What is sexual objectification and how is it dangerous?
Text: Maria Servetnik
In society - and in that including the Russian one, the public debate about various forms of discrimination, in particular, about sexism, is gaining momentum. Gamergate, the stormy debate about the shirt, which did not leave anyone aside, the appeal of the initiative group to ELLE after the publication of the article about Ekaterina Arkharova - all this signals that these phenomena are of concern to everyone. But we must understand that in our society there is no long tradition of such a discussion and, accordingly, there is no public consensus on a number of issues.
Comments in social networks and under media publications demonstrate that many still do not have a clear understanding of what the struggle for rights, discrimination, sexism, feminism, radical feminism, and so on are. We decided that for a constructive dialogue, you must first decide on key concepts. First of all, we asked the experts to explain what sexual objectification is, how it manifests itself in culture and society, and what consequences it may have.
Denis Saltykov cultural studies
Sexual objectification is the construction and / or perception of someone as a sexual object. For example, if a man goes to the subway and eagerly examines the neckline of a lady who is sitting opposite, this is a typical and familiar case of sexual objectification. In the same way, a man (I refer to such a masculine heterosexual model as the most common in our everyday life), who looks at the theater at an actress's game and then comments on her friends: "Nychos is her tits!" - also a vivid and clear example of sexual objectification.
Nevertheless, it is worth distinguishing objectification as such from sexual objectification. It is generally human nature to objectify, as modern anthropologists like Daniel Miller clearly explain. This is a normal way of social interaction. Therefore, it is very easy to overdo the criticism of objectification. Likewise, it is worthwhile to relate to the representation of women in art. You should always take into account the context of production and distinguish the image of the female body as a sexual fetish from, for example, the canonical image of a nude in Renaissance painting. The notorious Venus is the work of creating a religious fetish. Sexual objectification is not necessarily added here. We know that naked female nature was not erotized in antiquity, in the Renaissance, things were already a little more complicated, but this is still a situation that is not identical to the modern one, and therefore there is no need to hurry with the use of analogies from our time.
In addition, in addition to the intention of the creator of the image, there is also the perception of people, end users. It is no coincidence that nowadays in anthropology there is a widespread recommendation to pay attention to audience analysis. It is quite possible that something that was conceived as a religious fetish (I use this example because of its clarity) will be perceived by the audience in the familiar spirit: "Well, and the figure of this lady!" The main thing in the criticism of sexual objectification is to be attentive to the social context in each specific case in order not to start measuring everything from the point of view of today's context. Subtle criticism must be sensitive to differences.
In the trend, accents are placed like this: a man is sexy when she is successful, and a woman is successful when she is sexy
Sexual objectification on the position of women affects, of course, negatively - but this is if it is total. Objectification involves abstraction from all other qualities. This may be interesting in a directly erotic context, but obviously inappropriate and harmful in a professional context. If in the decision to take a job, more attention is paid to the compliance of the applicant's physical data with the actual canons of beauty than her skills related to work, then the more talented can suffer. This is understandable in itself, but there are consequences that are a little less obvious. Sexual objectification penetrating all spheres forces women to spend their time and energy not only on surviving in modern conditions, but also on maintaining the appearance corresponding to the conventional canon. There is little time and effort for everything that does not concern external sexuality.
It is interesting to compare with the position of men. They are also often presented as sexual objects, but the images of male professionals in the public sphere are still much more. And it tunes in to certain stereotypes. I harden, but in the trend accents are placed like this: a man is sexy when she is successful, and a woman is successful when she is sexy. But there is an important clarification. Introducing censorship about this and trying to use repressive logic is pointless and harmful. It does not change the situation when one group of people suppresses others. These are cases where, in some situation gaining power (for example, in some media), some feminists reproduce the situation against which they fought, but in the opposite direction.
Cultural criticism is needed, but when it moves to the repression of individuals, it becomes not like striving to improve the status of women, but trying to dictate little things even in individual cases. And here I want to return to the thesis that sexual objectification in itself is not harmful. Harmful is the situation when it becomes total and applies to all areas.
