It must be a guy thing, because I don't find this surprising or unusual at all. If I was unfamiliar with the genre (which I imagine is the case with most indie boys, or people in general), I'd find it hi-larious that someone was writing porn about me!

I prefer for people who feature me in written porny scenarios to confine their publishing efforts to an instant message window.

It must be a guy thing, because I don't find this surprising or unusual at all.

I suspect our sample may be too small because I can think of two guys off the top of my head who don't like it.

I wonder -- and I'm not getting into a just-deal-with-it thing here, I do just wonder -- if maybe one of those guys is more well-known that the rest of us, and if maybe it's because guys are put into, or at least have to mentally deal with it less, situations where one is aware of being seen as a sexual object.

Wow, that is an awkward sentence, but I can't be arsed to figure out how to fix it right now.

For instance, I found a note and a...er, caricature, I guess would be the best way to put it, on the floor of my classroom the other day. It was speculative in nature, shall we say? I was kind of grossed out, on the one hand, but on the other, more amused than not.

One, because it is the nature of the beast (i.e., teenage boys to Think About The Women-Parts, Any Women-Parts Excessively) and two, as a, I think, not-unattractive woman who has grown-up in woman-as-sexual-idee-fixe society, I think most women are used to the idea of sometime, somewhen (like, twice a week, on the street or in the drugstore) being the at least fleeting centerfold in some stranger's 30 second porno.

Course, I could be wrong, and it could be split down the middle, men and women's comfort zones on sexualization. Damn, too bad I don't want another degree, in sociology; I think there's a nice little research question here.

Course, I could be wrong, and it could be split down the middle, men and women's comfort zones on sexualization. Damn, too bad I don't want another degree, in sociology; I think there's a nice little research question here.

I know I've had things of a sexual nature written about me, some for public consumption, some not. I've only ever read the former (I've just heard tell of the latter), and it was a curious mix of humor vs. discomfort, and I'd given permission for it. Knowing of the latter is a weird combination of flattering, and realizing that other people are naked under their clothes. Err.

re: ita's guys vs. the emo boy fic quoters.

The fandom in question, with the fourth wall breaking and all, is known for its performative sexuality, with much in the way of boy touching, boy kissing, boy groping, and declarations of being gay above the waist. So I think a lot of them take it as part of the image/persona myth that they're selling, and are therefore amused. With some exceptions, who are fine if people write about them, so long as it does not involve The Sex.

I wonder -- and I'm not getting into a just-deal-with-it thing here, I do just wonder -- if maybe one of those guys is more well-known that the rest of us, and if maybe it's because guys are put into, or at least have to mentally deal with it less, situations where one is aware of being seen as a sexual object.

I think it's more the for-public-consumption thing that would put men off than just being objectified in and of itself. I have heard guys say that they're happy to have their appearance commented on because at least it's something about them, rather than about something they own or can buy. Being reduced to a wallet is just as insulting in its own way as being reduced to a bustline.

The first reply to Plei's was so illegible I noticed it before hitting post. Trying again.

Sounds like the boys in bandom today are all about the public personas--way more than NSYNC or De La Soul. It seems that RPF plays right into that,

Now way back in the old Smallville cocksicle thread I argued that boy bands like N'Sync were designed to have public personae which they exploited and were consequently fair game for RPF. Since the persona was itself a kind of fiction.

I have heard guys say that they're happy to have their appearance commented on because at least it's something about them, rather than about something they own or can buy. Being reduced to a wallet is just as insulting in its own way as being reduced to a bustline.

That's true -- and it's something I wouldn't have thought of as a woman. I am lucky to not think of guys as a material commodity -- and to not have gf's who do, either -- so that idea of Man As Wallet is startling to me. But I know it's still a very real part of gender-sliced societal thinking, in the US, and maybe even more so in other countries.

How do you think this applies to the gay community? Men, not chicks? (Not asking you to represent all gay dudes, BTW; just asking for thoughts, cause I'm interested in this line of thought, Matt.)

As to the boiband/emoPeteWentz thing...could it be argued that all public performers, regardless of the deliberate sexualization of their image, should realistically expect that someone out there will be taking their image and...well, wanking off to it, whether in via visual print, words or just mentally?

I argued that boy bands like N'Sync were designed to have public personae which they exploited and were consequently fair game for RPF

I think they're more designed than, say, Tori Amos, but almost everyone in music is designed. But I think they're more like little lies than the full fledged fiction being discussed above.

I'm not going to pretend my interaction with boy bands was either long or deep but it was interesting in relationship to public faces.