There is little doubt that the media has a profound influence on its audience. In fact, some experts say that the average American views an average of over 5,000 advertisements in a single day.
With the advent of new technologies, that number is only expected to grow. Further, in American culture and society, the power of advertising to persuade, manipulate, and shape behavior has been undeniable. Despite its primary objective as a medium of selling products, advertising has long been criticized for having deeper and more complex effects on people’s attitudes and behaviors.
While there has been much research about the effects of the media on individuals’ behavior, one of the most prominent areas has been the objectification that it fosters, specifically with regards to the stereotype aimed at women. Many researchers have attempted to understand this phenomenon, and have come up with empirically-validated theoretical accounts and explanations. One such construct, termed objectification theory, posits that in Western society, the female body is regarded as a sexual object that is to be looked at and evaluated (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). According to this theory, the female body is “treated as a body (or collection of body parts) valued predominantly for its use (or consumption) by others,” (p. 174). As a result of this process, females come to internalize this “observer” position of themselves, and therefore view their bodies as objects for visual inspection and evaluation. The term self-objectification refers to the adoption of this observer view of the self, and includes constant monitoring and evaluation of how one’s body appears to others (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification).
Although levels of objectification can differ among women, it has been argued that objectification generalizes to all women due to the female gender role socialization that is found in Western society. Although research has documented many long-term effects of objectification (i.e., anxiety, depression), more recent findings suggest that objectification can lead to short-term effects (i.e., body consciousness, cognitive disruptions) as well.
Despite objectification being a societal problem, there is little doubt that it has made its way into the classroom. I first experienced this firsthand a number of years ago, when I noticed that in all of my classes, I barely had females participating in class discussions. Not thinking much of it at the time, I simply encouraged more participation (from everyone) in general. Little did I know then that what I was facing was much deeper than I could have imagined. One day, a student came up to me after class to tell me how much she loved my class, but that she was afraid of speaking because of her fear of “looking stupid” in front of other students. So naturally I did what any educator would do, and over the course of a few weeks, tried to figure out just how much of a problem this was for other (female) students. I asked several students what they thought about class, and particularly, class discussions, presentations, and other assignments that consisted of some performance aspect in front of other students. Quite surprisingly, I found what my female student had hinted upon: while males had no issues speaking in class, it was the females who had much reservation, mainly due to their concern of how they would appear to others in class. As one female student put it, “I am always worried of what other people will think of me.”
To be honest, this was something that had never crossed my mind before. Here I was teaching topics in marketing, yet one of the most obvious effects of the subject matter was right in front of my eyes. Had the media had such an effect on my female students that it stifled even something as basic as their participation in class? Sure, there were some exceptions to this, as I had some female students who were clearly outspoken and (at least in my opinion) did not have any fear or anxiety in speaking up in class for fear of “looking stupid.” Unfortunately, however, such female students weren’t the norm. And while I have tried to eliminate this problem as best I can (by encouraging participation from everyone, making it a point that I value everyone’s opinion, talking about the topic of objectification, and even showing the video (seen above) in class), I continue to encounter this problem semester after semester.
Although the issue of objectification and its effects on females is something that will be hard to change given that it’s a system problem, I urge you (as instructors) to at the very least recognize it. As Jane Kilbourne mentions in her film, the first step in addressing the problem is awareness. Bringing it to light in the classroom, especially by their college years, might bring us one step closer in finding a solution.
I think this is a very important issue for young people of both sexes and for those who are teaching and guiding them through life.
I do have a little quibble with this post though, and it’s something that, ironically, relates to a kind of objectification I have noticed increasingly among students over the years: the use of the term female when referring to women.
My students, who are mostly women, are always calling themselves females and I’m always urging them to stand up for the fact that they are women, not just females — i.e. *human* females. It seems to erode the dignity of women to call them females. Being a woman (or a man) is more than a matter of sexual organs, no?
Perhaps though this is more trivial than I think? I’ve love to hear others’ thoughts.
I think you raise an extremely important and interesting point. However, I think that the issue of objectification (regardless of whether it’s aimed at men or women) stems from exactly your point: objectification occurs when individuals are treated simply as a collection of body parts. With that said, part of the experience of being objectified includes individuals being identified simply by their body parts. I also agree this is a huge problem, for men or for women. You raise a great point.
@ Ryan -
The question of what “being a woman (or a man)” entails beyond sexual organs is quite an open one. While I can see that for some people there is a “dignity” attached to the words “woman” and “man”, such that “female” and “male” seem undignified, it can just as easily work the other way round. That is, someone might want to get away from some of the baggage attached to “woman” and “man”, and might therefore prefer “female” and “male” as being more accurate and less laden with cultural meanings.
I personally more often refer to myself as “male” much more often than claiming to be “a man”. To say that I am male doesn’t align me with any particular gender roles, whereas to identify as “a man” immediately (for me) brings up precisely the kind of questions you allude to: What does being a man entail apart from being male? Do I agree with or accept these connotations of “manhood” as distinct from maleness?
Since I disagree with so much of what is attached to manhood and womanhood as distinct from maleness and femaleness, I am more likely to use the latter when identifying me… and perhaps other people as well.