GOOD

The Upside of Sexual Objectification

When we perceive a woman through her body, she appears "more capable of pain, pleasure, desire, sensation, and emotion but lacking in agency."

When a woman takes off her clothes, does it change her mind? The theory of sexual objectification says that the more we focus on a person's body, the less we think of her brains. But a new study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology attempts to establish the upside of an objectifying gaze.


Sexual objectification can apply to anyone who's viewed physically instead of mentally, but it's a phenomenon that predominantly affects women—one sweeping study of magazine ads found that on the whole, "women’s bodies are prominently displayed, whereas men are more often pictured by their faces." The practice harms women both mentally and physically. Research shows that a focus on the body at the exclusion of the mind is "linked with disordered eating, cognitive distraction, depression, and even self harm." Women who are subjected to "a long look up and down from a man" go on to perform "worse at a math exam."

But researchers Kurt Gray, Joshua Knobe, Mark Sheskin, Paul Bloom, and Lisa Feldman Barrett are challenging the idea that objectification is all bad. They asked study participants to assess a selection of men and women in various states of undress to determine how clothing affects their view of a subject's mental capabilities. Then, they asked the subjects to administer electrical shocks to both clothed and shirtless people to assess their perception of the subjects' capability to feel. The researchers found that focusing on a person's body does not strictly "de-mentalize" her, but rather "redistributes" our perception of her faculties. Objectified people are perceived to be experiencers, not actors. When we perceive a woman through her body, she appears "more capable of pain, pleasure, desire, sensation, and emotion but lacking in agency."

The mind-body divide points to the underpinnings of the human moral universe. The more agency a person has, the more we hold them responsible when they hurt others. And the more they're capable of feeling, the more we feel responsible for protecting them from harm. The researchers claim, then, that objectified people—who can't do much, but can feel deeply—"may have more moral status, not less." They list this as one of the potential "positive aspects" of objectification, in that it "may lead others to protect this person from additional pain."

In fact, the research speaks less to the upside of sexual objectification and more to the versatility of its downsides. Seeing people as bodies instead of minds can manifest itself as either hostile or paternal sexism—women are either too dim to think for themselves, or too sensitive to take care of themselves. Both serve to increase a man's power over them.

Articles
via Real Time with Bill Maher / YouTube and The Late Late Show with James Corden / YouTube

A controversial editorial on America's obesity epidemic and healthcare by comedian Bill Maher on his HBO show "Real Time" inspired a thoughtful, and funny, response by James Cordon. It also made for a great debate about healthcare that Americans are avoiding.

At the end of the September 6th episode of "Real Time, " Maher turned to the camera for his usual editorial and discussed how obesity is a huge part of the healthcare debate that no one is having.

"At Next Thursday's debate, one of the candidates has to say, 'The problem with our healthcare system is Americans eat shit and too much of it.' All the candidates will mention their health plans but no one will bring up the key factor: the citizens don't lift a finger to help," Maher said sternly.

Keep Reading Show less
Politics

There is no shortage of proposals from the, um, what's the word for it… huge, group of Democratic presidential candidates this year. But one may stand out from the pack as being not just bold but also necessary; during a CNN town hall about climate change Andrew Yang proposed a "green amendment" to the constitution.

Keep Reading Show less
test
Me Too Kit

The creator of the Me Too kit — an at home rape kit that has yet to hit the market — has come under fire as sexual assault advocates argue the kit is dangerous and misleading for women.

The kit is marketed as "the first ever at home kit for commercial use," according to the company's website. "Your experience. Your kit. Your story. Your life. Your choice. Every survivor has a story, every survivor has a voice." Customers will soon be able order one of the DIY kits in order to collect evidence "within the confines of the survivor's chosen place of safety" after an assault.

"With MeToo Kit, we are able to collect DNA samples and other tissues, which upon testing can provide the necessary time-sensitive evidence required in a court of law to identify a sexual predator's involvement with sexual assault," according to the website.

Keep Reading Show less
Health

Villagers rejoice as they receive the first vaccines ever delivered via drone in the Congo

The area's topography makes transporting medicines a treacherous task.

Photo by Henry Sempangi Senyule

When we discuss barriers to healthcare in the developed world, affordability is commonly the biggest concern. But for some in the developing world, physical distance and topography can be the difference between life and death.

Widjifake, a hard-to-reach village in northwestern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) with a population of 6,500, struggles with having consistent access to healthcare supplies due to the Congo River and its winding tributaries.

It can take up to three hours for vehicles carrying supplies to reach the village.

Keep Reading Show less
Health
via Keith Boykin / Twitter

Fox News and President Trump seem like they may be headed for a breakup. "Fox is a lot different than it used to be," Trump told reporters in August after one of the network's polls found him trailing for Democrats in the 2020 election.

"There's something going on at Fox, I'll tell you right now. And I'm not happy with it," he continued.

Some Fox anchors have hit back at the president over his criticisms. "Well, first of all, Mr. President, we don't work for you," Neil Cavuto said on the air. "I don't work for you. My job is to cover you, not fawn over you or rip you, just report on you."

Keep Reading Show less
Politics