The Lady doth protest too much, methinks”. That made me laugh, ECS. And I’m pretty sure I know what you mean. Still chuckling…
I also can see that your post had zero to do with child sexual abuse. But, I do stand by my opinion that a middle age woman swooning over a boy is just, well, weird. And it disturbs me.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 1, 2009 @ 11:42 am
I guess I am taking the largest beating here, so I will address the main points I have heard. First, I am talking about a 17 year-old young man here, not a 13 year-kid. That is a HUGE difference! At 13, I looked much older and yes, it would be creepy for a grown man to oogle me. At 17… let me see….. I was dating the man I would eventually marry (and he was 23). I see the difference between 13 and 17 and am surprised so many others do not (or assume I don’t).
Once AGAIN, let me say that the behavior of a very few grown women who do not know how to control themselves is not representative of the many of us who go to a movie and see a very attractive young man and enjoy it. To pin that kind of behavior on everyone over 22 who goes to this movie or admits to giggling at those werewolves is just unfair.
Finally, I think many of the comments here are engaging in a slippery slope fallacy. Just because I cop to thinking Taylor Lautner is hot doesn’t mean I am “lusting” or “imagining what I would do with him” or going to throw my panties at him. And it certainly doesn’t make me “pathetic” or a pedophile. These types of arguments, to me, seem to diminish the horror of true acts of pedophilia and inappropriate sexual aggression between adults in positions of power and young people.
There is a debate about whether the phenomenon is silly. I’d love to have it and I will happily defend my enjoyment of this ridiculous series. But we are lacking in perspective in this discussion.
Comment by Eris — December 1, 2009 @ 12:22 pm
Looks like there has been a lot of discussion about the objectification/sexualization aspect of this, and that’s certainly an important one. I wonder if there has been any thought as to the body image issue aspect? Many people condemn the constant bombardment of very specific and frequently unrealistic body images on our young women by the media. It is claimed (rightly, I believe) that this cultural prescription of very specific body types and actions–and the response to these body types by men–contributes to an increasingly negative self-image among women who don’t fit that certain body type. Isn’t this phenomenon of glorifying the young, hairless (except in werewolf form, I suppose) men with well-developed biceps, abs, and glutes doing the same thing to men? Is that acceptable, or is this well deserved payback?
Comment by Derek — December 1, 2009 @ 12:36 pm
Eris,
I happen to agree with almost everything you say here. And I’d be pretty pissed if someone was insinuating that I was anything like a pedophile as well. I think the context of this debate has slowly drifted into off-topic subjects (as often happens) such as sexual abuse and pedophilia. And you are more than right that a woman “appreciating” a 17 year-old boy’s physique should not be equated to those things.
Here’s my (hopefully balanced) take, though. I saw the movie too. I’m not blind and I’m not devoid of judgment so, of course, I saw Taylor and noticed he was in great shape. And I’m sure I even had the thought, “Wow, that kid has really worked out since the last movie”. I heard all of the gals (not sure if it was just the teenagers or if moms were included) oohing and aahing and it made me giggle. But then that was it.
I think when you use the term “hot” to describe him, that is where I cringe just a bit. “Hot” just connotes something more than mere observation and acknowledgement, IMO. Would you be okay if Bella was in a mini-skirt and very revealing blouse and your husband thought she was hot? If your answer is “yes”, then we’re just very different in this regard.
Look, I’ve been reading your comments for a very long time on this sight and I have never gotten the impression that you are anything but a decent, smart, kind, person who also seems to be a dedicated wife and mother. So, I am certainly not saying anything about your character here. I’m obviously not privy to your thoughts, but the use of the word “hot”, just gives me a little different impression of your thought processes in this regard, rightly or wrongly.
And, a lot of folks aren’t really directing their disapproval at you, specifically, but just to some of the more extreme behaviors that (at least in these parts) are running rampant among many middle-aged women. And many of those attitudes and behaviors ARE pathetic and disgusting. I’ve just never been a fan of double standards and I really think that if most or all of the men in a movie audience audibly responded to a 17 year old girl who showed some skin, we’d get a little (or a lot) uncomfortable and cry “perv!” Again, why is it okay for women but not men? I simply don’t get it.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 1, 2009 @ 12:47 pm
Hmm…
So, I confess that about 85 percent of the reason that I bothered to see New Moon was Taylor Lautner. Granted, I’m 22 and single, so its not quite the same…
So, certainly some of the Twilight moms are out of control. Especially the woman who wanted to have Taylor Lautner sign her underwear. That’s just pathetic…. but it would be pathetic no matter how old he were.
