I have two issues with your post. Maybe they are a failure to understand what you're saying (blame it on reading comprehension in that case):
1) ".. has negatively affected most women's ability to be treated professionally and respectfully"
If you reread those lines, would you still choose them? _Most_ women's ability to be treated in either way or both is negatively affected? Maybe I stumble when I read 'most' and change that mentally to 90% or so - which my gut rejects as unreasonably large and way over the top.
2) Did you watch the video? Would you, if that girl came now down the street, think disrespectful about her? Consider her unprofessional in her job?
I think the video was obviously shot for this effect and completely unnecessary. The 'I need new pants' comment at the end was the biggest issue I have with that stuff.
Watching it I reacted like w/ most advertisements: Lack of interest in general, disgust for so badly disguised tries to influence the viewer, me.
But I don't think videos like these will go away, nor are they the biggest problem. Failure to distinguish between a model with little more than a shirt on (job: to be looked at) and your fellow rails programmer (job: produce awesome code) because they share the same sex is .. stupid. And needs to be eliminated.
Yes, I'd write this the same way. I'm referring to the subtle effects that the real katie wrote about yesterday in "Lighten up". Women are treated professionally and respectfully in many situations, but the subtle effects of what she described add up, and do indeed affect most women.
Believe me, I see where you're coming from. My gut instinct (which I'm trying to tame) when I hear something about objectification is "I wouldn't mind someone objectifying me!" - but that instinct is wrong and here's why.
I (straight, white, american, upper middle class, male from suburban christian background) have a shit ton of privilege. Part of that as I understand it is that there are huge double standards in society at large for men vs women. There are things that I can do, which a woman doing would have incredible different reactions an consequences.
To be extreme, if I worked for a company and the rumor was that I had slept with every woman that worked there, it would likely be seen by the coworkers (and management potentially) as being a generally positive thing. James Bond, etc... The rumor of a woman doing the exact same and she's a slut. The consequences of being seen in a sexual light for a man aren't the same as they are for a woman. For men, its a sign of increasing power, and for women unfortunately its of decreasing power.
What does offend me are advertisements with the bumbling-husband archetype or similar man-without-a-woman stereotypes.
Edit: I should point out that I do think male sexualization is bad as it can promote poor body image, etc.
Also I can detect the implication that somebody is a hypocrite if they do not sit there and correctly judge every single case of sexism that comes their way. Do you believe that ethical decisions are black-or-white and that you cannot judge one ethical decision unless you have the ability and time to judge them all?
Obviously everyone has different sensitivities, but if you cannot objectively identify sexism of both men and women in advertisements, yes you're a hypocrite.
Consider the context though. How were women treated a 100 years ago? How are they still treated? Feminism, etc.
I think you need a better model that takes this into consideration. Whether you like it or not for historic reasons there is greater sensitivity about sexism against women. I don't think rejecting this is being more objective, it's called trying to force an incomplete model onto reality.
Every woman I've talked to LOVES this kinds of photos. I've never ever hear anybody protesting this (except maybe some prude religious idiots).
Edit: which is not to mean that the entire gender stereotyping thing doesn't hurt men — of course it does — but there's a world of difference between what it does to men and women.