Am I wrong for thinking article titles like this are demeaning?
Am I wrong for thinking article titles like this are demeaning?
Why does the title need to be worded like that? The worst part is that I've only seen them phrased like this with women celebrities.
It's clickbait. The fact that the clickbait is demeaning is incidental. They're maximizing whatever sensational clickbait title they can get. At least their heart isn't intentionally evil, just incidentally evil.
It's actually kind of perfect ragebait, because you'll both get a bunch of people going "OMG!!! She's beautiful! How dare you, you monster 😭😭😭" AND people going "She should be hotter, what a bitch!" with a single headline.
Target is both to hit your sense of justice (I’m a male feminist) but also engage the innate urge to see the photos. Example
Anne Hathaway criticized by chauvinists for being too sexy on the red carpet
Oh wow, I hate sexism so much I better check out these photos!! so I can…support women?
It CAN work for men but is usually not demeaning. Chris Pratt went from adorable pudge to sexy muscleman, click here to see him shirtless! Not the same I guess.
My instinct would be to click just to find out what exactly is "too sexy" for chauvinists. Same logic applies to the original post's article I guess.
I think these articles exploit this instinct. And I'm pretty sure it works for all kinds of people. When you put an opinion piece in some other people's mouth, everyone will want to find out if the opinion makes sense to them or if it's completely outrageous.
"Some people said this about this subject, come judge by yourself (and prove them wrong/right)"
The correct answer is to block that news site or whatever they call themselves, and don't give them clicks.
The whole article is almost certainly demeaning, as you would expect of a celebrity gossip rag.
That's disgusting! Where?
Florence Pugh has never been shy about her body.
Imo the article writers probably feel that they are decrying the way people are demeaning her, but it's just adding visibility for the judgemental.
It's a double edged sword. Everybody's got a different line for when something descriptive inadvertently becomes prescriptive
Thats not even a weightlifter body lol.
Incels just think anything other than questionable consent with somebody who looks like a child is actually gay.
It's not, but it will upset viewers and bait people into clicking or sharing.
She did star as a wrestler in a movie not long ago, which I believe I saw during covid and was the only reason I recognized her.
At least it contains the word “shamed”. Shaming someone is usually seen as unfair and judgmental.
The title is clickbait, a regular thing for "magazines", while the article itself clarifies things.
You aren't wrong. It is in poor taste. More so considering the article says the comment was made by "fans" who felt disappointed her body shape didn't fit their imagination.
Yup. Don't click that link; this kinda bullshit cant be rewarded
If you want to see pics just Google her.
This "shaming" or the "shit storm" is usually (and I think here too) just some Incels commenting on Instagram. As Instagram optimizes for maximum engagement, the stupidest and most controversial take is always at the top of the comments, that's how we end up with these idiots getting their platform. And these "news sites" then make a big deal out of a few losers also as engagement bait. This whole system is fucked
I don't know what this article is about, and I'd rather not engage with this segment of society to find out, but from a quick Google images search it seems like she recently (?) caught flack for a Valentino dress, which was very sheer and through which her nipples could be seen. But anyone who's been paying any attention to fashion at all would know that sheer is very much "in". The latest Yves Saint Laurent line is a prime example of this. As for the quality of her body, which seems to be an unusually frequent topic, why's it anyone's business? Can a woman exist anywhere on this planet and not be objectified and scrutinized like livestock?
I'm guessing you have not been alive long enough to remember that newspapers, especially tabloids, have always been demeaning of women. To be honest I think headline is timid sounding compared to twenty years ago, when tabloids were more popular and running sensationalist headlines, and the picture of the person being always the most unflattering. I don't really see that kind of reporting nowadays, but it is now on social media where sensationalist shaming happens.
I have been, and it's just as demeaning, but I think constant attention needs to be brought to it
I think it would be best if they drew attention to the people who are being horrible, instead of repeating the horrible things they said. So yeah, you're not wrong for thinking this is demeaning.
Yeaahh I'm gonna need to see the pic so..uhh.. so I can answer your question, yeah that's it.
You can read this article here which has images, I can’t see what they mean though. She looks fire!
I did try to add images directly here but I’m on a low signal area right now.
If you’re curious how to do this yourself, just type the headline into Kagi and then you’re done. I am on mobile so was lazy and screenshotted this post and then copied the text directly from the image to avoid trying, I then wrote all this so kinda defeated my not wanting to type.
I'm afraid I'm not going to provide a source because that would just make me a hypocrite lol
Every time those perfect faces or perfect bodies are projected into media, it demeans us all.
Source please
Afraid not. That would be contradictory to what I'm saying lol
I just mean pictures
You claim to dislike it, yet you gave it greater reach by posting it on Lemmy. Good job! Or maybe your actual job, assuming you are being paid to shill for whatever rag this came from.
demeaning? maybe. but like they say, any exposure is good exposure. would not mind seeing her exposed either
Boy do I have news for you lol. Google is your friend on this one.