Sex Roles

, Volume 77, Issue 5–6, pp 352–365 | Cite as

Objecting to Objectification: Women’s Collective Action against Sexual Objectification on Television

  • Francesca Guizzo
  • Mara Cadinu
  • Silvia Galdi
  • Anne Maass
  • Marcella Latrofa
Original Article

Abstract

Media often portray women as mere sexual objects, but to date no known research has explored relations between exposure to such media content and willingness to engage in collective action. In the present study, Italian participants (78 men; 81 women) were exposed to a nature TV documentary (Control video), a television clip portraying women as sexual objects (SO video), or to the same sexually objectifying television clip including a commentary against such degrading depiction of women (Critique SO video). After exposure to the Critique SO video, women, but not men, reported greater collective action proclivity and behavioral intention to support a protest against female sexual objectification, as compared to the Control condition. Importantly, results further demonstrated that anger was the mechanism underlying women’s collective action proclivity, as well as intention to react. These findings suggest that media literacy messages in the form of critique videos may be valuable tools to promote more active and critical media consumption and that media specialists, concerned citizens, and social media activists may use such messages to motivate women to collectively take action against sexual objectification.

Keywords

Mass media Objectification Collective action Media literacy 

Supplementary material

11199_2016_725_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 16 kb)

References

  1. Abramson, E., & Valene, P. (1991). Media use, dietary restraint, bulimia, and attitudes toward obesity: A Apreliminary study. British Review of Bulimia and Anorexia Nervosa, 5, 73–76.Google Scholar
  2. Aiello, A., Chirumbolo, A., Leone, L., & Pratto, F. (2005). Uno studio di adattamento e validazione della Scala di orientamento/tendenza alla dominanza sociale [A study on the adaptation and validation of the Social Dominance Orientation scale]. Rassegna di Psicologia, 22, 65–75.Google Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association. (2010). Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report-full.pdf.
  4. Archer, D., Iritani, B., Kimes, D. D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 725–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aubrey, J. S. (2006). Effects of sexually objectifying media on self-objectification and body surveillance in undergraduates: Results of a 2-year panel study. Journal of Communication, 56, 366–386. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00024.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aubrey, J. S. (2007). The impact of sexually objectifying media exposure on negative body emotions and sexual self-perceptions: Investigating the mediating role of body self-consciousness. Mass Communication and Society, 10, 1–23. doi:10.1080/15205430709337002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aubrey, J. S., & Frisby, C. M. (2011). Sexual objectification in music videos: A content analysis comparing gender and genre. Mass Communication and Society, 14, 475–501. doi:10.1080/15205436.2010.513468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barreto, M. E., Ryan, M. K., & Schmitt, M. T. (2009). The glass ceiling in the twenty-first century: Understanding barriers to gender equality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Becker, J. C., & Wright, S. C. (2011). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 62–77. doi:10.1037/a0022615.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bongiorno, R., Bain, P. G., & Haslam, N. (2013). When sex doesn’t sell: Using sexualized images of women reduces support for ethical campaigns. PloS One, 8, e83311. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083311.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Calogero, R. M. (2013). Objects don’t object: Evidence that self-objectification disrupts women’s social activism. Psychological Science, 24, 312–318. doi:10.1177/0956797612452574.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Calogero, R. M., & Tylka, T. L. (2014). Sanctioning resistance to sexual objectification: An integrative system justification perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 763–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Centro Studi Investimenti Sociali [CENSIS]. (2006). Women and media in Europe. Retrieved from http://www.censis.it/7?shadow_comunicato_stampa=5130.
  15. Conley, T. D., & Ramsey, L. R. (2011). Killing us softly? Investigating portrayals of women and men in contemporary magazine advertisements. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 469–478. doi:10.1177/0361684311413383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2009). Collective action in modern times: How modern expressions of prejudice prevent collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 749–768. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01621.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Flood, M. (2001). Men’s collective anti-violence activism and the struggle for gender justice. Development, 44, 42–47. doi:10.1057/palgrave.development.1110260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Flood, M. (2005). Men’s collective struggles for gender justice. In M. S. Kimmel, J. Hearn, & R. W. Connell (Eds.), Handbook of studies on men and masculinities (pp. 458–465). