Objectification: On the Difference Between Sex and Sexism

by Feona Attwood, Alan McKee, John Mercer

This is a concise and accessible introduction into the concept of objectification, one of the most frequently recurring terms in both academic and media debates on the gendered politics of contemporary culture, and core to critiquing the social positions of sex and sexism.

Objectification is an issue of media representation and everyday experiences alike. Central to theories of film spectatorship, beauty fashion and sex, objectification is connected to the harassment and discrimination of women, to the sexualization of culture and the pressing presence of body norms within media. This concise guidebook traces the history of the term's emergence and its use in a variety of contexts such as debates about sexualization and the male gaze, and its mobilization in connection with the body, selfies and pornography, as well as in feminist activism.

It will be an essential introduction for undergraduate and postgraduate students in Gender Studies, Media Studies, Sociology, Cultural Studies or Visual Arts.

168 pages, ebook

Published August 12, 2020

Reviews

[Liselot · Rating 3 out of 5]

1. Ik vind niet dat je alle soorten media onder een hoedje kan scharen en zeggen: is zelfde, want ik zie plaatje van een vrouw

2. Het argument “radicaal feminisme stom wat ze haten allemaal seks mimimi” mist enige nuance. Het is nu haast een karikatuur.

3. Hoe benoem je aan de ene kant postfeminisme, en heb je daarna de MINST KRITISCHE ANALYSE OOIT over sexy ass commerciële media. Ik wil niet zeggen dat alle sexy media slecht zijn, maar we hoeven niet te doen alsof het een ongenuanceerde zaak is.

[Hagazussa · Rating 2 out of 5]

I believe that the book would be better if it didn't spend so much time trying to "make fun" of radical feminism and comparing it to conservative agendas just because of its radical approach to sexuality (the ends could be similar, but the means are definitely not the same). The passages where sociopsychology is also addressed as a discipline that "flattens" sexuality and gender identity and that it is mostly used for lawmakers who want a binary answer were quite disappointing, not to mention that there is barely no consideration for other sciences such as biology, neuroscience, genomics, and a more pragmatic viewpoint when it comes to the topic of economic inequalities.
The argument that every work is exploitative under capitalism and thus sex work is no more exploitative isn't exactly convincing, it only highlights liberal arguments --that Jiz Lee sends their revenue from pornography to queer supportive groups feels like charity done by corporations that make money after exploiting people or environments, for instance.
Still, condemning and marginalizing sex workers is indeed not the way to tackle the issue as the authors argue, but I believe there is a kind of elitist perspective on the subject when considering women who sell sex for fun and for the pursuit of their own sexuality and those who have no chance to exist and to survive besides selling sex.
Maybe I would find arguments that sound better to me in cyberfeminist writers such as Paul B. Preciado or even the transfeminist perspective of Sayak Valencia who considers pornography another facet of the gore capitalism, but I wanted to see what the authors would bring here and it really didn't satisfy me and/or convinced me that sexualization is the way for emancipation. I'm still looking for other sources that give a better ponderation about capitalism, sexualization, sexism, and feminism.

[Arjun]

Bookmarks in comments