That said, I don’t know that there is anything all that wrong with appreciating someone who looks REALLY good - male or female. Taylor Lautner definitely still looks young, but he doesn’t look like a kid. He’s in that window, between late teens and mid-twenties, where most people look their best. it’s definitely in our nature to think that young, physically fit people are sexually attractive, because, well, they are. The same is true for attractive, sexually mature young women.
While objectification of others is never a good thing, I don’t think we should pretend that our attraction to people who look really good is unnatural or creepy. As long as there are appropriate boundaries for our application of attractiveness, I think it is, for the most part, harmless, no matter the person’s gender.
Comment by Megan — December 1, 2009 @ 1:03 pm
I think beautiful bodies, whether male or female, will always be praised. And they will always continue to be the central characters of fantasty storylines. This is what humans like to fantasize about because this is what humans like and are attracted to, it’s pretty much innevitable.
This is a lesson to be learned. The Twilight Mom phenomenon is interesting because it exposes this very fact, what many conservative women would like to deny. They are attracted to the young, healthy, in shape, alpha male types of bodies, and this attraction is an important part of their sexuality. This isn’t just a “few crazy immature women who failed to grow up.” The movie has generated record breaking revenues fueled in great part by the money of these older women.
The double standard is undeniable. Can you imagine if there were online clubs of older men dedicated to “admiring” the body of Miley Cirus (whom I believe is also 17), and if large masses of older men piled up to get a glimpse of her? (I cannot think of another teenage girl with comparable celebrity status). All these women that defend their “not lustful at all” admiration of a teenager’s physique would be outraged.
Women loudly complain about the bombardment of unrealistic female Barbie doll like images and their negative effects on women’s self esteem. Men don’t complain as much, but a similar phenomenon occurs for them.
As men, we grow up with the same stigma. We see women throwing themselves at the good looking guys in high school, the quarterback, the bad-ass popular kid, the guy with daddy’s car, etc etc etc. We hear of how hot Brad Pitt is, we are bombarded with images like Superman, a handsome muscular blue eyed 6′6″ superstrong flying man clad in spandex with his bulging red underwear over his blue tights. Or who can forget He-Man and his naked muscular body covered only by a loin cloth and a metallic chest strap?
These images definitely have an impact on the minds of the young. Girls are affected with eating disorders while more and more boys try steroids. They do so to live up to the expectations this media figures create for them.
I think there is a primal responsibility while raising the young, to let them know what is real, what is beautiful, what is attainable, and teach them how to obtain it. I don’t think beauty is out of the reach of anyone. But it has to be attained the right way. And it has to be taught the right way. Living in denial that beauty is not important, or that it can only consist of non-physical aspects, is the first mistake some parents make, and the first sign for their children to think to themselves “ok, mom and dad are clueless, thus their opinion on this matter is useless.”
Being in denial of what women and men are attracted to is what’s wrong. And telling children that these images aren’t important is pretentious. Rather, we must create a positive with what we have. If young men and women are inevitably influenced by these icons, nothing will stop them from trying to emulate them or look like them. We must acknowledge them and guide them in doing so in a healthy way.
It’s time for women to stop demonizing men who want their wives to look good, and who think Angelina Jolie is an icon of female beauty. Because for every man who lusts after Angelina, there may be a woman who lusts after Brad Pitt.
If the wife longs for a man in shape, why can’t the husband make an effort to get in shape? If the husband wants a wife in shape, why should that be wrong? or why should that be unfair?
It’s time for all to get in shape, increase their self esteem, enjoy being with each other and stop the endless overly defensive attitudes that people must like us flab and all. They don’t have to like us, and we can do something about it.
Comment by Manuel — December 1, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
50 — I don’t know that I’d go so far as calling it sexual abuse, but I would say it’s inappropriate sexual behavior with a minor. It’s not illegal, but it’s wrong.
53 — My major participation in the sexual abuse aspect of this thread has been to address some belief problems I’ve seen that unintentionally support the sexualization and sexual abuse of children. I’ve spent too much time with child sexual assault survivors, and sexually aggressive youth, to watch those things go by unchallenged. As with almost everything else I’ve seen linked to gender, there are some differences between men and women, some of which might be socialized and some of which might not, but there are also significant similarities between the genders. I am not a fan of the idea that gender alone makes someone a predator or prey, nor am I a fan of the beliefs that minimize the suffering of male victims of abuse and the culpability of their abusers. That is pretty much where I’m at with that part of the thread. I recognize it’s an OT thread, but that’s life in the blogosphere — threads go where they want to.
