The phrase “sexual objectification” has been around since the 1970s, but the phenomenon is more rampant than ever in popular culture–and we now know that it causes real harm. If objectification is the process of representing or treating a person like an object, then sexual objectification is the process of representing or treating a person like a object, one that serves another’s sexual pleasure.
How do we know sexual objectification when we see it?
We now have more than 10 years of research demonstrating that living in an objectifying society is highly toxic for girls and women.
I’ll describe that research in Part 2 of this series.
Laura Smet veut contester le testament de son père #Johnny Hallyday.
Et 5% des hommes sondés (soit 1 260 000 par rapport à la population londonienne) aimeraient faire leur demande le 14 février !
Headless women, for example, make it easy to see them as only a body by erasing the individuality communicated through faces, eyes and eye contact: We achieve the same effect when showing women from behind, which adds another layer of sexual violability.
American Apparel seems to be a culprit in this regard: Covering up a woman’s face works well, too: 2) Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?
Building on the work of Nussbaum and Langton, I’ve devised the Sex Object Test (SOT) to measure the presence of sexual objectification in images.
In it, I propose that sexual objectification is present if the answer to any of the following seven questions is “yes”: 1) Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?