Oh, okay, you're talking about the second criterion. You could have made that clearer in your above comment.
Well, let's look at that sentence again:
a person is held to a standard that equates physical attractiveness (narrowly defined) with being sexy
a standard = a restrictive set of parameters.
"A person is held to a restrictive set of parameters that equates physical attractiveness (narrowly defined) with being sexy"
physical attractiveness = sexy. A = B. That doesn't exactly leave wiggle room for C = B or D = B, if the standard is always that A = B.
Even if that's not clear from a diagram of the sentence, it should be abundantly clear from the entire rest of the report.
But if we use the second sentence, any work that shows that someone is sexy because he or she is physically attractive is sexualization. That means that all the physically attractive women in comics, if they are shown to be sexy, are sexualized and harmful to girls.
No. Again, read the damn report: The parts that talk about physical attractiveness relate to a culmulative affect. The problem isn't that one woman of a particular body type is presented as sexy. The problem is that most every woman in any given media (for example, comic books) is portrayed as sexy, and is portrayed as such because they conform to a narrowly defined body type.
And again, we're so far removed from the HfH cover right now that it's not even funny. But you keep bringing the stupid, and I, in my foolishness, keep trying to teach you how to read.
no subject
Well, let's look at that sentence again:
a person is held to a standard that equates physical attractiveness (narrowly defined) with being sexy
a standard = a restrictive set of parameters.
"A person is held to a restrictive set of parameters that equates physical attractiveness (narrowly defined) with being sexy"
physical attractiveness = sexy. A = B. That doesn't exactly leave wiggle room for C = B or D = B, if the standard is always that A = B.
Even if that's not clear from a diagram of the sentence, it should be abundantly clear from the entire rest of the report.
But if we use the second sentence, any work that shows that someone is sexy because he or she is physically attractive is sexualization. That means that all the physically attractive women in comics, if they are shown to be sexy, are sexualized and harmful to girls.
No. Again, read the damn report: The parts that talk about physical attractiveness relate to a culmulative affect. The problem isn't that one woman of a particular body type is presented as sexy. The problem is that most every woman in any given media (for example, comic books) is portrayed as sexy, and is portrayed as such because they conform to a narrowly defined body type.
And again, we're so far removed from the HfH cover right now that it's not even funny. But you keep bringing the stupid, and I, in my foolishness, keep trying to teach you how to read.