Sexual objectification
The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (January 2023) |
Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person solely as an
Although both
Part of a series on |
Feminism |
---|
Feminism portal |
Sexual objectification of women
General
The sexual objectification of women involves them being viewed primarily as an object of male sexual desire, rather than as a whole person.
Some feminists and psychologists
Sexual objectification of men
General
"Male sexual objectification" involves a man being in publicity in a sexual context.
Instances where men may be viewed as sexualized can be in advertisements,
Within gay male communities, men are often objectified.[14] In 2007 a study found discussing negative effects of objectification was met with considerable resistance in the community. The sexual objectification of men of color may force them to play specific roles in sexual encounters that are not necessarily of their own choosing.[15]
Research suggests that the psychological effects of objectification on men are similar to those of women, leading to negative body image among men.[16]
Media
Men's bodies have become more objectified than they previously were, though because of society's established gaze on the objectification of women, the newfound objectification of men is not as widespread.[17] Even with this increase of male objectification, men are still seen as the dominant figures and so the focus is still primarily on women.[18]
Male sexual objectification has been found in 37% of advertisements featuring men's body parts to showcase a product.[19] Similar to the issues of sexual objectification in women, it is common for said objectification to lead men to body shaming, eating disorders, and a drive for perfection. The continued exposure of these "ideal" men subject society to expect all men to fit this role.[20]
Male actors featured in TV shows and movies are oftentimes in excellent shape and have the "ideal" bodies. These men often fill the leading roles. When society is subjected to men who do not have ideal bodies, we typically see them as the comic relief. It is rare to see an out of shape man have a leading role. Leanne Dawson writes that "There are temporal, cultural and geographical "norms" of gender and other aspects of identity, which are often incorrectly considered to be inherent or natural."[21]
In the media, the ideal version of a man is seen as a strong, toned man. The idealized version of a woman is thin.[22] Body evaluation is more commonly used to criticize women than men, and it can take different forms for men. For example, body evaluation is often directed at men's nonverbal cues. By contrast, women more often are subject to body evaluation in the form of sexual, sometimes offensive, verbal remarks. Men tend to experience this from other men, whereas women experience it from both sexes.[19] The Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale (ISOS) is a scale that shows sexual objectification of respondents, both men and women. While experiencing sexual objectification it creates the need to constantly maintain and critique one's physical appearance. This leads to other things like eating disorders, body shaming, and anxiety. The ISOS scale can be related to objectification theory and sexism.[19] Self-objectification, which is the way in which people evaluate themselves, is concentrated more on women. Men typically experience it through media display. To the extent that men do experience self-objectification, studies have shown that men typically do not experience its negative effects to the extent that women do.[23][22]
In the media, sexual objectification has been used as a way to sell products to the general public.[24][25] Sexual objectification has been used as a marketing strategy for many decades according to the Journal of Advertising. This specific strategy targets the public in selling products that will make them look and feel desirable and attractive. It is stated that this strategy sells well by grabbing the attention of the public. The journal states that explicit advertisements do better in marketing than other non-explicit ads.[26]
Views on sexual objectification
While the concept of sexual objectification is important within feminist theory, ideas vary widely on what constitutes sexual objectification and what are the ethical implications of such objectification. Some feminists such as
Radical feminists view objectification as playing a central role in reducing women to what they refer to as the "oppressed sex
Pro-feminist cultural critics such as
The objection to the objectification of women is not a recent phenomenon. In the French Enlightenment, for example, there was a debate as to whether a woman's breasts were merely a sensual enticement or rather a natural gift. In Alexandre Guillaume Mouslier de Moissy's 1771 play The True Mother (La Vraie Mère), the title character rebukes her husband for treating her as merely an object for his sexual gratification: "Are your senses so gross as to look on these breasts – the respectable treasures of nature – as merely an embellishment, destined to ornament the chest of women?"[33]
The issues concerning sexual objectification became first problemized during the 1970s by feminist groups. Since then, it has been argued that the phenomenon of female sexual objectification has increased drastically since its problematization in all levels of life, and has resulted in negative consequences for women, especially in the political sphere. However, a rising form of new third-waver feminist groups have also taken the increased objectification of women as an opportunity to use the female body as a mode of power.[34] One study found that men exposed to media content in which women were objectified were more likely to accept those behaviors than men who were exposed to content where women were not objectified.[35]
Some
Others such as
Female self-objectification
Ariel Levy contends that Western women who exploit their sexuality by, for example, wearing revealing clothing and engaging in lewd behavior, engage in female self-objectification, meaning they objectify themselves. While some women see such behaviour as a form of empowerment, Levy contends that it has led to greater emphasis on a physical criterion or sexualization for women's perceived self-worth, which Levy calls "raunch culture".[49] In a study conducted by the State University of New York, it is found that women self-objectify when trying to fit the "perfect" female standard according to the male gaze.
