How can I prevent objectification and self-objectification?

            Most any society is characterized by interactions or patterns of daily relationships formed by individuals who share a distinctive culture. During everyday interactions humans experience multiple events that involve varying modes of input from the environment which require interpretation. There are many unknowns to be explored in order to fully understand the perplexity and multidimensionality of human nature and for many years, researchers have been studying these fascinating processes in humans. Consequently, a range of theoretical approaches emerged to aid examining an array of constructs and their related processes. One of them has been discussed in the earlier FemPop blogs this year (2013), “Objectification and Feminism” by Nina Silander. She addressed a possible theoretical explanation of objectification namely the evolutionary psychology perspective. As proposed by evolutionary theorists, mate selection largely depends on the characteristics that denote reproductive fitness. For example, women tend to be looking for a mate who will be willing and able to provide resources related to parental investment, food, shelter, territory, and protection. Men, on the other hand, tend to select women who display greater characteristics of fertility (e.g., large breast, wide hips; Buss, 1989; Symons, 1979). These characteristics can be detected by observation, which may pressure individuals to look good, healthy, and attractive to be successful in rivalry and in being selected by the opposite sex. Also, there is an intense pressure from various other sources, including media, comments from others, gazing among others. As a result, individuals are constantly being observed and evaluated by others, and therefore, “always potentially objectified” or seen as object (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997, p. 177). Awareness of this objectification and evaluation can lead to habitual monitoring and self-evaluation of one’s body to approximate the ideals represented by the society. This in turn can lead to a numerous psychological consequences (e.g., body-dissatisfaction, shame, anxiety) and mental health risks (e.g., eating disorders, depression, sexual dysfunctions).  

            Although the research emphasis on objectification is hardly new (Cooley, 1902), the advancement of a formal theoretical framework and related assessment tools has elicited an increase in empirical studies using objectification theory and related phenomena over the past two decades. In particular, much remains to be illuminated about why and how the process of self-objectification persists in some individuals; how it may be counteracted; how its negative and harmful consequences may be combated once they occur; and what its implications are among individuals and society at large as well as members therein.

Multiple preventive programs and techniques have been proposed. One of the ways to prevent self-objectification is by promoting contextualization schema. Acquiring contextualized schema requires a) educating individuals about self-objectification (e.g., discussions about causes of objectification), b) recognizing when experiencing objectification (e.g., catcalls, being whistled at, others’ gaze, being told you look great or to lose weight etc.), and c) responding to objectified comments. In addition, women should avoid body comparison. This can be achieved by relating to the same sex-peers in non-appearance-oriented ways.

Main contributors to self-objectification are media images and messages. To understand, confront, and regulate exposure to objectifying media, professionals encourage use of prevention programs (e.g., GO GIRLS!; Piran, Levine, & Irving, 2000). In these prevention programs, individuals are learning to identify how body size is depicted in media, promote responsible advertising, and support for positive body images portrayed by the media and major merchants. I just recently came across an interesting video by Kean Kilbourne, Ed.D. – “5 Minutes Of What The Media Actually Does To Women.” Other prevention programs (e.g., The Full of Ourselves; Tylka & Augustus-Horvath, 2011) are designed to enhance empowerment to emphasize individuals’ internal qualities and to provide embodied experiences. These programs focus on the functional view of the body and pleasure (e.g., health, enjoyment, mood, fitness). 

If self-objectification is maintained, some additional therapeutic techniques can be used to reduce individuals’ tendency to continue their self-objectification patterns. Clinicians and clients need to communicate to address positive, yet short-lived and superficial, benefits received for engaging in self-objectification. Additionally, professionals have to emphasize harmful effects individuals experience from engaging in self-objectification behaviors. Once the clients become aware and knowledgeable about negative and damaging effects, they have the capability to contextualize objectification and prevent these circumstances to affect their self-esteem.