I do not have a problem with grown women enjoying these stories, and I don’t think every grown woman who does is using this as in a pornographic fashion. I do think it’s worth pointing out that some women are using this in a pornographic fashion, and that that is dangerous. Lust hits are very exciting, and pornography addiction is not a small problem, nor are its impacts minor. Too many female porn/sex addicts have to push against the belief system I mentioned above, which make it harder for them to receive help when they seek it.
So, again, I would oppose those who say all Twilight moms are creepy, lusting or addicted. But I would say that those who are are something to be concerned about, and would discourage people from saying things that collude with their denial.
Comment by Blain — December 1, 2009 @ 1:24 pm
Lawyer Lady, perhaps “hot” does connote something more than I meant. I do not believe it means more than “very attractive” or “super-duper good looking” but that’s my understanding of the term.
In this case, I mean it in the sense of “Wow. That is a very attractive human being and I enjoy looking at him. In fact, I will pay $6.75 to see a movie with him in it.” I don’t know what other term to use, but am willing to accept suggestions.
Comment by Eris — December 1, 2009 @ 1:40 pm
But Eris you haven’t gone on and on about his body. I doubt you have posters up in your room or have bought eau de twilight.
I was more surprised with the double standard aspect of your post, then thinking you were lusting after him.
Comment by britt — December 1, 2009 @ 1:48 pm
Eris,
As often happens, it looks like we’re actually pretty close in our thinking on this subject. Darn semantics confusing things again! I’ve always thought “hot” was more along the lines of “sexy”. And then, “sexy”, having “sex” as it’s root, just brings on a whole other meaning.
I am getting pretty old, though, so who knows?. I remember my Dad using the word “foxy” when I was a teen and I died laughing. He was talking about Stevie Nicks, so I assume it was somewhere along the lines of “hot”, too.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 1, 2009 @ 1:51 pm
I think of it this way “The 42 year old ____ leered at the 16 year old ______ and hooted and cheered when ____ took ____ clothes off.” It is is icky no matter what gender terms fill in that gap. If it is a 42 yr old man, cheering at a nude (or at least partially) teen age boy it is bad, if it is a 42 yr old woman hooting and making catcalls at a 16 yr old girl is is bad.
Comment by Jenny — December 1, 2009 @ 4:39 pm
Britt, could you please point out my support of a double-standard here? I don’t remember saying it was ok for women but not men. I’ve said a lot, so it may have slipped out accidentally, but I doubt it.
Lawyer Lady, I guess it may be closer to “sexy” but I don’t connote “hot” with “sex.” But Stevie Nicks? She is definitely foxy!
Comment by Eris — December 1, 2009 @ 5:23 pm
I can’t believe I’m actually agreeing with Blain and sam and britt ;), but seriously, I’m very surprised to see a post supporting a double sexist standard on a feminist site (sexual abuse discussion aside). Is this tongue-in-cheek, E?
This is my bottom line, too:
I’m comparing this situation to the furor over the Liebowitz photo of Miley Cyrus. Remember that?
Oh, and yes to Derek’s #54.
Comment by Chandelle — December 1, 2009 @ 6:32 pm
But you already know how I feel about it, from Facebook.
Comment by Chandelle — December 1, 2009 @ 6:34 pm
Oh, AND I spelled Leibowitz wrong. :::sigh::: I give up already.
Comment by Chandelle — December 1, 2009 @ 6:35 pm
UFTDA!!!!
guess who’s on the cover of my brand new Rolling Stone magazine?
all sexified too. if he’s only 17, i think his parents ought to be ashamed.
yeesh.
Comment by mfranti — December 1, 2009 @ 6:37 pm
Embarrasing admission; I’m not sure if I’m squicked out by the new moon and twilight boys because they’re just kids or because I simply find them deeply unattractive. Eeeeech, that Rolling Stones cover. I highly recommend folding the magazine in half.
Comment by djinn — December 1, 2009 @ 7:15 pm
—-This to me is all double standard stuff….
Regardless, there’s definitely something different about middle-aged women squealing over a teen-aged boy than middle aged men squealing over a teen-aged girl.
* First of all, (real) men don’t squeal*.
