I read a short article today entitled “The Endorsement: Self-Delusion” that I found to be a nice bit of writing, albeit a tad flip. Then I clicked on the tantalizingly titled link “Women We Love: Photo Galleries of Highly Attractive Women.” For who can resist?

Turns out this takes you to a page by Esquire magazine purporting to be a list of “Women We Love.” I found it more than a little unsettling.

First off, the image for Charlize Theron is a foot. Clicking on the foot takes you to Ms. Theron’s page, at the top of which are four thumbnails for other pictures: the foot, her hands, a hand on a leg, and her breasts. Poor Charlize has been dissected into a collection of body parts. Down below there’s an article on what makes her so great, but are people (i.e. men) really supposed to read that? Other pages don’t fare much better. Monica Belluci’s at least shows her face, although the second thumbnail looks disturbingly like a photo still from a porn flick.

Obviously I’m not above taking a few moments out of my day to look at beautiful people, but what bugs me is how the vast majority of photos feature the women in highly sexualized positions and in various stages of undress. And the criteria for “women we love” is overwhelming slanted toward the young and white.

I guess what I object to (besides the general objectification) is that the page suggests that “we” (Esquire? men? the human race?) love these women for reasons more than just their bodies. Yet the actual content on the page runs contrary to this very notion.

Maybe it’s also funny considering that my wife’s issue of Bust magazine’s “Men We Love” issue is sitting next to the computer. Let’s just say the text-to-photo ratio is a bit different, and Elija Wood isn’t required to cover his genitalia with only his hands. Little different take on the “opposite” sex, innit?

Current Mood: Embarrassed To Be Male |