To be annoyed by this meme regarding knickers?

[UnaCorda]

For the umpteenth time I have come across a photo of an underwear-clad woman seductively and suggestively pulling down the waistband of her pants. It's bad enough that photos of scantily-clad women are so ubiquitous, but this meme really raises my feminist hackles as it's so unnecessary. When do you ever see a picture of a man doing this?

We all know that a woman's vulva and vagina are underneath her pants and we're aware that an early stage of having sex tends to be the removal of said pants, so it's obvious where this choreographed come-hithering comes from, but for the love of Marks and Spencer's lingerie department is it really necessary to spell it out?

But photos of people not wearing a lot aren't what I'm referring to. I'm talking about photos of women people in underwear being hyper-sexualised by adding a virtual arrow (i.e the lowering of the waistband) pointing to what's inside the underwear, even if the clothing itself is the ostensible focus (i.e. an advert for said underwear).

Yes, exactly. Look on Tik tok. Men are in shorts or underwear, shirts off, very similar looks to the underwear pictures on here. Many doing magic Mike style dancing or in the shower. Many look to be young, probably older teens or twenties but my god, the comments from women on there. Declaring themselves cougars and repeated comments along the lines of please state your age, are you legal etc. My eyes have been well and truly opened!

Like we all aren't suffering enough at the moment without being tricked into looking at pictures of buff men in their pants, when I was expecting an intellectual feminist discussion. More blue-stocking than undercrackers, if you will

Hyper-sexualised - that's the word.
I was googling picture frames and I got a close up of a woman's fanny in see through nicks and pudenda clearly delineated she with a sexy smile - I dunno , rape stats are bad - constantly seeing these images paints the wrong story imv .

Adverts for hats held at a jaunty angle lest we forget there might be a head underneath This cracked me up. Great thread, OP. Just what I needed after a very long week.

Interesting. (And I do think I mean "meme", not "trope", but anyway...)

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras - I think the difference between the pictures I'm referring to and the sort of thing you're describing on TikTok is that in the magazine or advert shots there is a someone behind a camera plus maybe a director who decides that a simple picture of lingerie on a woman is not sufficient without a behavioural act (the meme) of her pulling it down slightly to enhance the effect. Whereas on TikTok they are self-directed and the aim is to look as sexy as possible. So a different objective.

Weird analogy, I realise, but it reminds me of the way people can't simply say, "he died"; instead they have to say, "he sadly died" - the qualifier becomes an integral part of the whole, without which it almost doesn't exist (as to say, "he died" is to risk being deemed rude).

(Really hope someone understands what I'm getting at here...)

I was googling picture frames and I got a close up of a woman's fanny in see through nicks and pudenda clearly delineated she with a sexy smile
What kind of frames were you googling😂

The pants i buy don't advertise this way (Google Thunderpants, they are not pretty but they are the most comfortable pants on the planet!), but i also understand that some people buy pants with a consideration for how they look when undressing for sex, and that's ok too.

I’ve had to delete my search history after reading this thread....

Nothing like this then OP?

Well this has been an education...

OP is it that the male underwear-wearers look like they're having fun, for themselves, but the female ones look like they're just passively waiting for someone else to have fun using their body?

If that's it then I think you're right, it is a meme/trope/nugget of collective subconscious/what have you.

Oh I see op.

We'll, many of the pictures of male models posted on here are exactly what you describe then - directed to be very sexualised and posed provocatively.

Judging by the posts on this thread, I am currently trying to secure rights to the site 'fit men in their pants'
You can thank me later.

OP is it that the male underwear-wearers look like they're having fun, for themselves, but the female ones look like they're just passively waiting for someone else to have fun using their body?

It is definitely to do with bodily autonomy, yes.

I don't mind any of this kind of advertising, it's rather silly to get uptight about this. I am an oldie, but rather like the male posers, as well as the women and their knickers. You have been spared, as you probably won't see an ad, with an older lady inching her knickers down ha ha,

Maybe you only think this happens to women because you're only buying women's underwear? 1. It happens to men just as much, if not more. 2. I can't actually understand your issue with it? A feminist who thinks other women (or men for that matter) shouldn't be allowed to do as they please with their own bodies isn't in favour of equality to be honest.

A feminist who thinks other women (or men for that matter) shouldn't be allowed to do as they please with their own bodies isn't in favour of equality to be honest.

I don't think you've read the full thread. I'm suggesting that woman (and, it seems, men) are being directed, as a matter of course, to add extra sauciness to any photo where they're in underwear. I just think it's objectifying, unnecessary and actually a bit tedious. Why can't people in undergarments be portrayed as athletes, gymnasts, swimmers, etc. and asked to pose in a way that makes them look fit and strong, rather than sexual and provocative?

If people want to choreograph and curate their own photos or videos to provoke lasciviousness that's up to them and doesn't bother me, but I'm talking about pictures taken during a professional shoot for adverts or magazine covers.

I suppose it's a little bit like the way women are directed in porn (typically to appeal to the male gaze) vs someone choosing to upload a video of themselves having a wank. In the latter there's no coercion.

Pardon?

You've lost me 🙄

I think you’re being ridiculous. How on earth can you get wound up about this

When do you ever see a picture of a man doing this?

Apart from all the ones posted here there’s an insane amount of ‘sexy men memes’

The women in the knicker ads are being objectified and sexualised by men and therefore are a misogynist attack on feminism. Whereas the men in briefs ads are forcing their sexuality on women and so are reverse objectifying women and therefore a misogynist attack on feminism.

Have I got that right?

Worrrrrr @zscaler I had forgotten about that Mark Walberg advert

OK, I admit I haven't read the full thread because I got lost my glasses steamed up but the women in the pictures are being coy and submissive whereas the men aren't.

It's how they are meant to be viewed that reveals the kind of body language they are using (as choreographed according to the photographer's intent - what s/he wants the audience to see)

Some of those men look as though they've dropped a coin down their shorts and are trying to find it. teh one with his back to us looks as though he's trying to work out how to put the pants on. One looks as though he's holding on to himself for dear life as though it might disappear.

The women are much more ambiguous in their roles, playing into an idea of indecision and no strong identity. Perfect for the male gaze and desire to be seen to 'take control of her indecision'.

I dunno , rape stats are bad - constantly seeing these images paints the wrong story imv

Rape doesn’t happen because women wear or advertise sexy underwear. Rape happens because rapists decide to rape someone.

Looks to me like she could just as easily be pulling them up post-shit