* Second of all, the disgust over middle-aged men lusting after young girls is probably motivated by middle-aged men being much (MUCH) more likely to act out as sexual predators than middle-aged women.
* Third of all, there’s something uniquely vulnerable about a half-naked young girl. There’s nothing vulnerable at all about a half-naked seventeen year old boy proudly displaying his powerful biceps and huge, um, ego. Naked women are prey, naked men are the predators.
The 40 year old women ripping their panties off and begging Taylor Lautner to sign them are offering themselves up as prey. Which is pathetic, not predatory. So I say don’t get your knickers in too much of a twist over the Twilight Moms, they may be ridiculous, but they’re harmless.
Comment by britt — December 1, 2009 @ 7:18 pm
Comment by ECS — December 1, 2009 @ 7:27 pm
djinn, I don’t get it either. I’m only a few years older than this Taylor kid, but that’s exactly what he looks like to me - a kid. I really don’t get the attraction. But then, I’m much more attracted to brains than brawn.
Comment by Chandelle — December 1, 2009 @ 7:34 pm
genie, i’ll be ripping the RS cover off the magazine. I have to do that often with RS. don’t they know i only read them for the articles?
Comment by mfranti — December 1, 2009 @ 7:35 pm
OH dh just walked in the house and saw the cover and said: do you think it would be ok if that was a 17 year old girl on the cover in that pose?
Comment by mfranti — December 1, 2009 @ 7:36 pm
do you think it would be ok if that was a 17 year old girl on the cover in that pose?
Exactly - that’s why I referenced that photo of Miley Cyrus.
Comment by Chandelle — December 1, 2009 @ 7:42 pm
Right or wrong, actors are commodity where much money is invested in marketing them, frequently as sex symbols.
Celebrities have participated in using underwear(or the lack of them) as a marketing tool.
The movie was shot in Vancouver. The age of consent in Canada, I believe, is 16. A 17 year old actor on location could legally have consensual sex with all the 80 year old perverts he or she wants. (Have any of you seen Harold and Maude?)
There is a certain segment of a certain industry built on the concept of barely legal.
Comment by Suzanne Neilsen — December 1, 2009 @ 8:32 pm
63 — In the usages I’ve seen, “hot” definitely has a sexual undertone to it. As in “makes me hot and bothered.” FWIW
64 — I hope agreement with me wasn’t too traumatic. I’m sure will be disagreeing again soon.
Comment by Blain — December 1, 2009 @ 11:30 pm
Point of order, britt, those were not my comments. I am Eris not ECS.
Comment by Eris — December 2, 2009 @ 1:12 am
Blain, good point. Although I don’t believe I have ever uttered the phrase “hot and bothered” so I claim innocence there.
And wasn’t Miley Cyrus 15 when she did that Liebowitz shoot? 15 seems a little young for topless.
As for RS, he’s wearing a wet t-shirt and holding a football, right? I think a wet t-shirt on a teenage girl would be too much.
Comment by Eris — December 2, 2009 @ 1:16 am
I have to point out, though, Suzanne (#75) that I believe Harold was 20.
Comment by Lorian — December 2, 2009 @ 1:23 am
And Bud Cort was 23 at the time he made the movie.
Comment by Lorian — December 2, 2009 @ 1:25 am
78 — Innocence accepted, but the sexual connotations remain. At least as something to consider.
Comment by Blain — December 2, 2009 @ 2:52 am
Hey, I have another question about the “hot and bothered” comment. If I say “hot and bothered” I am describing my state of inner-desire. If I say “that’s hot” as used in popular context, that is describing a state of cool or attractiveness. Doesn’t the current social use of the term “hot” - to use Paris Hilton as my prime defender (that has to be a first on fMh!) - remove some of its sexual connotation.
Comment by Eris — December 2, 2009 @ 8:25 am
You are right Eris…here is where I think the double standard comes out…replace the male with female in your posts…are you okay with men with this attitude? maybe you are…
am not ashamed to admit that I enjoy the shirtless boys, either. I would never act on it, but find nothing wrong in appreciating a nice physique on a young man. It’s a shirtless teenage actor, people. I don’t think that qualifies me as a sex offender and think the word “prey” is a bit of an exaggeration.