Levy discusses this phenomenon in Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture. Levy followed the camera crew from the Girls Gone Wild video series, and argues that contemporary America's sexualized culture not only objectifies women, it encourages women to objectify themselves.[50] In today's culture, Levy writes, the idea of a woman participating in a wet T-shirt contest or being comfortable watching explicit pornography has become a symbol of feminist strength.
Jordan Peterson has asked why women need to wear make-up or high-heels in the workplace, that a double standard exists for sexual harassment and females who self-objectify themselves in society.[51]
Social media has made a major impact on the self-objectification of women. Through social media, women self-objectify by posting provocative images that know will be objectified by their viewers as a form of seeking validation of posting images that fits the mold of society.[52]
Latina women
Latina women face a particular form of sexual objectification based on
Such sexual objectifications hold real-world consequences for Latina women. For instance, the prevalence of negative Latina stereotypes (such as hypersexualization) has led to a decrease in positive in-group attitudes among the Latina community.[55]
Black women
Black women have been fetishized and objectified throughout history. They may be portrayed as having a more animalistic nature than their non-black counterparts. People who fetishize black women are sometimes said to have "
Black women are widely objectified in the media and in pornography, and are scrutinized more closely for doing the same things as their non-black counterparts.[citation needed] They are also stereotyped in the media as having more curvaceous bodies and bigger lips.[56]
Objectification theory
This section needs attention from an expert in Gender Studies. The specific problem is: The prose is jargon-filled, repetitive and nearly impenetrable to laypeople. The structure needs improvement.(January 2015) |
Objectification theory is a framework for understanding the experiences of women in cultures that sexually objectify them, proposed by Barbara Fredrickson and Tomi-Ann Roberts in 1997.[57] Within this framework, Fredrickson and Roberts draw conclusions about women's experiences. This theory states that, because of sexual objectification, women learn to internalize an outsider's view of their bodies as the primary view of themselves. Women, they explain, begin to view their bodies as objects separate from their person. This internalization has been termed self-objectification. This theory does not seek to prove the existence of sexual objectification; the theory assumes its existence in culture. This self-objectification then, according to objectification theory, leads to increased habitual body monitoring. With this framework in mind, Fredrickson and Roberts suggest explanations for consequences they believe are the result of sexual objectification. The consequences suggested are: increased feelings of shame, increased feelings of anxiety, decreased peak motivational state, and decreased awareness of internal bodily states.
Sexual objectification has been studied based on the proposition that girls and women develop their primary view of their physical selves from observing others. These observations can take place in the media or through personal experience.
Self-objectification
Women, girls, and self-objectification
Primarily, objectification theory describes how women and girls are influenced as a result of expected social and
Sexual objectification occurs when a person is identified by their sexual body parts or sexual function. In essence, an individual loses their identity, and is recognized solely by the physical characteristics of their body.[58] The purpose of this recognition is to bring enjoyment to others, or to serve as a sexual object for society.[5] Sexual objectification can occur as a social construct among individuals.
Sexual objectification has been around and present in society for many but has increased with the introduction of social media according to “Objectification, Sexualization, and Misrepresentation: Social Media and the College Experience - Stefanie E Davis, 2018” This journal shows a clear explanation for how young girls are influenced by social media to be sexually objectified. The platform is meant to share a glimpse into a person's life through photos to share with friends, family and mutuals. For many individuals, social media applications like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) are used to glamorize and romanticize certain lifestyles. Examples of this can be young women using their platform (however big it may be) to pose as an older age by uploading provocative photos. This behavior promotes sexual objectification of young girls that participate on social media.
