Sexual Objectification

From UBC Wiki

Sexual objectification is the act of reducing a person into an object to use and consume sexually.[1] Sexual objectification has been a central idea under debate in feminist politics since the 1970s, starting most notably with Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon.[2][3] Scholars have been arguing for decades about whether sexual objectification is harmful to humanity and whether it contributes to gender inequality.

History of Sexual Objectification Theory

Second Wave and Radical Feminism

Second wave feminism is used to describe feminist activism from the 1960s to mid-1980s.[4] According to many second wave feminists, sexual objectification is a pejorative, morally problematic term.[5] However, anti-pornography campaigns of the time heightened conflicts between feminist activists because there was not a consensus of opinion within the movement regarding the relationship between pornography, oppression and exploitation. There were several different forms of feminisms that emerged within the second wave movement, including radical feminism which "locates patriarchy within the explicit differences between women and men"[6] and was partly characterized by strong advocacy against pornography. [7] Radical feminists believe that patriarchy is solely to blame for oppression, that men are the "principal instigators...of gendered privilege and societal advantage," and they reject patriarchal definitions of beauty and sexual attractiveness[6] For radical feminists, pornography and the sexual violence that goes along with it are an "indication of heterosexual patriarchy and coercion of women."[6] Through their anti-pornography activism in the radical feminist movement, Dworkin and MacKinnon became vocal advocates about the gender inequalities embedded in sexual objectification. They argue that women are much more often objectified than men, and that men do this objectifying.[1] It is women who are dehumanized into sex objects with purely instrumental value for the sexual pleasure of the male gaze. The male gaze is a term that describes the power dynamics in viewing media, characterized by a male subject as viewer and a female object of his gaze.[8]In other words, it is the belief that all media is created to appeal to a straight male audience. Because the majority of media is ultimately created or controlled by men, the male gaze is perpetuated and becomes the normative culture. This is "a culture in which men are always assumed to be the consumer of media" and creates a social script where it's acceptable for men to do all the looking while women are only looked at. [9]According to radical feminist thinkers, sexual objectification is a social process. It is not an issue about sex drive but about a social hierarchy of power.[3] They reason that pornography, in particular, creates and sustains this power imbalance between men and women.[1] Feminist activists also assert that sexual objectification and pornography lead to increased violence against women.

Third Wave Feminism

Third Wave Feminism is commonly referred to the period of feminist activism starting the 1990s arguably up to the present time.[10] Third wave feminists have a different reaction to the issue of sexual objectification. In their approach, which is popularly known as a sex-positivism, third wave thinkers emphasize women’s subjectivity and pleasure in sexual encounters.[10] Contesting second wave feminist’s polarized view of sexuality, third wave feminists emphasize the complexity of sexual relationships and assert that women are not always victims of men’s subjectivity.[10] This view of sexuality emphasizes women’s empowerment and agency. Martha Nussbaum argues that sexual objectification when seen through the lens of consent and choice can in fact be a harmless part of sexual life for women. She claims that women can find power and subjectivity in sexual objectification.[5]

Post-Feminism

Angela McRobbie asserts that we live in a postfeminist society in which gender equality is claimed to be fully achieved. Post-feminism is based on the theory that society has rendered "male-female tensions...inconsequential," and therefore claimed "the supposed war of the sexes as unnecessary, spurious, and vacuous."[6] The post-feminist society promotes “tropes of freedom and choice” and by doing so claims that “feminism is decisively aged and made to seem redundant.”[11] A post-feminist society communicates the discourse that “equality is achieved” so much so that feminism “is no longer needed” and it is “displaced as a political movement.”[11] However, McRobbie warns that it is within this paradigm that gender inequality actually persists.[11] Women are encouraged by neoliberal ideologies to become empowered through consumption and individualism.[6] Dr. Caroline Heldman claims that objectification and gender inequality has not diminished but it has instead become normalized under the guise of choice. She blames the mass media and advertising for the ubiquitousness of sexually explicit and objectifying imagery as well as the destigmatization of pornography. Building off of second wave thinkers, Heldman claims that conflating sexual objectification with sexual liberation produces harmful effects to women in Western society. Heldman’s research focuses on how societal tendencies toward sexual objectification affect the perceptions of women in politics.[12] She fights back against what Ariel Levy terms the emergent “raunch culture,” within which women perform sexuality in a way that consents to objectification for the pleasure of men.[13] Heldman argues that in the postfeminist world, women actually deprioritize their own sexual pleasure by catering to consumerist tendencies of the male gaze. She depicts Western culture as a society that promotes consumption of people and bodies which we mistake for equality and empowerment.[12] However, post-feminism is a contested theory that has been criticized for lacking "a comprehensive definition." [14] Some define post-feminism as related to popular culture, as Angela McRobbie does, but some refer to the term as a trend in academia to move feminism toward a "reconceptualization of the self, subjectivity and identity," influenced by prominent post-structuralist thinkers.[15] Some, like Hall and Rodriquez, declare that post-feminism is a myth because their research shows that despite postfeminism in the media, "women continue to support feminism and find it relevant in their lives."[14]

