The importance of the difference is about the perception of the nudity of the pictured women. Are we looking at them as at the sexual objects or the objects to be judged? Or, on the contrary, are we looking at naked women as at them, just for their simple being, without any male interference or interest and judgment? In my opinion, these differences apply to images of today’s western society in a very similar way as back then. Ladies are in an all-source of media often presented as an object, in position to try to catch the attention by the visual perception by looking submissive, available, and ready.
The role of the women depicted as a beautiful thing to look at, whose biggest interest is to be pretty for the men. Women were just sexual objects, which were even more attractive if they were submissive without their own opinion, quietly following the men’s demands. The position of women in modern society is more and more equal to the position of men, but we can still see many situations nowadays where are the same old rules still applied. For instance, magazines or photos on social media are presenting women’s nudity without any artistic relevance, or intellectual overlap. Even some very intelligent, successful women still believe that they are not fully accepted by society without positive judgment of their physical beauty by men.
The beauty of women was ranked by interest and judgment of men’s enjoyment. Women at the paintings were looking at themselves in the mirror, thinking about how they look and how they are looking at by men. Mirror was also used as a symbol of the vanity of women. The hypocrisy of the men was hidden behind the moral condemn of the women for their vanity in order just to look at the naked women’s body. We can see a kind of parallel between the women naked bodies pictured in old paintings and photos of naked women in every other magazine today. Women are often seeing as a sexual object without any other interest than to be pretty and accepted by men.