"Sex object" redirects here. For other uses, see Sex object (disambiguation)

Sexual objectification refers to the practice of regarding or treating another person merely as an instrument (object) towards one's sexual pleasure, and a sex object is a person who is regarded simply as an object of sexual gratification or who is sexually attractive. Objectification more broadly is an attitude that regards a person as a commodity or as an object for use, with little or no regard for a person's personality or sentience.^[1][2] Objectification is most commonly examined at a societal level, but can also arise at an individual level.

The concept of sexual objectification and, in particular, the objectification of women, is an important idea in feminist theory and psychological theories derived from feminism.^[3][4] Many feminists regard sexual objectification as objectionable and as playing an important role in gender inequality.^[1] Some social commentators, however, argue that some modern women objectify themselves as an expression of their empowerment over men, while others argue that increased sexual freedom for women, gay, and bisexual men has led to an increase of the objectification of men.^{[5][6][7][8][9]} The idea of sexual objectification has also been an important area of discussion and debate in the area of sexual ethics and the philosophy of sex.^[10]

Sexual objectification of women[link]

Feminist scholars say that the objectification of women involves the act of disregarding the personal and intellectual abilities and capabilities of a female; and reducing a woman's worth or role in society to that of an instrument for the sexual pleasure that she can produce in the mind of another.^[2][3] Although opinions differ as to which situations are objectionable, some feminists see objectification of women taking place in the sexually oriented depictions of women in advertising and media, women being portrayed as weak or submissive through pornography, images in more mainstream media such as advertising and art, stripping and prostitution, men brazenly evaluating or judging women sexually or aesthetically in public spaces, and the presumed need for cosmetic surgery, particularly breast enlargement and labiaplasty.^{[citation needed]}

Feminists argue that women have historically been valued mainly for their physical attributes. Some feminists and psychologists argue that such objectification can lead to negative psychological effects including depression and hopelessness, and can give women negative self-images because of the belief that their intelligence and competence are currently not being, or will never be, acknowledged by society.^[11][12] The precise degree to how objectification has affected women and society in general is a topic of academic debate. Such claims include: girls' understanding of the importance of appearance in society may contribute to feelings of fear, shame, and disgust that some experience during the transition from girlhood to womanhood because they sense that they are becoming more visible to society as sexual objects;^[13] and that young women are especially susceptible to objectification, as they are often taught that power, respect, and wealth can be derived from one's outward appearance.^[14]

Pro-feminist cultural critics such as Robert Jensen and Sut Jhally accuse mass media and advertising of promoting the objectification of women to help promote goods and services.^[15][16][17]

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?"^[18]

Recently, sexual-objectification has been reported as a national epidemic. A society filled with people experiencing sexual objectification and self-objectification is considered to have low political efficacy. The minimal self-worth of citizens leads them to doubt themselves in having the ability to understand and influence political affairs. As people lose their political efficacy, they stop having motivation to participate in society, and the result could be a society void of any enthusiasm, intellect, or advancement, or only input from one ruling power. Low political efficacy, or self-worth, also gives rise to sexual violence and its acceptance by society. Dehumanization through objectification has historically been a first step in justifying violence against a specific people. Today, 1 in 6 women are rape survivors, however 27% of women whose sexual assault cases matched the legal definition of rape actually considered themselves rape victims. Statistics like these acceptance of sexual violence by both men and women due to objectification and low self-worth. ^[19]

Female self-objectification[link]

Feminists such as Ariel Levy contend that exploitation by Western women of their sexuality by, for example, wearing revealing clothing and engaging in lewd behavior, are forms of female self-objectification. While some women see such behaviour as a form of empowerment, critics contend that it has led to greater emphasis on a physical criterion or sexualization for women's perceived self worth, which Levy calls "raunch culture".^[20]

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.^[21] 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; she says that she was surprised at how many people, both men and women, working for programs such as Girls Gone Wild told her that this new "raunchy" culture marked not the downfall of feminism but its triumph, because it proved that U.S. women have become strong enough to express their sexuality publicly.

Sexual objectification of men[link]

Feminist authors Christina Hoff Sommers and Naomi Wolf write that women's sexual liberation has led many women to a role reversal, whereby they view men as sex objects,^[22][23][24] in a manner similar to what they criticize men's treatment of women. Research has suggested that the psychological effects of objectification on men are similar to those of women, leading to negative body image among men.^[25]

Instances where men are being presented as sex objects include advertising, music videos, movies and television shows,^{[26][27][28][29]} beefcake calendars, women's magazines, male strip shows, and clothed female nude male (CFNM) events.^[30][31] Also, more women are purchasing and consuming pornography.^[32][33][34]

Views on sexual objectification[link]

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 Naomi Wolf find the concept of physical attractiveness itself to be problematic,^[35] with some radical feminists being opposed to any evaluation of another person's sexual attractiveness based on physical characteristics. John Stoltenberg goes so far as to condemn as wrongfully objectifying any sexual fantasy that involves visualization of a woman.^[36]

Radical feminists view objectification as playing a central role in reducing women to what they refer to as the "sex class". While some feminists view mass media in societies that they argue are patriarchal to be objectifying, they often focus on pornography as playing an egregious role in habituating men to objectify women.^[37] Other feminists, particularly those identified with sex-positive feminism, take a different view of sexual objectification and see it as a problem when it is not counterbalanced by women's sense of their own sexual subjectivity.^{[citation needed]}

Some social conservatives have taken up aspects of the feminist critique of sexual objectification. In their view however, the increase in the sexual objectification of both sexes in Western culture is one of the negative legacies of the sexual revolution.^{[38][39][40][41][42]} These critics, notably Wendy Shalit, advocate a return to pre-sexual revolution standards of sexual morality, which Shalit refers to as a "return to modesty", as an antidote to sexual objectification.^[39][43]