Kant Theory

Immanuel Kant defines objectification beings with the offer for profit of one's person for another's sexual gratification. A person, Kant says, cannot allow others to use her body parts sexually in exchange for money without inevitably losing her humanity and becoming an object. As he writes: '...a man is not at his own disposal. He is not entitled to sell a limb, not even one of his teeth. But to allow one's person for profit to be used for the satisfaction of sexual desire, to make of oneself an Object of demand, is to dispose over oneself as over a thing...' [16]

Commodification necessarily leads to objectification. Once a woman offers her body to a man and allows him to use it for sexual purposes in exchange for money, she has made her whole person (body and self) 'a thing on which another satisfies his appetite' [17]. And, according to Kant, 'human beings are ...not entitled to offer themselves, for profit, as things for the use of others in the satisfaction of their sexual propensities. In so doing, they would run the risk of having their person used by all and sundry as an instrument for the satisfaction of inclination'. [17] The prostitute, in deciding to exchange herself for money, is reduced to an object. Kant puts most of the blame on the prostitute for the harm done to her humanity. The prostitute, Kant thinks, is responsible for her objectification and degradation, as long as she voluntarily allows others to use her person (body and self) sexually for profit, and so to turn her into an object.

Sexual Objectification Theory

Sexual objectification theory claims that women are treated as possessing a value that determines her usefulness by others. Sexual objectification occurs when a woman is not seen as a whole but rather as her body and body parts being single physical parts for the use of male sexual desires. The theory of sexual objectification suggests that sexual objectification leads to and contributes to an abundance of mental health problems that negatively impact women [18].

Sexual objectification leads to women internalizing the views of outsiders in such a way that they begin to view themselves as objects. Rather than evaluating themselves based on their qualities and attributions, women are focusing on their appearance. These negative psychological processes, further lead to the development of mental health issues in women. Specifically, issues such as appearance related anxiety. Anxiety linked to appearance causes females to grow increasingly fearful about how people will evaluate her appearance and body parts. In light of this, females begin to fear their personal safety in terms of worries of being raped. These anxieties further reduce opportunities for motivational flow and diminish awareness of regular body sensations such as hunger and sexual arousal. This can further lead to eating disorders such as bulimia or anorexia and depression [18].

Not only are men objectifying women sexually, the media is increasingly doing so also. The media portrays women with unrealistic qualities as being the “ideal” and “standard” image of beauty. These women often are shown as possessing unattainable standards of beauty which puts a greater pressure on females in terms of their worth and how they evaluate themselves. There is an importance placed on beauty and appearance rather than on self-worth and character which should be the defining features of women. The portrayals by the media lead to body shaming, body dissatisfaction as well as the internalization of standards of beauty which are deemed as culturally acceptable [18].

Feminists argue that "not only is sexual objectification part of the status quo, it also plays a role in the underlying current of misogyny that courses through our society." [19] Although misogyny is usually defined as the hatred of women, they argue that it exists in other forms as well. Sexual objectification effectively places a woman's sole value in her body. Everything else that contributes to her uniqueness and importance as an individual person in society is ignored, which contributes to its dehumanizing factor. Additionally, sexual objectification further diminishes a woman's feelings of self worth because it condones the horribly oppressive message that women exist first and foremost as a means of sexual satisfaction for men.

