I saw far more bulky/muscle-y male costumes on male children at the zoo than “sexy” costumes on girls.
lol look what I found on the misandry tag
because young boys wearing fake muscles is the same thing as young girls being sexy. It’s certainly not making young boys feel…
I love how you just completely ignored my point. No one is saying that women are less in danger (I doubt anyone is in danger, tbh). ]
My point (which you would have saw if you weren’t drunk on the crayade) is that in spite of what social justice warriors say boys are also objectified via their costumes. The same way that a girl’s cuteness is accentuated (via a dress? are you serious; that is heterocentric but not sexism; it’s not like they have padded bra uniforms although I’m sure those exist somewhere) is similar to how a boy’s “manliness”/muscly-ness is emphasized with the costumes with fake muscles.
And btw, girls can also wear those exact copies costumes without stigma, but if a boy wore the skirt/dress costumes he would be stigmatized so don’t ignore that tidbit of heterosexist misandry.
P.S. The point, fair simpleton, is not that girls are objectified less than boys, but that boys are also significantly objectified.
It’s not objectification, it’s a power fantasy. When the boys put on those big muscle costumes, it’s not about being sexy (or imitating adult sexiness, as the case may be) - it’s about being powerful. Boys get the big muscles because the superheroes have big, strong muscles that they use to smash the bad guys. Girls get the sexy, barely-there costumes because society says their bodies are made to be looked at. Big difference.
“Girls get the sexy, barely-there costumes because society says their bodies are made to be looked at.”
What sites do you look at? The costumes geared toward girls are mostly not “barely-there”. There are slutty costumes geared towards women (not girls), but those are not the majority of what’s advertised (unless you are looking for it). Even the “sexy” costumes that all the social justice warriors are linking to are actually pretty covering, except for that ONE with the bite taken out of it. After all, don’t forget that there are male costumes out there that show even more flesh than women costumes. Both slutty outfits for women and men are in the minority, not the majority.
Also, you really need to do some research. Objectification is more than just sexual objectification. Women in the US tend to be more obviously objectified on the basis of their sexual appeal/attractiveness. However, men in the US tend to be more obviously objectified on the basis of their strength and power (via the muscles).
Don’t forget that while women (esp. in US past) have been chosen as worthy due to their level of attractiveness (looks, “purity”, amiable personality, etc.), men (esp. in US past) have been chosen as worthy due to their level of power (e.g. financial security, physical strength, sexual stamina, etc.)
Objectification is objectification, regardless of if its on the basis of sexiness/attractiveness or strength/power.
“Girls get the sexy, barely-there costumes because society says their bodies are made to be looked at. Big difference. ”
Society says that women’s (not little girls) bodies should be sexy, but what you ignore is that society also says that men should be powerful either through financial success or physical force.
And btw, I found all children costumes to have been made to be cute, including boy costumes. The reason why girl costumes tend to have skirts (ignoring for a moment that there are costumes for girls without skirts while there are no costumes for boys with skirts) is not due to objectification, but due to heterosexism: i.e. skirts/dresses for girls and shorts/pants for boys.
Even if we assumed you were right about girls costumes being designed for cuteness (you aren’t, except maybe for very young girls’ costumes, which I don’t think is what anyone is upset about - walk into a Spirit store and check out the costumes marketed toward girls over the age of about 7 or 8 into the “tween” demographic and I guarantee you’ll be ooked out by how “sexy” everything is for girls that could be as young as 3rd grade), I’ve already done my research: being seen as powerful is the opposite of objectification. You can’t be objectified based on how powerful you are presumed to be, because by mere virtue that you are presumed to have power, you are no longer just an object! Power is autonomy and ability and agency, and those are the antithesis of objectification. Being physically powerful is also not the only option that men have to be judged worthwhile, like you said - intelligence, money, sexual prowess, advanced skills, etc. can all stand on their own as markers of worth for men. With women (and girls, by extension) what you do rarely matters if you aren’t adequately attractive while you do it (Fun exercise: name a female equivalent of Steve Buscemi who has been equally successful). I’m not saying that idealizing muscles and physical power is totes cool, but don’t confuse it with objectification. Batman is a lot more than his appearance. This is not.
Now, if you want to argue that costumes are gender normative (which is what I think you mean when you say “heterosexist”, and I really promise I’m not trying to be a jerk when I tell you you’re using “heterosexist” wrong - heterosexism is the assumption that heterosexuality is and should be the default, whereas gender normativity is the notion that men should be “masculine” and women should be “feminine”), be my guest, because they totally are! However, while it is definitely shitty that a boy can’t wear a frilly strawberry shortcake costume without fear of ridicule while a girl can slip on a costume sold for boys and be just fine, the reason behind that is because the female status is viewed as lesser. Girls that put on a boys’ costume are just putting on the “normal” costume, because what is “male” is the default (take that cookie monster example - the boys get a costume that looks like the NORMAL cookie monster, while girls get a “cute” adaptation). If a boy puts on a dress, he’s taking a step down.
Just for the purposes of example, here are the splash pages for children’s (CHILDREN’S, not toddlers) costumes from Party City, one of the major retailers.
The boys:
They’re all about action! They get to be cool, gross, creepy, funny, powerful, scary, skilled, and dexterous. How about the girls?
I see… pretty? While they’re not all ridiculously oversexed (the marketing team would know better than to do that on the online splash page anyway, since parents are the buyers online), the overarching theme of these costumes is still little but being attractive. Sounds like the short end of the stick to me.
