In my previous post, I
wrote about the theoretical perspective(s) of objectification and
self-objectification and their potential preventive and treatment mechanisms.
In this essay, I focus on the factors contributing to objectification and
self–objectification. In general, objectification theorists do not try to
explain why objectification occurs, but rather take it as “given that
[individuals] exist in a culture in which their bodies are – for whatever
reason – looked at, evaluated, and always potentially objectified” (Fredrickson
& Roberts, 1997, p. 177). The importance that bodies or collection of body
parts have are provided within social and cultural context; and consequently message
about the importance of bodies or collection of body parts have are constructed
through sociocultural interactions.
One of the venues where objectification
occurs is in interpersonal and social interactions. Many of us have been the
recipients of some sort of sexual “gaze” and/or “leer” (i.e., cultural
practices of sexual objectification). Supposedly, women are more gazed at and
looked at compared to their male counterparts and can often be accompanied by
sexually evaluative commentary. Evidence suggested that the gaze from a member
of a different sex may have differential effects on individuals. For example,
if females anticipate a male’s gaze, they are more negatively affected compared
to women who anticipated a female’s gaze. In addition, women who anticipated a
female’s gaze have experienced less shame and social physique anxiety.
The second venue where objectification
can be experienced is in visual media that portray interpersonal and social
interactions. Women are more likely than men to be monitored by others when
looking off into a distance, daydreaming, or otherwise mentally drifting
(Goffman, 1979).
Probably the most harmful
way that we experience objectification gaze is through visual media depicting
bodies and body parts where sexual gazing is implicit. Meaning that looking at
ones’ intimate body parts can occur unconsciously. This sexual gazing is not
limited to pornography only, but also to films, artwork, advertisements,
television programs, fashion, beauty and fitness magazines, and photography. The
mass media, including television, fashion, and beauty magazines, often portrays
a thin, lean, and “ideal” female body. As a result, many women, and to lesser
extent men, are subjected to pressure to keep up with what society suggests – thus
wanting to have an “ideal” physique. Any deviation from the stereotypical ideal
may be considered bad or not normal. As a consequence, many people are
dissatisfied or unhappy with their body, especially with their weight and size.
The mass media is one of the most influential factors to body-dissatisfaction.
In particular, fashion, beauty and fitness magazines, such as Cosmopolitan,
Glamour, People, Women’s Health, Man’s Health, Man’s Fitness, Maxim, and
Esquire, have been a leading source in disseminating the thin ideal for women
and a lean muscular ideal for men. For example, exposure to fashion and beauty
magazines correlated with trait and state self-objectification, body-dissatisfaction,
symptoms of eating disorders, other psychological and health related issues.
As mentioned in my
previous post, engagement in physical activity and exercise in one of potential
preventive and treatment mechanisms for objectification and
self-objectification. Many people are aware of a wide variety of physical and
psychological benefits of regular exercise and physical activity, including physical
and mental or psychological benefits. Despite the wide range of benefits of
physical activity and exercise, millions of U.S. adults remain essentially
sedentary (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007). Although much
is known about these positive effects of exercise, they are not universal. For
example, motivation and the exercise environment can impact whether exercise
acts as a buffer for body image. For example, if someone exercises for health,
endurance, and fitness-related reasons, that person has higher chances to
experience the benefits. On the other hand, if someone exercises to look good
and mainly for the appearance-related reasons (e.g., weight control, body tone,
attractiveness, and cosmetic outcomes), it is more likely that this person experiences
poor body image, disordered eating, and body-dissatisfaction. It is also
interesting that individuals who exercise to address objectification concerns
are more likely to exercise for appearance-related reasons that have been
linked to poor body image and disordered eating. As such, the previously
mentioned exercise benefits for these individuals do not translate into
increased body- and self-esteem, body-satisfaction, or increased psychological
well-being. On the other hand, people who do not view exercise as addressing self-objectification
concerns exercised more for the intrinsic value of the exercise (e.g., health
benefits, fitness, and diseases). Perhaps it is possible that the individuals
who exercise for appearance-related reasons are doing so as a reaction to low
body-esteem and high self-objectification. It is also possible that exercising
in response to low body-esteem contributes to an increase likelihood of
self-objectification. More research is needed in order to answer this and
questions alike.
Whether individuals
experience negative exercise effects does not depend only on one’s motives for
exercise, but also on the exercise environment. For example, exercising in the
fitness center environment has been shown to be positively correlated with
self-objectification concerns, disordered eating, and excessive weight loss. Fitness
facilities are venues where people usually engage in health-benefiting exercise
behaviors. In this setting, the body is often an individual’s central focus and
one which lends itself to seeing the body as an object that can be trimmed,
shaped, refined, and buffered via appropriate exercise protocols. Moreover,
people are surrounded by mirrors in which they are likely to observe themselves
and others in revealing clothing; fitness facilities often display posters of
ideal bodies and body builders, which might have an adverse impact on
exercisers. This suggests that fitness center facilities may serve as an
objectified environment.
The above mentioned
factors do not explain why people objectify and self-objectify, but rather
contribute to these experiences. Future research and discussions should focus
on answering the question “Why one’s body is reduced to its parts?” for which
some preliminary evidence has been shown by Gervais and her colleagues (2013).
Written by
No comments:
Post a Comment