Sexual Objectification in Media

Advertising

1988 Mickey Malt Liquor advertisement

Sexual Objectification in advertising is related to the idea that "sex sells". As sexual objectification puts "one person in the role of the subject and one person in the role of the object"[19] a figure objectified in an advertisement becomes another thing that is buyable. The figures are usually wearing minimal, if any, clothing and are placed in sexually suggestive positions. As Carole Heldman explains in a series on sexual objectification, components of an objectifying advertisement can include: the image showing only part of a sexualized body (particularly faceless or from behind), the figure directly standing in for an object (or larger than the object being advertised), the image showing multiple figures' bodies as interchangeable, the image endorsing a figure that has not given consent, the image showing the figure as product, and the image showing the figure as sexually available.[20]

The image to the right shows a 1988 an American advertisement for Mickey's Malt Liquor, owned by the second largest brewer in the world. This advertisement shows many of the aspects that Heldman described in her definition of a sexual objectification. Firstly, her body, covered only by a bright bikini, is the central part of the image. The woman is headless, so she loses her individuality; is shown from behind, making her vulnerable; and is much larger than the bottle of beer that she holds, making her a commodity. The tagline says "The first thing I noticed was her Big Mouth", which is not shown in the photo, but is supposed to depict the woman as sexually available. The advertisement creates a woman that seems like she is for sale just like the liquor, reinforcing the sexual objectification of women and rape culture.

Advertisements are meant to create recognition in a consumer so that when they have brand recognition when they go to select a product. To create this brand recognition, companies have to create content that the consumer will remember: "the most effective advertisements of all are those with little or no rational content".[21]. Thus, the logic for using a sexual objectifying advertisement that does not immediately relate to the product is that it will shock the viewer and cause them to remember the product when they go to select it. In the 1990's, Calvin Klein launched its controversially sexualized jeans campaigned and doubled its revenue.[22] . However, today there is evidence that sexually objectifying advertisements may no longer be as effective. As researchers found "people pay so much attention to the graphic material their minds are distracted from what is being promoted" and "brands advertised during programmes with sexual overtones were also viewed less favorably". [23]. It is possible that the brands using sexual advertisements are beginning to be viewed less favorably because of changes in feminism in the 21st century .

Sexual Objectification on Instagram

Instagram, a social media tool that has taken the world by storm. An outlet that lets people post pictures of their photogenic lunches, cute puppies, and picture perfect vacations. When instagram began it was simply a place to upload personal photos, now it has become a giant online marketing platform which unfortunately, objectifies women through advertising.

Example 1: Fitness advertising and Instagram - Yovanna Ventura

Yovanna Ventura is considered a "fitness model" and has over 2.9 million followers on Instagram. Most of her posts consist of her posing in a sexual manner in skimpy work out clothes (for advertisement purposes of her sponsers), shots of her breasts or/and ass holding "freshmeals" and "EHPlabs protein", both of which she is also sponsored by. Advertising on instagram is certainly not a crime, however, it becomes sexual objectification when the woman (or man) advertising feels the need to sexual objectify themselves so that her post gets more views and "likes".

Example 2: "Its all a sham" Instagram "model" reveals truth behind posts

In the beginning of November 2015, Instagram "model" Essena O'Neill decided that she had had enough with the fakeness and objectification of Instagram. O'Neil had more than 574,000 Instagram followers on her page, a page with beautiful snapshots of what seemed to be a perfect life. However, after deleting 2000 photos she began to tell the truth behind her Instagram posts, captioning pictures such as " this "candid shot" took us 2 hours to get right". In a scandalous bikini clad photo she re-captioned it "yet another photo taken to promote purely my 16 year old body. This was my whole identity. That was so limiting" (O'Neill, 2015)

A statement O'Neil made on a post to Instagram October 27th 2015:

“I’m quitting Instagram, YouTube and Tumblr. Deleted over 2000 photos here today that served no real purpose other than self promotion. Without realising, I’ve spent majority of my teenage life being addicted to social media, social approval, social status and my physical appearance. Social media, especially how I used it, isn’t real. It’s contrived images and edited clips ranked against each other. It’s a system based on social approval, likes, validation in views, success in followers. It’s perfectly orchestrated self absorbed judgement. I was consumed by it.”

Reference

Netshark, 2015. Former Instagram Model Reveals the Awful Truths Behind Her ‘Perfect’ Pictures. Nov 2, 2015. http://nextshark.com/essena-oneill-instagram-truth/#rmns.

