[lbo-talk] Contemporary forms of female self-objectification

Adam Souzis adamsz at gmail.com
Sat Sep 17 12:06:51 PDT 2005


good points... if you only look at women you're not gonna get a full picture of these trends. Yes, female olympic athletes might pose in playboy but wasn't there an equivalent controversy of over male athletes doing highly sexualized underwear ads (e.g. some Mets player)? Similar parallels: the rapid rise in teenage boys of body dismorphic disorder and male equivalents to anorexia like obsessive body building; the mainsteaming of gay male self-objectifying imagery in advertising and fashion, "metrosexuality", etc.

The gender balance here lends some weight to the Marxist/frankfurt school explanation: sexual objectification and commodity fetishism go hand-in-hand. I think they're on to something but perhaps its broader than capitalist processes of commodification, marketing, mass media, etc.; perhaps objectification increases as communication and social interactions becomes more mediated, a relentless trend in our "globalizing" world.

For example, surely the internet has had a big impact on these trends -- not just through the ubiquity of pornographic imagery but its impact on communication and self-representation -- consider the huge popularity among adolescents (of all genders) for sites like hotornot and facethejury where kids willingly and competitively objectify themselves (not to mention of course dating sites).

personally, i find these transformations disturbing but not necessarily bad; i guess in this regard i'm more donna haraway than adorno.

-- adam

On 9/17/05, Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 17 Sep 2005, Marvin Gandall wrote:
>
> > My wife brought the item to my attention. A much more muted and benign form
> > of self-objectification is the tendency of many progressive feminists to wear
> > lipstick, perfume, and dye their hair. Now I will quickly put on my helmet,
> > because whenever Walker (yes, her first name) and I have chided left-wing
> > women friends about this, the brickbats have quickly rained down on us. But
> > in cyberspace, I feel safer, and it is an interesting question, no? And maybe
> > one to pose to Ms. Levy.
>
> Yeah, this is interesting: what is, in practical terms, the difference
> between Carmen Electra and my tastefully adorned colleagues in the English
> department? I guess I draw the opposite conclusion, though: if most women
> adorn themselves to be an object of admiration or desire, is there a
> problem? (I'm not sure what Marvin is advocating here: we all wear
> unisex gray Mao jumpsuits?)
>
> Moreover, the implicit dichotomy between the objectified woman
> and the man doing the objectification is misleading: men too are
> increasingly objectified, and dress and act to appeal to others. (--Seen
> a Bowflex ad lately?) Just as we have breast augmentation in women,
> we have baldness "treatment" in men. Just as we have Paris Hilton
> getting fame from overt sexuality, we have Snoop Dog.
>
> There's a strange Victorian undercurrent here: it's more or less assumed
> that women do not sexually objectify men, and men do not dress or act to
> provoke that objectification. Without taking women's capacity
> for sexual objectification of men into account, it's pretty fucking hard
> to account for the fame of Brad Pitt, isn't it? (--And my wife is
> quite the construction worker about, of all meatheads, the Rock: "cut
> me off a hunk of that!")
>
> I agree that it's not symmetrical--for instance, women still spend more
> time on personal appearance than men do, according to daily self-reports.
> However, given the obvious profits produced by "image making" commodities
> like surgery, exercise equipment, diet programs, fashionable clothing,
> jewelry, etc., I think it's pretty predictable that both men and women
> will become increasingly "objectified" in a capitalist society as
> they purchase and are enticed to purchase these commodities.
>
> Miles
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list