Psychological consequences
Objectification theory suggests both direct and indirect consequences of objectification to women. Indirect consequences include
Causes of depression
Learned helplessness theory posits that because human bodies are only alterable to a certain point, people develop a sense of body shame and anxiety from which they create a feeling of helplessness in relation to correcting their physical appearance and helplessness in being able to control the way in which others perceive their appearance. This lack of control often results in depression.[8] In relating to a lack of motivation, objectification theory states that women have less control in relationships and the work environment because they have to depend on the evaluation of another who is typically basing their evaluation on physical appearance. Since the dependence on another's evaluation limits a woman's ability to create her own positive experiences and motivation, it adversely increases her likelihood for depression.[8] Furthermore, sexual victimization may be a cause. Specifically, victimization within the workplace degrades women. Harassment experienced every day wears on a woman, and sometimes this results in a state of depression.[8][64]
Alternatives and critique
Ann J. Cahill uses the concept of derivitization as an alternative to objectification when trying to address sexual objectification's seeming judgment of all physical interactions (termed somatophobia by Cahill). Cahill criticizes the notion of objectification as marginalizing the role of the body in one's subjective experience and therefore making it impossible to understand how being viewed as a sexually appealing body can enhance an individual's notion of self.[66] : 842
Instead, Cahill uses the concept of subjectivity from the study of intersubjectivity. A subject is an individual with their unique experience of reality. Derivitization is then defined as limiting another person's subjective behaviour and experience to align with or serve your own subjective experience. In this framing, the objectification exists in sex work is viewed instead as the derivitization of having another act for only one's own subjective experience and ignoring the sex worker's experience. Drawing comparisons to the doctor–patient relationship, Cahill argues that a recognition of what both people bring to a relationship and their subjective goals is what makes a relationship ethical.[66]: 843-847
See also
References
- ISBN 9780300182132. Retrieved 13 November 2022.
- ^ a b Barber, Nigel. "Objectification Is a Basic Aspect of Male Sexuality". Psychology Today. Retrieved 13 November 2022.
- ISBN 0814781497. Retrieved 13 November 2022.
- ISBN 978-0-8147-1069-2.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-510556-8.
- ^ S2CID 17954950.
- ^ a b Jhally, Sut (director) (1997). Dreamworlds II: desire, sex, power in music (Documentary). USA: Media Education Foundation.
- ^ S2CID 145272074.
- S2CID 17954950. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
- S2CID 144282688.
- ^ Report of the American Psychological Association task force on the sexualization of girls, executive summary (PDF) (Report). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 2010. Retrieved 19 February 2007.
- ^ "Sports, gym classes, team initiations and events". Sensations4women.com. 26 January 1998. Archived from the original on 30 April 2018. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
- ^ Citations:
- ISBN 978-0-312-13626-0.
- "A 'Playgirl" for adult TV". Multichannel News. NewBay Media. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
- Taormino, Tristan (13 May 2008). "Girls love gay male porn". The Village Voice. Josh Fromson. Archived from the original on 3 June 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2012.
- Scott, Lisa (15 October 2008). "Women who like to watch gay porn". Metro. DMG Media. Retrieved 17 August 2012.
- Murphy, Chris (12 May 2015). "Women's porn tastes: You'll never guess what ladies prefer". Trinity Mirror.
- S2CID 8287617.
- S2CID 8287617.
- ^ Neimark, Jill (1 November 1994). "The beefcaking of America". Psychology Today. Sussex Publishers. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
- PMID 31442260.
- ^ PMID 23458607.
- S2CID 161493223.
- S2CID 147349266.
- ^ a b Stevens Aubrey, Jennifer (27 May 2003). Investigating the role of self-objectification in the relationship between media exposure and sexual self-perceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Marriott Hotel, San Diego, CA, May 27, 2003.
- See also: Stevens Aubrey, Jennifer (June 2006). "Effects of sexually objectifying media on self-objectification and body surveillance in undergraduates: results of a 2-year panel study". .
- S2CID 55703429.
- S2CID 30977582.
- S2CID 216353566.
- S2CID 140844572. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- ISBN 978-0-06-051218-7.
- ISBN 978-1-84142-041-7.
- ISBN 978-0-674-63934-8.
- ISBN 978-0-19-510556-8.
- .
- ^ balembbn (15 April 2013). "Representations of Women in Reality TV". Feminism and Film (blog). Archived from the original on 14 April 2019 – via Vanderbilt University.
- ISBN 978-0-394-55948-3.
- S2CID 141197696.
- S2CID 145614917.
- Toronto, Ontario, Canada: via True Media. 12 January 1997. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-684-86317-7.
- ISBN 978-0-910311-92-2.
- Plugged In Online. Focus on the Family.