Other feminists contest feminist claims about the objectification of women. Camille Paglia holds that "Turning people into sex objects is one of the specialties of our species." In her view, objectification is closely tied to (and may even be identical with) the highest human faculties toward conceptualization and aesthetics.^[44] Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy holds that the label "sex object" means nothing because inanimate objects are not sexual. She continues that women are their bodies as well as their minds and souls.^[45]

Objectification theory[link]

Objectification Theory is based on the principle that girls and women develop their primary view of their physical selves from observations of others. These observations can take place in the media or through personal experience.^[46] Through a blend of expected and actual exposure, females are socialized to objectify their own physical characteristics from a third person perception, which is identified as self-objectification.^[47] Women and girls develop an expected physical appearance for themselves, based on observations of others; and are aware that others are likely to observe as well. The sexual objectification and self objectification of women is believed to influence social gender roles and inequalities between the sexes.^[48] Some research questions the existence of sexual objectification. Some research shows that people do not so much objectify others but redistributes mental states in others ^[49]

Self-objectification[link]

Self-objectification can increase in elicit situations which heightens the awareness of an individual’s physical appearance.^[50] Here, the presence of a third person observer is enhanced. Therefore, when individuals know others are looking at them, or will be looking at them, they are more likely to care about their physical appearance. Examples of enhanced presence of an observer include the presence of an audience, camera, or other known observer.

Women, girls, and self-objectification[link]

Primarily, objectification theory describes how women and girls are influenced as a result of expected social and gender roles.^[46] Research indicates not all women are influenced equally, due to the anatomical, hormonal, and genetic differences of the female body; however, women’s bodies are often objectified and evaluated more frequently.^[51] Females learn that their physical appearance is important to themselves and society. As a result, females consider their physical appearance often, expecting that others will also.

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.^[46] The purpose of this recognition is to bring enjoyment to others, or to serve as a sexual object for society.^[52] Sexual objectification can occur as a social construct among individuals.

Psychological consequences[link]

Research indicates that objectification theory is valuable to understanding how repeated visual images in the media are socialized and translated into mental health problems, including psychological consequences on the individual and societal level.^[53] These include increased self consciousness, increased body anxiety, heightened mental health threats (depression, anorexia nervosa, bulimia, and sexual dysfunction), and increased body shame. Therefore, the theory has been used to explore an array of dependent variables including disordered eating, mental health, depression, motor performance, body image, idealized body type, stereotype formation, sexual perception and sexual typing.^[50][53] Effects of objectification theory are identified on both the individual and societal levels.

Table by Allen Jones which incorporates a woman in the furniture

Sexual fetishism[link]

Sexual fetishism can be considered sexual objectification when a person is assigned or adopts the status of the fetish object. In BDSM activities, even though it is consensual, subjecting a submissive to erotic humiliation can be regarded as sexual objectification. Human furniture is a form of fetishism and sexual objectification. Allen Jones' "Hat Stand and Table Sculpture" incorporates semi-naked women into furniture, and are regarded as sexual objectification.

See also[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Sexual objectification

• Dehumanization
• Gender role
• Objectification
• Sex in advertising
• Sexuality in music videos
• Sexualization

References[link]

Further reading[link]

• Bartky, Sandra Lee. 1990. Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression. New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-90185-5 (hc), ISBN 0-415-90186-3 (pb).
• Berger, John. 1972. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books. ISBN 0-563-12244-7 (BBC), ISBN 0-14-021631-6, 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 0-7879-0104-0.
• Eames, Elizabeth. 1976. Sexism and woman as sex object. Journal of Thought 11(2):140–143.
• Holroyd, Julia. 2005. Sexual objectification: The unlikely alliance of feminism and Kant (conference paper). Society for Applied Philosophy International Congress 2005, Oxford, UK.
• LeMoncheck, Linda. 1985. Dehumanizing Women: Treating Persons as Sex Objects. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. ISBN 0-8476-7331-6 (hc).
• Nussbaum, Martha C. 1995. Objectification. Philosophy and Public Affairs 24(4): 249–291. doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.1995.tb00032.x. (JSTOR link.)
• Papadaki, Evangelia. 2007. Sexual objectification: From Kant to contemporary feminism. Contemporary Political Theory 6(3):330–348. doi:10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300282. (PDF)
• Shrage, Laurie. 2005. Exposing the fallacies of anti-porn feminism. Feminist Theory 6:45–65. doi:10.1177/1464700105050226.
• Soble, Alan. 2002. Pornography, Sex, and Feminism. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-57392-944-1 (pb).

External links[link]

• "Feminist Perspectives on Objectification" by Evangelia Papadaki, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, March 10, 2010.
• "Feminist Perspectives on Sex Markets: 1.3 Sexual Objectification" by Laurie Shrage, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, July 13, 2007.
• "FAQ: What is sexual objectification?" by Tigtog, Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog, March 23, 2007.
• "Comes Naturally #5: On Sexual Objectification" by David Steinberg, Spectator Magazine, March 5, 1993. – Sex-positive feminist perspective on sexual objectification.
• "Women Like Seeing Men as Sex Objects". Interview with Janet Anderson by Petronella Wyatt, Daily Telegraph, October 5, 1996.
• John Berger's Ways of Seeing, Episode 2: The Female Nude. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4. (Archived on YouTube.)
• "Sexual Suggestiveness in Online Ads: Effects of Objectification on Opposite Genders" by Sriram Kalyanaraman, Michael Redding, and Jason Steele, Media Effects Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University, 2000.
• "Bikini-Clad Women Make Men Impatient" by Bram Van den Bergh, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Marketing & Consumer Science Blog, June 11, 2008.