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fouts, G., & Burggraf, K. (2000). Television situation comedies: Female weight, male negative comments, and audience reactions. Sex Roles, 42, 925–932. doi:10.1023/A:1007054618340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Galdi, S., Maass, A., & Cadinu, M. (2014). Objectifying media: Their effect on gender role norms and sexual harassment of women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 398–413. doi:10.1177/0361684313515185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grabe, S., Ward, L. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2008). The role of the media in body image concerns among women: A meta-analysis of experimental and correlational studies. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 460–476. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.460.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Halliwell, E., Easun, A., & Harcourt, D. (2011). Body dissatisfaction: Can a short media literacy message reduce negative media exposure effects amongst adolescent girls? British Journal of Health Psychology, 16, 396–403. doi:10.1348/135910710X515714.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hargreaves, D. A., & Tiggemann, M. (2004). Idealized media images and adolescent body image: “Comparing” boys and girls. Body Image, 1, 351–361. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.10.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hatton, E., & Trautner, M. N. (2011). Equal opportunity objectification? The sexualization of men and women on the cover of rolling stone. Sexuality and Culture, 15, 256–278. doi:10.1007/s12119-011-9093-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408–420. doi:10.1080/03637750903310360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  28. Holmstrom, A. (2004). The effects of the media on body image: A meta-analysis. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 196–217. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4802_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Irving, L. M., DuPen, J., & Berel, S. (1998). A media literacy program for high school females. Eating Disorders, 6, 119–131. doi:10.1080/10640269808251248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Iyer, A., & Ryan, M. K. (2009). Why do men and women challenge gender discrimination in the workplace? The role of group status and in-group identification in predicting pathways to collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 791–814. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01625.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jeong, S. H., Cho, H., & Hwang, Y. (2012). Media literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 62, 454–472. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01643.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Klein, O., Doyen, S., Leys, C., Miller, S., Questienne, L., & Cleeremans, A. (2012). Low hopes, high expectations expectancy effects and the replicability of behavioral experiments. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 572–584. doi:10.1177/1745691612463704.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Leach, C. W., Iyer, A., & Pedersen, A. (2006). Anger and guilt about ingroup advantage explain the willingness for political action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1232–1245. doi:10.1177/0146167206289729.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Liss, M., Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2004). Predictors and correlates of collective action. Sex Roles, 50, 771–779. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000029096.90835.3f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. MacKay, N., & Covell, K. (1997). The impact of women in advertisements on attitudes toward women. Sex Roles, 36, 573–583. doi:10.1023/A:1025613923786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malamuth, N., & Check, J. (1981). The effects of mass media exposure on acceptance of violence against women: A field experiment. Journal of Research in Personality, 15, 436–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mallett, R. K., Huntsinger, J. R., Sinclair, S., & Swim, J. K. (2008). Seeing through their eyes: When majority group members take collective action on behalf of an outgroup. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11, 451–470. doi:10.1177/1368430208095400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Milburn, M., Mather, R., & Conrad, S. (2000). The effects of viewing R-rated movie scenes that objectify women on perceptions of date rape. Sex Roles, 43, 645–664. doi:10.1023/A:1007152507914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moradi, B., & Huang, Y. P. (2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women: A decade of advance and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 377–398. doi:10.1111/ j.1471-6402.2008.00452.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nelson, J. A., Liss, M., Erchull, M. J., Hurt, M. M., Ramsey, L. R., Turner, D. L., & Haines, M. E. (2008). Identity in action: Predictors of feminist self-identification and collective action. Sex Roles, 58, 721–728. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9384-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2007). Adolescents’ exposure to a sexualized media environment and their notions of women as sex objects. Sex Roles, 56, 381–395. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9176-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Postmes, T., & Smith, L. G. E. (2009). Why do the privileged resort to oppression? A look at some intra-group factors. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 769–790. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pratto, F., Stallworth, L. M., & Sidanius, J. (1997). The gender gap: Differences in political attitudes and social dominance orientation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 49–68. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1997.tb01118.