Given our environment of rampant consumerism, “it was almost inevitable that human beings would become the ‘ultimate’ consumer product,” said Alvare. “Women’s physical beauty and sexual complementarity with men make them particularly desirable in a commercial economy.” [...] However, she continued, “the degree to which women, individually and via organized groups, have embraced their own objectification as consumer items is a particularly disturbing feature of our current situation.”

This is obviously a heterosexist remark made by someone who doesn’t even understand original sin (Adam had “domination” before he sinned: it was commanded of him by God). It was an interesting remark, to me, because it mirrors feminist discussions of women’s participation in their own subjugation. I find it especially interesting because it’s clearly written by a woman who buys into subjugation-as-freedom. It’s like she’s had a moment of clarity but can’t quite figure out what to do with it.

It may be tripe as a whole, but I found it an interesting footnote to the Hathor article: here is a woman in the situation discussed in Hathor making (some) similar points.

‘This type of feminism “drew upon the worst features of male behavior for its prescriptions. Thus was the feminist woman urged to be a sexually adventurous, marriage-and-children-spurning, money and career driven, creature,” Alvare concluded. “Feminism urged women to imitate the male version of original sin — domination — to attain equality and happiness.”‘

Sorry, but WTF do building a career, financial goals, and remaining single have to do with “Objectification”?

Please say you’re not imagining there are some deep insights somewhere in this article. It’s pure gibberish, as should be obvious from the very first line where they explain how “Objectification” is caused by “Original Sin.”