Clinicians should also assist individuals with recognizing and managing triggers of their self-objectification by conducting an environmental or ecological analysis of objectifying instances. For example, clients record circumstances to which they are exposed (e.g., places, people, settings). Clinicians then work with clients to decrease the amount of time they spend in these situations, and help to develop coping strategies that can be used to feel more empowered. At the same time, professionals can work with clients to come up with the strategies to decrease social comparison opportunities and replace maladaptive body-comparison thoughts (e.g., “I wish I would have that body”) with adaptive thoughts (e.g., “Personalities define people”). 

Other successful treatment programs integrate cognitive dissonance interventions involving clients to actively critique the thin ideal. They are encouraged to behave contrary to what they believe, which causes dissonance, and they are likely to change their attitudes to match their behavior and improve body-satisfaction (Stice, Chase, Stormer, & Appel, 2001). Clinicians need to encourage clients to appreciate, respect and honor their body (Avalos, Tylka, & Wood-Barcalow, 2005). Clinicians can help individuals to reframe their aversive statements, to identify negative-appearance body talk, and to focus on their senses when performing activities rather than on their appearance. Enhancing individuals’ body awareness and responsiveness (i.e., embodiment) can help clients to have more positive and connected attitude toward their body (Soth, 2006). Embodying experience can be improved by engaging in Hatha yoga (Impett, Daubenmier, & Hirschman, 2006) and guided imagery exercises (Bergner, Remer, & Whetsell, 1985).

Self-objectification suppresses interoceptive awareness (Myers & Crowther, 2008), where individuals have difficulties to identify, express, and cope with their emotions and other internal states (e.g., hunger, satiety). Mindfulness and emotion regulation techniques rooted in dialectical behavioral therapy (Linehan, 1993) can help individuals to connect with their emotions, feelings, and thoughts using various adaptive coping skills in dealing with broad range of emotions. Many times individuals deal with stressful situations through the trend-and-befriend response. This entails nurturing activities that encourage safety and the need to create and maintain social support networks that aid in stress reduction (Taylor, Klein, Lewis, Grunewald, Gurung, & Updegraff, 2000).

On a broader scale, professionals must work toward reducing the cultural acceptance of sexual objectification within society including communication to the media, research on the harmful effects of sexual and self-objectification and development of networks focused on embodiment and intellectual concentration. In addition, professionals could design and implement community workshops and programs for parents or caregivers, which would help them to become more aware of harmful effects of objectification and how to avoid promoting it. Prevention and treatment efforts can also be directed at lowering the frequency with which men and boys engage in sexual objectification (e.g., The Men’s Program; Tylka & Augustus-Horvath, 2011). Finally, professionals should be proactive in raising awareness among media about their role in perpetuating these unreal ‘ideal’ images that harm individuals.

Act now – whether as a person who is objectified or as a person who is objectifying!

Written by Urska Dobersek, MA

Link to the video: http://www.upworthy.com/5-minutes-of-what-the-media-actually-does-to-women-8?g=2&c=ufb1

Why Feminist Psychological Approaches Are Still Necessary

Everyday, I’m reminded of my intersecting identities. Whether if it is how African American females are portrayed in popular culture or the accepted norm of Caucasian males as the referent (and thus anyone else as abnormal), my intersectional experiences are not only marginalized in the literature, but also in the spaces of society.

Not only is there a need for differential feminist theoretical perspectives, but there remains a need for a comprehensive spectrum of gender perspectives that is inclusive of both genders and adequately embraces the multiple constructs or identities that contribute to an individual’s identity development. Understanding an individual’s complete identity makeup is critical for the development of efficacious health programs and social interventions and requires an understanding of the multiple constructs that contribute to gender roles, habits and values within diverse (gender, class, ethnicity, sexuality, geographical) populations. There are different schools of thought in feminist and gendered perspectives, particularly within the development of measurement scales. What is most critical to note is that none of the scales are completely inclusive of the diversity within the human race. It is for this reason alone that there cannot be a true measurement of what evolutionary theorists consider basic biology or the theory of natural selection around gendered issues. Rather, an understanding of a “subpopulation” of the U.S. population still creates a referent group that some scholars could consider an “oppressive” group, but continues to force comparisons that may not otherwise be appropriate. This warrants the need for a “within-groups” approach towards research, which would force further analysis of gendered constructs & health behaviors within racially & ethnically diverse populations. More variation is often found within the group vs. between groups and this would contribute strongly to the literature. This is why critical feminist psychological approaches are still necessary.