- ^ National Coalition for the Protection of Children & Families (July 1997). "Subtle Dangers of Pornography (special report by the National Coalition for the Protection of Children & Families)". Pure Intimacy (website). Focus on the Family. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
- ^ Shalit, Wendy (2000). "Modesty revisited". orthodoxytoday.org. Fr. Johannes Jacobse. Archived from the original on 2018-10-28. Retrieved 2015-09-07.
- ISBN 978-1-4051-1069-3.
- ISBN 978-0-679-73579-3.
- ^ McElroy, Wendy (2006). "A feminist overview of pornography, ending in a defense thereof". WendyMcElroy.com.
- ^ Kaminer, Wendy. "When Conservative Senators Sound Like Anti-Porn Feminists". Retrieved 15 October 2022.
- ^ Strossen, Nadine. "Who Really Benefits From the First Amendment". Tablet. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
- ISBN 9780415910378. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
- ISBN 0814781497. Retrieved 13 November 2022.
- ISBN 978-1-4165-2638-4.
- ^ Dougary, Ginny (25 September 2007). "Yes we are bovvered". The Times. London. Retrieved 23 May 2010.
- ^ Maples, Miranda (22 March 2018). "Jordan Peterson Questions If Men and Women Can Work Together". Study Breaks.
- S2CID 149757000.
- S2CID 149715074.
- S2CID 144571909.
- S2CID 148590923.
- ^ S2CID 240601761.
- S2CID 145272074.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-415-90186-4.
- ISBN 978-0-465-01349-4.
- ISBN 978-1-59385-040-1.
- ^ S2CID 146312527.
- ISSN 2166-109X.
- S2CID 10241677.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-205-79241-2.
- S2CID 144389646.
- ^ ISSN 0887-5367.
Further reading
- ISBN 978-0-415-90186-4.
- ISBN 0-14-013515-4(pbk).
- .
- Brooks, Gary R. (1995). The centerfold syndrome: how men can overcome objectification and achieve intimacy with women. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0-7879-0104-2.
- S2CID 145230875.
- Eames, Elizabeth R. (1976). "Sexism and woman as sex object". Journal of Thought. 11 (2): 140–143. Preview. [Link Broken]
- Holroyd, Julia (2005). Sexual objectification: The unlikely alliance of feminism and Kant (PDF). Society for Applied Philosophy International Congress. Oxford, UK. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2005-05-21. (conference paper)
- LeMoncheck, Linda (1985). Dehumanizing Women: Treating Persons as Sex Objects. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-8476-7386-5.
- JSTOR 2961930.
- Papadaki, Evangelia (Lina) (August 2007). "Sexual objectification: From Kant to contemporary feminism" (PDF). S2CID 144197352.
- Daily News. New York.
- ISBN 978-0-8050-8132-9.
- Mario Perniola, The Sex-appeal of the inorganic, translated by Massimo Verdicchio, London-New York, Continuum, 2004.
- Sharge, Laurie (April 2005). "Exposing the fallacies of anti-porn feminism". S2CID 145194517.
- Soble, Alan (2002). Pornography, Sex, and Feminism. Amherst, New York: ISBN 978-1-57392-944-8.
External links
- Papadaki, Evangelia (March 10, 2010), "Feminist perspectives on objectification", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- Shrage, Laurie (July 13, 2007), "Feminist perspectives on sex markets: 1.3 sexual objectification", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- Steinberg, David (March 5, 1993). "On Sexual Objectification". Spectator Magazine | Comes Naturally column #5. – Sex-positive feminist perspective on sexual objectification.
- Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on May 30, 2008. Interview with Janet Anderson.
- Kalyanaraman, Sriram; Redding, Michael; Steele, Jason (2000). "Sexual suggestiveness in online ads: effects of objectification on opposite genders". psu.edu/dept/medialab. Media Effects Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University. Archived from the original on February 8, 2008.
- Davis, Stefanie E (July 13, 2018) "Objectification, Sexualization and Misrepresentation: Social Media and the College Experience" Sage Journals
- Bello, D. C., Pitts, R. E., & Etzel, M. J. (1983). The communication effects of controversial sexual content in television programs and commercials. Journal of Advertising, 12(3), 32-42.
- Hill, M. S., & Fischer, A. R. (2008). Examining objectification theory: Lesbian and heterosexual women's experiences with sexual-and self-objectification. The Counseling Psychologist, 36(5), 745-776. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000007301669
- User generated content
- Tigtog (March 23, 2007). "FAQ: What is sexual objectification?". finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com. Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog via WordPress.
- Karen Straughan via YouTube. Retrieved June 7, 2017.