Finally, let’s keep some perspective on what the vast majority of grown women are doing here. They aren’t throwing themselves at this kid, they are admiring a very nearly adult male body that has been built up to look adult (that’s the story line in the book, too. He’s supposed to age super fast and be the equivalent of a 25 year-old man). It’s this kind of overreaction that makes people roll their eyes at legitimate criticisms of the hyper-sexualization of media
Comment by britt — December 2, 2009 @ 8:51 am
Britt, I recognize my own words and I don’t have a problem with exactly what I described if it were reversed. I think we take this way, way, way too far and seem to be demanding that everyone walk around pretending that the body is not beautiful and that we are evil for admiring it.
Yes, he is 17. I put that age in a gray area. 13, 14, 15, or 16 would be different. 17, almost 18 even, to me is closer to adulthood than childhood in many ways for many people. Just not as bothersome to me. Again, I come from a long line of early marriers and feel like drawing and arbitrary “this age is ok and grown up, but this one is not” is just not realistic unless you are talking about 14 versus 22.
And once again, I am talking about admiring an attractive body, not engaging in ridiculous behavior.
Comment by Eris — December 2, 2009 @ 11:15 am
82 — I don’t see how you can use the word to describe a person and leave the sexualized portion aside. I don’t recall using the term to describe a person. I also don’t use “sexy” very much. I don’t see a problem with saying “attractive” or “pretty” or “cute” or “nice looking,” I think they speak to a relatively objective understanding of someones appearance. “Hot” or “sexy,” speaks at least as much to the observers internal process and desires, or, perhaps, to the sexual availability they perceive from how the person is presenting themselves.
I watched the movie yesterday, and found Alice, again, to be adorable — I loved the banter between her and Jacob. But I don’t see her in a sexual context because that’s not where I let my head go. Which I’m rather pleased with, actually.
I think the way the film is presented, the women aren’t objectified, which helps. The guys flagrantly were: “Oh, your head is bleeding. Let me take off my shirt.” “Oh, I’m going to step out into the square at noon so I can be killed. Let me take off my shirt.” “I’m a werewolf-guy. We don’t wear no stinking shirts.” My daughter (20) and I just busted out laughing at the first one of those because it was ridiculous. I would rather not see Dakota Fanning or whoever plays Alice in that kind of sexualized setting, and I’m glad I didn’t.
I get the distinction you’re speaking of in 84. I’m pointing to a slightly finer distinction than that. It’s not particularly about double standards — it’s about lust, and avoiding it.
Comment by Blain — December 2, 2009 @ 1:16 pm
Anybody squealing over Twilight needs to read literature and to view true cinematic excellence.
Comment by Origen — December 2, 2009 @ 5:29 pm
Oh please Origen. The books and movies are fluff. And sometimes that is just what we need. I don’t see anyone here claiming them to be the equivalent of Austen or Chabon or Hitchcock or Bergen. They are fun, so don’t ruin it by telling me I have no concept of quality literature or cinema.
Comment by Eris — December 2, 2009 @ 6:02 pm
Blain, glad you liked the movie. I felt this discussion needed more empiricism, so I went to see it again today. I feel much better about contributing to our very scientific discussions here.
And I promise I’m not lusting! Just admiring.
Comment by Eris — December 2, 2009 @ 6:04 pm
I’ve been thinking about this for some time and I have been trying to decide if the middle aged women are doing the same thing as the middle aged men who go googly over a nice body.
How many years have Women, girls, ladies been objectified as sex objects/symbols? Boobs, legs, nether regions, butt….? Pretty sure loads more than a stupid twilight mom asking a boy to sign her panties. (which is still so lame) but to say it’s the same thing… I just can’t wrap my brain around it. It’s just so not ..
And that RS cover is nothing compared to Miley posing topless… see that’s my point… she has to expose skin, her bare back, oh… and maybe is there a little hint at a breast.. and the photo appeared as though she just finished having s*x, with her hair all tousled like that, but Taylor is throwing a football with a wet t-shirt on, showing his large bicep. It didn’t show him in his underwears, on a bed, rolling around in the sheets, hinting at the fact that he had just been doing the naughty with Miley…
Women have it much worse then the men do.
(But honestly let’s face it… women have much prettier, softer body parts than men do so I can see why they like to look at us)
… still, it’s so not the same thing… I think Miley’s parents should be slapped for allowing their much younger daughter, to pose in such a sexual way. Taylor’s eh… until you show me nether region skin it doesn’t even compare. I think these moms are so not doing the same damage… I just can’t see it.
Comment by Sunshine — December 2, 2009 @ 6:06 pm
I am not at all saying it’s the same thing-a woman topless v. a man…but why should we excuse objectifying anyone? Saying women have it worse doesn’t excuse objectifying the guy.