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Pratto, F., Liu, J. H., Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Shih, M., Bachrach, H., & Hegarty, P. (2000). Social dominance orientation and the legitimization of inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 369–409. doi:10.1177/0022022100031003005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Puvia, E., & Vaes, J. (2013). Being a body: Women’s appearance related self-views and their dehumanization of sexually objectified female targets. Sex Roles, 68, 484–495. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0255-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmader, T., & Lickel, B. (2006). The approach and avoidance function of guilt and shame emotions: Comparing reactions to self-caused and other-caused wrongdoing. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 42–55. doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9006-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith, S. L., Choueiti, M., Scofield, E., & Pieper, K. (2013). Gender inequality in 500 popular films: Examining on-screen portrayals and behind-the-scenes employment patterns in motion pictures released between 2007 and 2012. Study by the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism. Retrieved from http://annenberg.usc.edu/pages/~/media/MDSCI/Gender_Inequality_in_500_Popular_Films_-_Smith_2013.ashx.
  49. Tylka, T. L., & Augustus-Horvath, C. L. (2011). Fighting self-objectification in prevention and intervention contexts. In R. Calogero, S. Tantleff-Dunn, & J. Thompson (Eds.), Self-objectification in women: Causes, consequences, and counteractions(pp. 187–214). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  50. United Nations. (2014). HeforShe, gender equality campaign. Retrieved from http://www.heforshe.org/en.
  51. Vaes, J., Paladino, P., & Puvia, E. (2011). “are sexualized women complete human beings?” why men and women dehumanize sexually objectified women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 774–785. doi:10.1002/ejsp.824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. van Zomeren, M., & Iyer, A. (2009). Introduction to the social and psychological dynamics of collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 645–660. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01618.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. van Zomeren, M., Spears, R., Fischer, A. H., & Leach, C. W. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 649–664. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.649.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. van Zomeren, M., Leach, C. W., & Spears, R. (2012). Protesters as “passionate economists” a dynamic dual pathway model of approach coping with collective disadvantage. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 180–199. doi:10.1177/1088868311430835.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Vandenbosch, L., Vervloessem, D., & Eggermont, S. (2013). “I might get your heart racing in my skin-tight jeans”: Sexualization on music entertainment television. Communication Studies, 64, 178–194. doi:10.1080/10510974.2012.755640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ward, L. M. (2002). Does television exposure affect emerging adults’ attitudes and assumptions about sexual relationships? Correlational and experimental confirmation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ward, L. M., & Friedman, K. (2006). Using TV as a guide: Associations between television viewing and adolescents’ sexual attitudes and behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 133–156. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00125.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ward, L. M., Merriwether, A., & Caruthers, A. (2006). Breasts are for men: Media, masculinity ideologies, and men’s beliefs about women’s bodies. Sex Roles, 55, 703–714. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9125-9.Google Scholar
  59. Watson, R., & Vaughn, L. M. (2006). Limiting the effects of the media on body image: Does the length of a media literacy intervention make a difference? Eating Disorders, 14, 385–400. doi:10.1080/10640260600952530.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Williams, R., & Wittig, M. A. (1997). “I’m not a feminist, but…”: Factors contributing to the discrepancy between pro-feminist orientation and feminist social identity. Sex Roles, 37, 885–904. doi:10.1007/BF02936345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wright, S. C., & Baray, G. (2012). Models of social change in social psychology: Collective action or prejudice reduction? Conflict or harmony? In J. Dixon & M. Levine (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 225–250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Wright, S. C., & Lubensky, M. E. (2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action versus prejudice reduction. In S. Demoulin, J. P. Leyens, & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291–310). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  63. Zanardo, L. (2011). Nuovi Occhi Per la TV/Formazione [A New Look at the Media/Training course]. Retrieved from http://www.ilcorpodelledonne.net/nuovi-occhi-per-la-tvformazione/.
  64. Zanardo, L., Chindemi, M. M., & Cantù, C. (2009). Il corpo delle donne [Women’s body]. Retrieved from http://www.ilcorpodelledonne.net/english-version/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesca Guizzo
    • 1
  • Mara Cadinu
    • 1
  • Silvia Galdi
    • 1
  • Anne Maass
    • 1
  • Marcella Latrofa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Development and Socialization PsychologyUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly

Personalised recommendations