Music

The music industry is considered a heavily sexualized industry. The most obvious sexual objectification of women in music comes when they are the subjects in a male artist's song, or especially, a male artist's music video.[24] In these videos the male artist is usually singing surrounded by female dancers, setting the man as the center of the scene and the women as decoration. Less clear though, is how female artists sexualize themselves in order to increase popularity, and whether this is considered objectification or not.[24] In 2014, American rapper Nicki Minaj released the controversial song and accompanying music video Anaconda. In the song, Minaj samples a classic male rapper Sir Mix-A-Lot's song "Baby Got Back", which sexually objectified women in the traditional sense of a man rapping about a woman's body being used for his own pleasure. In Minaj's video, women dance sexually, but for their own pleasure. As a critic writes: "the song is far more empowering than it is derogatory. It shows — bravely and boldly — that women can and should own their curves, their sexuality and how they choose to express that in any way, whether it's overt or subtle. She's showing that it's not only men who should be allowed to show themselves as sexual beings, in and out of their music."[25]. In this example, Minaj sexualizes herself but does not objectify herself because she is doing it for her own pleasure on her own terms. When analyzing the music industry's widespread sexual objectification, it is also important also look at how race and sexual orientation affects the sexual objectification through intersectionality .

Movies and Television

Movies and television provide an extended period of time for sexual objectification to transpire. As sexual objectification can range in terms of explicitness, it can be difficult to immediately identify scenes of sexual objectification. One example is the costumes: "Female characters (even powerful ones, like hospital administrator Dr. Lisa Cuddy on the show House, M.D.) wear low-cut shirts and tight clothing, while their male colleagues dress in normal business attire or loose clothing. [19] While this is clearly visible, less apparent is that women are underrepresented in TV shows and movies in general. In 1985, American cartoonist Alison Bechdel created the Bechdel Test as a way of quickly demonstrating if a movie represents women in a basic way. It asks: 1. Are there at least two named women characters? 2. Do they talk to each other? 3. Do they talk to each other about something other than a man?. [26] According to the Bechdel Test website, 6148 movies have been analyzed and only 57.6% of these pass all three questions of the test.[26] The underrepresentation of women in TV as determined by the Bechdel test and movies is a form of sexual objectification, because it means that when women are represented they are not placed as equals to their male counterparts.

Sexual Objectification of Men

An example of "hunkvertising". Note the differences in posture compared to ads which sexually objectify women

Sexual objectification is normally considered the objectification of women by men. However, coming into the 21st century this definition has become more fluid and the questions "can women objectify men" and "can a member of one sex objectify another member of the same sex" have arisen. In advertising, the practice of using sexualized male figures to sell a product is known colloquially as "hunkvertising" and usually features a posed male model wearing little clothes, at first reminiscent to an advertisement sexually objectifying women. However, most male figures have their faces showing and their gaze is intent at the viewer, humanizes them and showing their consent.[27] In an opinion piece, writer Martin Daubney writes "These days, it’s acceptable for straight men to admit we actually quite like looking at Jamie Dornan’s body – and Beckham’s budgie smugglers or David Gandy’s pecs. It's not a sexual thing, because we look at these men as objects: superior physical beings we’d like to be a little more like. Straight men thinking more like gays – and that’s healthy."[28]. However, while men are depicted as sexual as often or more often than women in society, it does not necessarily mean that they are objectified. A study in 2012 gave participants photos of sexualized men and women right side up and upside down. Images of people cause recognition problems when they are upside down but images of objects do not. Male and female participants answered comparably: "They recognized right-side-up men better than upside-down men, suggesting that they saw the sexualized men as persons. On the contrary, the women in underwear weren't any harder to recognize when they appeared upside down, indicating that the sexy women were consistently identified as objects".[29]. While men and women can be equally sexualized, only women can have their humanity taken away because of it and turned into objects. This is evident in the way sexualized men and women are commonly presented in advertising. Men are much more likely to be presented as an actual character with a distinct personality as opposed to being simply an object to be admired. They are more likely to adopt commanding postures instead of the passive and submissive postures frequently displayed by women in comparable ads. This results in sexualized men being seen as dominant and powerful whereas sexualized women are often seen as meek or depraved. Just because a man's body is used in the same manner as a woman's does not make the two experiences equal in terms of the messages being supported. This gendered sexualization enforces negative gender stereotyping by promoting men as the active instigator and women as the passive body. According to writer Shannon Ridgway, this is why the sexualization of men today is not at all comparable to what women have faced in the past and continue to face now. She describes how "even if a man is objectified on occasion, it is not the same as living within its oppressive structure day in and day out.". It is women alone who have experienced the centuries of systemic oppression and the negative repercussions of such a system. Ridgway argues that it is far less common for a man to be offended or demeaned by being sexualized because it is not "backed by [the] history and current system of domination, violence, oppression, repression, dehumanization, and degradation” that is inextricably linked with the sexualization of women. [19].

