1) Every picture is also part of a larger instantaneous image of the world in which millions of people are currently having being tortured to death. Do you think those pictures belong in the classroom as well?
Do I think pictures of individuals being tortured should be included in a classroom setting? If a history class, or current affairs, carefully presented in context, and the children were sufficiently mature - it may be appropriate.
But not appropriate for a computer vision class regardless of the age.
Should CROPPED pictures be included of such out of context? No. Because the subject suffered, unlike in this case, where the subject has no problem being seen.
Kids aren't stupid, they'll figure out the source of the photo and everyone will know. The nature of the photo creates the context.
2) There are students, particularly female ones, who find it both objectionable and threatening. That is completely relevant to its use in a high school class.
I find cars objectionable and threatening - they've killed way more people than consensual, safe, softcore pornography
And if a lot of people shared your strong objections to car pictures than I'd agree schools should avoid unnecessary photos of cars.
You have no idea how difficult it is for me to respond civilly after you claimed I'm a sexist that objectifies women.
YOU are the one arguing that objectification is inevitable. When you see that image, do you think less of the model, or of women in general? If yes, YOU have a problem. If no, you've blown a hole in your own argument.
You've missed the point entirely.
The problem isn't that me or a woman in the class is objectifying women because of the picture.
The problem is that there are men in the class who are objectifying women, or thinking it's appropriate to objectify women, because of the picture.
Whether or not I'm one of those men is irrelevant, merely the fact women have a reasonable expectation that those men are there objectifying them makes it an issue.
There are two very obvious gender differences. One males are, on average, far stronger than women.
True, but of fuck all relevance here.
Second pregnancies are far more costly to women.
True, but in most civilised nations, contraceptive pills and implants and morning-after pills and early terminations and (as a very last resort) adoption are universally available.
Which is one of the reasons that Western women are more sexually liberated, but the differences persist.
but also because men have far less to fear about being physically overpowered.
Utterly, utterly false. Non-consensual sex / sexual assault is rarely about being physically overpowered. This is one of the main rape myths that (proper, i.e. egalitarian rather than anti-penis) feminists have tried to dispell.
Ask any woman, it's still something they have to be aware of, I know many girls who won't trail run by themselves because they're worried about guys attacking them. That's a concern that never even crossed my mind.
And it's not just rape, spousal abuse is still terrifyingly common and there's certainly a sexual component to that.