If you’re a girl who objectifies good-looking men, then you’ll be interested to visit TubeCrush.net, which features photos of hot-looking guys taken surreptitiously as they ride the London Underground. And if you’re a guy (and my hand is raised) and you think it’s hilarious to read photo captions salivating over a guy who “reminds us of one of those Action man/Ken dolls you see in the shop. He looks very fit and clean in his box, but you just want to get him out, play with him and make him dirty,” then you’ll be interested in the site, too.
Oh, and if you think objectifying men is just as bad as objectifying women, then you’ll probably be up in arms.
*Sigh*
Let’s be honest, men will never, ever, in a million years have it as bad as women when it comes to sexual objectification. The overwhelming majority of men, I imagine, would be honored (if slightly startled) that a woman had seen fit to take his picture on public transportation and send it into a website for publication. It’s just so outside the usual male experience.
Does this represent a double standard? Sure. But is it mostly harmless? Absolutely.
Salon.com’s Tracy Clark-Flory tackled some of the women’s issues with TubeCrush.net:
I bristle at the suggestion that women who sexually objectify men are necessarily “copying” mainstream male sexuality (maybe they’re, I dunno, expressing how they really feel). In fact, I’m often tempted to celebrate mildly piggish female behavior—to a point—just because it at least contradicts the stereotype that female sexuality is adequately represented by, say, Twilight fan-fiction. (And isn’t fan-fiction just another mode of objectification, anyway?) I also happen to think that sexual objectification isn’t always a bad thing; it’s all about context and consent…It’s also interesting to think about the difference between candid shots taken for a street-style fashion blog versus a sexy-person-on-the-train blog: Why does the former seem so much more innocuous and reasonably objectifying?
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
As someone who falls drastically short of George Clooney in the looks department, I don’t have to concern myself with the possibility of turning up on a website like TubeCrush.net. Too bad. Otherwise I might get treated to the following kind of caption, which describes the guy in the photo at the top of the story:
Date: 9th May 2011
Line: Piccadilly Line
Submitted By: Binky (we hope this is your real name)
Well Binky managed to make it out of Chelsea and on to the tube to find this prime cut of footballing beef. We would say he is the Chateaubriand of Tube Crushes, and would suggest that he is probably best served medium rare, with just a little pink on the inside.
The Chateaubriand of Tube Crushes. Come on, that’s awesome.
Women, it appears, aren’t the only ones who enjoy this site. As someone named “Tom” commented on one photo: “The “A” train in New York NEVER has anybody this sexy!!!”
Well, Tom, maybe somebody should start a website called NYCtraincrush.net. After all, guys in New York deserve to be objectified, too.
(Related article: Hot Guys Reading Books GMPM)
I’ve said it before, but objectification is not in and of itself a bad thing. This I see as innocuous and fun. Sometimes it’s nice to just admire a person whom you find attractive, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Objectification only becomes problematic when it is the only manner in which a specific group is portrayed (e.g., women). Although males are increasingly objectified (and it is problematic), men are still afforded the freedom to be funny, witty, strong, intelligent, capable, powerful, and so many other things that their sole value is not placed in their appearance. It’s… Read more »
No, I don’t think it’s acceptable to photograph people (of any gender) on the tube and then post them online. You don’t know if that person would want their photo online, let along with comments about their hotness underneath. (Especially comments along the lines of that Ken doll one. *shudders*) I don’t hold with this idea that because women have a history of being objectified by men way more than the other way around, we can get away with stuff like this and it will be seen as cute and harmless. Indorsing the idea that it’s ok to invade the… Read more »
Mind you, I haven’t taken pictures like that, but when I think or feel things that might be considered ‘objectification of men’ along that logic, I try not to make anyone uncomfortable. For example, my tastebuds are partial to Asian men the way a lot of guys’ are partial to redheads. If I bump into one at the store that I think is delicious, I would never tell him that, personally, but when’s he’s out of sight, I’ll tell my friends how I’d like to take THAT home, etc.. BUT, I never tell the handsome stranger this. And I think… Read more »
I find this kind of horrifying, mainly because I definitely would NOT be okay with someone posting my picture on the Internet without my consent and discussing me as though as I’m a piece of meat. This kind of objectification might be outside the usual male experience, but that doesn’t make it cute or flattering or funny. It’s still a clear-cut double standard.
People who find Steven Greenstreet’s “Hot Chicks of Occupy Wall Street” appalling while at the same time thinks the TubeCrush.net are A-OK and great are plain hypocrites and shouldn’t be taken seriously in this matter. Neither the men nor the women of those sites have consented to have their pictures published on that consent. The fact that some arbitrary percent of the men and the women would consent to have their pictures published in such a consent gives no-one the right to assume that all of them would. What the h*ll does this article do on GMP? Is accepting hypocrisy… Read more »
I mistyped consent instead of context two places in my above comment. Replace where appropriate. The location of the mistyped are left as an exercise for the reader.
More bait and switch. The overwhelming majority of men, I imagine, would be honored (if slightly startled) that a woman had seen fit to take his picture on public transportation and send it into a website for publication. It’s just so outside the usual male experience. Does this represent a double standard? Sure. But is it mostly harmless? Absolutely. Way to decide for all us (despite the “overwheliming majority of men” quantifier) that such treatment would be harmless. Let’s be honest, men will never, ever, in a million years have it as bad as women when it comes to sexual… Read more »
Just to clarify:
I’m pretty sure most of the people here would agree that talking about a woman (most women anyway) would be wrong.
Should be:
I’m pretty sure most of the people here would agree that talking about a woman (most women anyway) in that manner would be wrong.
It is only viewed as harmless because people view women’s desires as harmless. I think most men would be startled and annoyed that a bunch of shiftless women went around taking pictures of them. The underlying assumption here is that men so want sexual attention from women that they have zero boundaries. That is just not true. And keep in mind the reason this is considered wrong when men do it has nothing to do with direct harm caused to the person. After all, the men are not touching the women or bothering them in any manner. However, they are… Read more »
Because hypocrisy is always amusing and harmless.
It’s laughable that women find these men studmuffins. We men are much, much worse. You wouldn’t want to see our pictures. Hee, hee
A group of women once gathered on the sidewalk in Paris and hooted and whistled at male passers-by.
They were not only startled, but most looked downright scared. 🙂