Edika
Well-Known Member
^ This more or less sums up my opinion. I refuse to jump on the "any expression of strait male sexuality is offensive" or "any depiction of someone being sexy reduces them to an object" trains. Why do people not complain about something like depictions of sexy firemen? Why does depicting a man in a sexy way not count as objectifying them? We nitpick about which sexual expressions are considered offensive based on weird, screwed up, current social values, not because there's actually anything wrong with anyone's sexual expressions.
Realistically, the mistake being made here is not that they've used a sexy woman in a logo, it's that they've misjudged what the market wants to see right now in 2018.
You have a valid point about the objectification of men and I do agree with you. In some sense it is a bit more subtle and less pronounced. It also has to do with the double standards most societies have about what is the acceptable sexual behavior of males and females and in some cases what is supposed to be an acceptable and healthy expression of male and female sexuality. The media and advertisement has done it's fair share of exploiting either sides of sexuality to sell and promote stuff but in a sense it's amplifying what is already deep routed in society.
In a sense though none of us can truly say what is a true expression of true male sexuality and what is a true female sexuality through the conditioning we have received since childhood. Some people realize this conditioning and reject, others embrace it but most people are somewhere in between. As an average looking dude believe I have never felt like I have been objectified even once in my life. Most female friends I have can recall numerous instances, even with what be considered average looks. That I don't really consider as an expression of straight sexuality, at least not a healthy one.