Until research, practice and media reflect the current population’s diversity and health needs, we have much work to do as feminist psychologists, particularly as students. From the work of scholars such as Stephanie Shields to Elizabeth Cole, conducting intersectional psychology must become the norm, rather than the exception. Collectively, we must engage in purposeful actions of research and practice that engage diverse audiences and consider their intersectional experiences. These actions will enable us to adequately address the needs and perspectives of diverse populations and further contributions to addressing health inequities. As students, we must demand this and, as future professionals and academics, we must employ these methods in our work.

Written by Jameta N. Barlow, MPH

Feminist Questions for this Fall's Television Premieres

I love television.

When I am not being a “good” doc student, I am a self-professed television-connoisseur.  If I’m not doing research, I’m writing about the media.

Transparency is incredibly important in what I do, whether it’s research, therapy or writing.  I write as a white, European cis-gendered woman of ‘average’ physical build who grew up on a farm in rural Ohio.  I identify as a 20-something, spiritual, middle class, bisexual, woman (although, very flexible regarding binaries of attraction).  I am able-bodied, but when I was 19 I had a stroke and could not walk and was, in many ways, dis-abled.  After rehabilitation my personal and social identity shifted back into able-bodiedness.  And, one of my strongest identities – I identify as a Feminist.

If anyone else watches television – even just a little bit – I hope you’ve seen the variety of shows that have either premiered or started another season this fall.  Some of these shows are absolutely thrilling (I’m slightly hooked on The Blacklist, but that’s beside the point) and all of the shows can provoke some interesting, feminist-oriented questions in one way or another…

Television – a huge media source – is one of the most fascinating things that we encounter.  Below I touch on some shows that have stood out for me this season.  I encourage you all to be effective media consumers and question the portrayals of women and other marginalized groups (whether by race, religion, sexual orientation, ability, etc).  Fictional or not, critically analyze what you watch! 

Once Upon A Time.  We are in the third season and, if you have been paying attention in any way, the show combines every single possible fantasy/fairy tale character into one giant, thick, interesting plot idea.  Complicated, but still captivating.  One character was presented as bisexual on this show – because I do not want to provide any spoilers, you can see anarticle (and the clip) here.

Positive LGBT representation in television is rare if it presented at all – we do have a few shows, but a character coming out as bisexual is a really good first.  Any other shows you can think of that allow a character to come out with a non-binary sexual orientation?  Thumbs up for that character development in OUaT! 

Super Fun Night.  Rebel Wilson is an interesting character.  This is a new show this season – Rebel has two friends and the show centers around documentary-esque theme of her ‘crazy’ life.  Now, the issue that I see coming up over and over again is fat shaming.  From the first episode the joke always comes back to Rebel’s weight.  Her body becomes the joke.  Her body is the joke.  Most scenes, in some way, use Rebel’s character in a way which exposes her in public (e.g., skirt torn off by an elevator), or talking about how “non-sexual” she is.  Here is a clip with the character and her sister – listen for the punch line regarding Rebel and the bikini at the pool.

Thoughts? That is just one of hundreds of jokes about Rebel’s weight in this show.  Approximately 90% all the punch lines in this series have involved her weight in some way.  Now, there are numerous debates regarding who can use jokes and humor and whether or not it is “okay” if the joke falls back on the joke teller – but that is beyond the scope of this brief review. 

Now, this show just started – sometimes shows start off with very strong stereotypes and begin to level out… I hope that happens with this show and they make an attempt to combat fat shaming attitudes and behaviors.

The Michael J. Fox Show.  This is a pretty impactful show for me this season as my grandfather has struggled with Parkinson’s Disease for almost 2 decades.  Michael J. Fox plays himself (but uses the last name Henry) in this comedy that, in some ways, makes the disease a little more visible and places it in the context of “real life.”  Fox addresses a powerful issue in this show: How he has been defined by his disease.  This trailer captures some of those initial scenes of the series.