Maria Dudko Co-organizer of the Moscow Experimental School on gender studies, activist, gallery owner
Sexual objectification is when a person treats another person not as a full-fledged personality, but as a collection of pleasant parts of the body that exist solely to satisfy other people's fantasies. It so happened that in our society, this set of body parts are most often women, because mass culture looks at the world primarily through the prism of heterosexuality. This means that female sexuality turns into a commodity, and a man becomes a consumer who needs both her and the car or watch she sells. As a result, the girl grows up with the idea that in society she is valued primarily for the ability to physically attract men, and not for her intelligence, intelligence or professional accomplishments.
In the feminist theory, the phenomenon of traditional society is well described, when a woman feels herself a full-fledged subject, but sees around that in general no one is particularly interested in it, and most importantly, what is her breast size and whether she has wrinkles on her face. In such a situation, a woman has to either constantly struggle with this total depreciation of herself, or occupy a comfortable subordinate position next to a man. And feminism fights precisely with such an inert, limited view of female sexuality, when a woman is “guilty”, if the way she looks, “provoked” someone to slap her on the priest in the subway, but if she has many sexual partners, then considered a "whore."
What is important is not that humanity likes the naked body, but what social processes lie behind these images.
It is believed that sexual objectification is a consequence of the sexual revolution, but it is not the fact that humanity likes naked body and thoughts about sex, but what social processes lie behind these images. Yes, in classical art there are also a lot of naked female bodies, but it must be remembered that for most of human history women could not be artists at all, did not have access to ways of expressing their subjectivity, acted solely as muses.
And even Matt Taylor's notorious shirt is a bitter reminder that small sexist blunders are normal if there are good reasons to justify who committed them. Not to mention how easily we are all willing to forget that everyday sexism, including the picture of the modern world, is composed of, for example, only 30% of the total number of scientists are women.
Sofia Egorova admin of the public body positive
Sexual objectification is the reduction of the personality, living-minded-multidimensional, to the sole function of sexual service, entertainment, "supplement." For example, we often come across this in advertising. And not only the spiritual and intellectual component is ignored, but also bodily reactions, desires, the right to dispose of your body. The person is considered as a subject. It's simple.
Sexual objectification is not necessarily connected with sex as a process — rather, it is such a sex-like ornament, a sexual decor. Sexualized images of women are not “just pictures”, they are not “pictures of bodies” - this is the reduction of even the bodily aspect of personality to the function of “decor” and “entertainment”. Like the shirt of this ill-fated. It became familiar, everyone got used to it. For decades, the clothes and appearance of famous women have been criticized and estimated "yapnedudul" and "well-whitened", while their achievements depreciated (I recall the relevant phrases about Angela Merkel and Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner) - and this was perceived as the norm. It was worth once to point out the incorrectness of the appearance of the man - and this was regarded as harassment.
Exposure in modern culture is still low-status, helplessness, accessibility
I would not even associate sex objectification directly with nudity, but exposure in modern culture is still low status, defenselessness, accessibility. It is funny that non-retouched photos of the naked body receive a lot of comments about “non-sexuality”: a sex object does not have the right to individual features of appearance and traces of personal experience.
Since women are involved in this system of constant evaluation, social rejection of their personal achievements and the denormalization of their natural corporeality - this prevents the formation of adequate self-esteem and deprives the strength for further development. Women get used to assess themselves in the same way - as objects. And it blinds. Because women are considered less competent in all areas - what the hell can competence of the object?
I expect that in response to our comments it will sound that “women are not objectified — everyone just wants them, but you envy”: the social value of a woman often comes down to satisfying the wishes of other people, and few see this situation as unhealthy. Female sexuality in the commonly used meaning of the word is not at all connected with the woman’s own desires and reactions.
The Internet is good because the anonymity of the commentary allows you not to embarrass yourself in expressions, the heavy beating of conventions and propriety subsides - and you can write what you think. Therefore, it is terrible to realize that a huge number of people estimate half of the world's population as an “object” and hang the label of “quality”. And I want to ask: guys, do you know that we are actually people?
Illustrations: via wikiart.org, Shutterstock (cover image)