What does "objectification of women" mean, and can men be objectified?

Umm, I don't know how wishing people to be viewed as people instead of objects could be construed that I don't think sex is good. I think sex is great. I wouldn't want to live without it. I just want to be treated like a person while I'm having it. Is that being too sensitive? If so - so be it.

Her mother is from Vancouver.

She wanders like a shuttlecock, from side to side she flutters.
She makes a lover with a wind, with every word she utters.
She's welcomed by the younger folk, and flirtingly she stands.
then sits and rouses someone else, toes wriggling, squeezing hands.
She blows a kiss, she gazes round, she turns and shows her ring,
to one she tips the sign of love, with one she stops to sing.

It's an early version of Girl from the North Country. More classical too. It might be an interesting subject for a book to trace the poet's "girl" from the Odyssey to Candle in the Wind. From robust to fragile objectivications. A scholar could work that up. And have sequels.

PROMISCUOUS women who have children by different men could help prevent humanity from becoming extinct, scientists claimed yesterday.

A study has shown that women who have multiple sexual partners reduce the risk of replicating a genetic quirk that means they are more likely to have only daughters.

A study by the Universities of Exeter and Liverpool contends that if all women had children with just one partner, a male- destroying chromosome could be reproduced and spread until humanity eventually became 100 per cent female, precipitating its extinction.

It claims that having multiple partners reduces the spread of a sex-ratio distortion (SR) chromosome that would lead to all-female offspring.

The SR chromosome has the effect of killing all the "male" Y chromosomes before fertilisation.

Polyandry, the practice of females having multiple partners to protect the future of the species, is common in the animal kingdom. Scientists believe that its occurrence has several benefits, including ensuring reproductive success and conferring more variation in traits to female's offspring, which would have a wider benefits for the health of a species' pack, hive or family.

The new research is the first to suggest that female humans should also have more than one man to safeguard our future.

The research was published in the journal Current Biology. One of the study's authors, Professor Nina Wedell, said: "Polyandry is a widespread phenomenon in nature, but it remains something of an enigma for scientists.

"This study is the first to suggest it could save a population from extinction."

Tom Price, another author on the paper, added that while the research spoke to all reproducing creatures, the complex nature of humans made it harder to apply in hard and fast terms.

The sex of a child is determined by X and Y chromosomes " a woman is XX and a man is XY.

But some men also carry the SR chromosome and when a human egg is fertilised, the SR kills the Y " producing a female baby.

That female will now also carry the SR gene, meaning any sons she has will also have SR chromosomes and will father only females.

But by having multiple partners " some of whom will not have the SR chromosome " the female can help ensure her descendants are males and females. The new research says monogamy means the sex ratio distortion chromosome will be passed down more often " eventually leading to an all-female population.

Experts carried out the experiment by studying fruit flies " which share 60 per cent of human genes. Some given some multiple partners and others were restricted to one mate each.

Over 15 generations, five of the 12 populations that had been monogamous died out because of a lack of males.

Do it - and post it. I'd read and comment.

I'm not saying he was taking the piss in your quote.

I'm not a scholar Rebecca.

I'm not familiar with this idiom but I've noticed it a few times of late. What does it mean, Spendi, anyone?

The term sometimes refers to a form of mockery in which the mocker exaggerates the other person's characteristics; pretending to take on his or her attitudes, etc., in order to make them look funny. Or it may be used to refer to a ruse where a person is led to believe something is true that isn't (usually a fairly unbelievable story) for the purpose of ridicule of the "victim".

The phrase is in common usage throughout British society, employed by headline writers in broadsheet gazettes[2] and tabloids[3] as well as colloquially and is also used in English speaking countries such as Australia.[4][5]

In colloquial usage, 'taking the piss' is also used to refer to someone or something that makes a claim which is not in line with a recognised agreement e.g. an invoice that is double the quoted price with no explanation for the added charge could be said to 'take the piss', or likewise if something consistently misses a deadline.

take the piss Vrb phrs. 1. To ridicule, to tease, to make fun off. Cf. 'extract the urine'.
2. To take advantage of, to exploit. E.g."Just because they like looking after their grand children, doesn't mean you can dump the kids on them every weekend whilst you go out clubbing. That's just taking the piss."

It might even be scaremongering in the sense that women would panic at the idea of a 100% female population, as well they might, and would stop being promiscuous.

Oh no Rebecca. The most important thing about a scholar is the ability to do detailed research in libraries and archives. I'm hopeless at that. Thank goodness.

And besides--what I write "off the cuff" might have the same effect. It isn't as disorganised as it looks at first sight.

First off--I'm sorry for not responding to your post Rebecca. I did intend to and then other things got in the way for which I beg your pardon.

So nice of you to say - but not necessary spendius. Don't give it a thought.