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Papadaki, Evangelia. (2007) "Sexual objectification: from Kant to contemporary feminism." Contemporary Politcal Theory. 6, (330-348)
  2. ↑ Dworkin, Andrea. (1981) Pornography: men possessing women. New York. Dutton.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 MacKinnon, Catharine. (1986) "Pornography: not a moral issue." Women Studies International Forum. 9(1), (63-78)
  4. ↑ Crapanzano, T. (2012). Feminist theory: second wave. In M. Kosut (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gender in media. (pp. 103-106). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4135/9781452218540.n44
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Nussbaum, Martha. (1995) "Objectification." Philosophy and Public Affairs. 24(4), (249-291)
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Jones-Devitt, Stella and Julie Dickinson. (2007) "Feminism and Post-Feminism" in Critical Thinking in Health and Social Care. eds. Jones-Devitt, Stella and Smith, Liz. SAGE Publicaations, USA. 88-102.
  7. ↑ Crapanzano, T. (2012). Feminist theory: second wave. In M. Kosut (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gender in media. (pp. 103-106). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4135/9781452218540.n44
  8. ↑ Arya, R. (2012). Male gaze. In M. Kosut (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gender in media. (pp. 195-197). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4135/9781452218540.n85
  9. ↑ LaFata, Alexia (2015). "Why It's Completely Okay To Objectify Men...No Really, It Is." Elite Daily. http://elitedaily.com/life/culture/okay-to-objectify-men/1106317/
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 Griebling, B. (2012). Feminist theory: third wave. In M. Kosut (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gender in media. (pp. 107-109). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4135/9781452218540.n46
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 McRobbie, Angela. (2004) "Post-Feminism and Popular Culture." Feminist Media Studies. 4(3), 255-264.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 Heldman, Caroline and Wade, Lisa. (2011) "Sexualizing Sarah Palin." Sex Roles. 65, 156-164.
  13. ↑ Levy, Ariel. (2005) Female chauvinist pigs: women and the rise of raunch culture. New York. Free Press.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Hall, Elaine and Rodriguez, Marine Salupo. (2003) "The Myth of Postfeminism." Gender & Society. 17(6), 878-902.
  15. ↑ Browning, Gary; Halcli, Abigail and Webster, Frank. (1999) Understanding Contemporary Society: Theories of the Present. SAGE Publications Inc., USA
  16. ↑ Kant, I. (1963) 'Trans', in L. Infield (ed.) Lectures on Ethics , New York: Harper and Row.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Kant, I. (1996) 'Trans', in M. Gregor (ed.) The Metaphysics of Morals , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 http://knowledge.sagepub.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/view/familyhealth/n327.xml
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 19.3 Ridgway, Shannon. (2014). "Can Men be Objectified by Women". Everyday Feminism. http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/07/men-objectified-by-women/
  20. ↑ Heldman, Caroline. (2012)."Sexual Objectification (Part 1). What is it?" The Society Pages. http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2012/07/02/sexual-objectification-part-1-what-is-it/
  21. ↑ Leslie, Ian. (2015). "How the Mad Men lost the plot". Financial Times. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/cd1722ba-8333-11e5-8e80-1574112844fd.html
  22. ↑ Furnham, Adrian. (2013). "Does Sex Sell". Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sideways-view/201312/does-sex-sell
  23. ↑ Telegraph reporter. (2015). "Sex Sells?: It can make you forget what is being advertised, says scientists". The Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/shopping-and-consumer-news/11754878/Sex-sells-It-can-make-you-forget-what-is-being-advertised-say-scientists.html
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Lewis, Randy. (2012). "Women Objectify women in music videos too; study finds" LA Times. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2012/04/women-sex-object-music-video-research-study.html
  25. ↑ Clifton, Derrick. (2014). "Nicki Minaj's 'Anaconda' Is the Fiercest Take on Female Sexuality of the Year". Mic. http://mic.com/articles/95520/nicki-minaj-s-anaconda-is-the-fiercest-take-on-female-sexuality-of-the-year
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 http://bechdeltest.com
  27. ↑ Gianatasio, David. (2014) "Hunkvertising: The Objectification of Men in Advertising". Adweek. http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/hunkvertising-objectification-men-advertising-152925
  28. ↑ Daubney, Martin. (2015). "Men are now objectified more than women" The Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11395576/Men-are-now-objectified-more-than-women.html
  29. ↑ Villarica, Hans. 2012. "Study: The Objectification of Women Is a Real, Measurable Phenomenon". The Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/05/study-the-objectification-of-women-is-a-real-measurable-phenomenon/257504/
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Sexual_Objectification&oldid=405361"