A differently-abled identity becomes salient in a culture that privileges able-bodied folks.  One easy thing to do is look around your campuses.  Is campus accessible to a variety of different abilities?  Whether that means ramps in easy-to-access locations or functioning elevators in buildings with several floors, is campus accessible to everyone?  If there is an issue, bring it up.  It was a powerful moment to address the fact that on my campus that one ramp that leads into the building goes straight into a stairwell with no access to the ground floor.  No one thinks about it until someone needs to have access. 

Can you all think of any shows that present differently-abled individuals in the spotlight?  There is IronSide and MONK – what else?

I presented three television shows that stand out to me this season. What are all of ya’ll watching that bring up some feminist-oriented questions??

Written by Samantha D. Christopher

Down the Rabbit Hole: Feminism, Mothers, and Mass Media

“This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.”

-Morpheus, The Matrix (1999)

Do you ever feel that watching the news is like living in the Matrix?  As a feminist, I experience much of the mainstream news as a form of social amnesia, a way to forget what kind of society we live in.  I think this numbing sensation stems from fundamental naiveté about how to conceive of and grapple with core issues of inequality.  The result is that deeply ingrained disparities rooted in race, gender, class, ethnicity, ability, religion, nationality, etc., are often boiled down and oversimplified into dichotomies: man/woman, gay/straight, black/white, cis/trans.  Trending now is the father/mother dichotomy, particularly in light of the important steps women in business have taken to push this issue into the spotlight. 

As it turns out, fathers are at the top of the workplace economic hierarchy. In 2012, they earned more than men and women without children and mothers, with mothers earning the least of the four groups (U.S. Bureau of labor Statistics, 2013). So not only are women earning less than men, on average, but mothers working full-time are penalized while fathers are rewarded.  Over the past 10 years, psychological research that looks at gender and the workplace has continually demonstrated that mothers face a disadvantage compared to fathers and non-parents based on the way that they are perceived (Cuddy, Fisk, & Glick, 2004; Fuegen, Biernat, Haines, & Deaux, 2004). It appears that when women become mothers they are devalued in terms of workplace standards and seen as less competent and qualified while fathers experience bolstered status (Cuddy et al., 2004).  This disparity was highlighted in a recent NBC News Business article with the tag, “call it the mommy penalty versus the daddy bonus.” 

The truth is, the problem is not just about women choosing more flexible lower-status career paths in order to manage their families or foregoing children to pursue satisfying careers.  It’s also not just about the role stereotypes attributed to “mother” and “father.”  The problem is about the way that we understand families, our ability to ignore power and privilege, the way we think about sex and gender roles, and the lagging pace of attitude change.  Depicting the issue as “mommy versus daddy” is perilously deceptive because it obscures critical pieces of the puzzle of income disparity.  It also prevents us from conceiving of real solutions.       

For example, the intersections of race and ethnicity, class, and education significantly influence income disparities. Asian men and women earned more than White, Black, and Hispanic men and women in 2012; however, the disparities for Black and Hispanic workers were much larger (they earned between 70-50% of Asian worker’s median income) than those of White workers (earning between 80-90% of Asian worker’s median income).  It’s important to note that Black and Hispanic women had the lowest median incomes when taking race/ethnicity and gender into account.  Additionally, men and women with bachelor’s degrees earned almost twice as much as men and women with a high school diploma.  When we bring these different identity components into our discussion of working mothers’ experiences, we come closer to beginning to understand “how deep the rabbit hole goes.” To put it more optimistically, describing our society in light of the complex interactions of interlocking forms of oppression allows us to avoid the mistake of placing a Band-Aid over a massive crater in the earth. bell hooks aptly uses the phrase, “imperialist white-supremacist capitalist patriarchy” to describe the system that enforces such inequalities.

I believe that it’s our task as feminists to “take the red pill,” to recognize the dangers of oversimplification, and trust that it’s worth it to continually question what we see, hear, read and absorb.

Written by Rachel L. Brosamle, M.A.