That goes back to the old women should get the right to be as bad as men and get away with it stuff that I detest so much. Why not set a standard for both sexes that does not allow objectifying people?
Eris, I’m not saying new moon in itself is so awful. I’m really not.
I’d just rather not objectify ANYONE at any age. Here we have a legal child being objectified by someone who could be his mom.
I’m not against actual relationships with age differences. It’s virtual starings at for personal pleasure that creep me right on out.
Comment by britt — December 2, 2009 @ 6:40 pm
britt
Isn’t it a function of Hollywood to objectify actors. It maybe inherent in the system of marketing entertainment.
So everyone, which is worse–
Admiring and/or ogling a 15 year old actor who presents as 25, or admiring and/or ogling a 25year old actor who presents as 15?
Comment by Suzanne Neilsen — December 2, 2009 @ 7:59 pm
That’s a good question, Suzanne, that puts it into perspective. It depends on who you are ogling. I said in a previous comment that I don’t think it’s wrong to ogle the character in the movie (25), but I do think it is wrong to go ogle the teenage actor himself. Similarly, I don’t think it would necessarily be wrong to go ogle a 25 year old actor (maybe a bit pathetic, but not wrong), but there definitely would be something wrong (and creepy) about ogling a teenage character in a movie.
So, with Twilight (which I haven’t seen), I’m guessing that the appeal is seeing the fantasy in the book (with an adult character) play out on the screen. I don’t think it makes women pervs who go to the movie and admire that.
Comment by Stephanie — December 2, 2009 @ 8:40 pm
It would be different if the character in the movie is a teen and the moms are fawning all over that. That would be a bit weird.
Did this happen with the first movie? I am guessing not since the character was a scrawnier teen?
Comment by Stephanie — December 2, 2009 @ 8:42 pm
The character in the movie IS a teen. He is 16.
I simply can’t get pleasure out of a shirtless kid. Aside from the fact that we’d be screaming all sorts of nasty accusations at a middle-aged man admitting he enjoyed staring at a 16-17 scantily clad girl (again, double standard), teen boys (even if they’re built just don’t do it for me. But then again, that’s just me…
And, I agree with Chandelle - brains and personality go a lot further with me anyway.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 8:53 pm
I thought someone said he had aged to 25?
Comment by Stephanie — December 2, 2009 @ 8:57 pm
No, I think Suzanne Nielsen was just posing an interesting question back up in #91.
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 9:02 pm
I really need to stop talking about things I don’t know anything about. Sorry. But, one last thing: I just looked it up, and it says that Jacob is 16 years old but his body is a mature adult body of 25. That complicates things! So, is it okay to lust after a 16 year old character who looks 25 but is really a 17 year old actor? Um, too weird for me.
Comment by Stephanie — December 2, 2009 @ 9:05 pm
Stephanie, he is 17 IRL. On screen he plays a 16 yo, who then matures quickly beyond his 16 yo body, and by the way it is described he is supposed to look more like a 25 yo. His body is very built.
Still not the same as ogling a girls tits and tight ass, and legs. The boy has muscles what in the world is wrong with that? He doesn’t show his p*nis, or butt, or anything that most women have to show on screen, so if we are going to play the fair card then that needs to stop too! And, when you see him bare chested he is wearing the longest shorts I’ve seen… which is something else that women don’t get to do on screen…they have to wear skimpy shorts that show half their ass hanging out.
So… I can’t see the comparison… still…
Comment by Sunshine — December 2, 2009 @ 9:09 pm
It’s okay Stephanie, we still like hearing from you!
Comment by Sunshine — December 2, 2009 @ 9:12 pm
Thanks, Sunshine.
Comment by Stephanie — December 2, 2009 @ 9:15 pm
Sunshine,
“tits and tight ass” - now there are some words I never thought I’d see on this website!
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 9:22 pm
Phew! I’m so glad someone finally said that so now I can close the comments.
I’ve learned my lesson. No more Stephenie Meyer (until I sneak into the Breaking Dawn movie, so I can legally ogle Jacob the werewolf since he will be at least 18).
Comment by ECS — December 2, 2009 @ 9:27 pm
Damn. Okay, until my tech support gets here to close comments (mfranti), no more T&A discussions.
Comment by ECS — December 2, 2009 @ 9:32 pm
too funny…
Comment by Lawyer Lady — December 2, 2009 @ 9:33 pm