Hi,

I am new to feminism. I've started reading Greer's 'the whole woman' and I've run into trouble understanding the term 'Sexual Objectification'.

In an article entitled 'A Feminist Defense of Pornography', Wendy McElroy writes:

"If taken literally, it means nothing because objects don't have sexuality; only beings do."

A shoe can be a 'Sex-Object' to a shoe fetishist, but Person A cannot be a Sex-Object to Person B because Person A is a Person not an object.

If taken to mean 'the object of lust', why do so many feminists have a problem with it? Being the object of lust is a perfectly human thing, and is often desirable; Particularly when having sex.

If Person A sees a sexy stranger at a bus-stop (let's call the sexy stranger Person B) and goes home to masturbate about that person, where is the inherent harm in this?

I can only conclude that 'Sexual Objectification' is an inaccurate term for what it is trying to describe. It gives a negative connotation to a broad range of activities and behaviours, many of which are perfectly human. The term may be provocative by design, but I believe this only serves to confuse and to weaken credibility, and is unproductive.

Perhaps a solution would be to create two new terms (Term A and Term B) and to file all harmful incidences of sexual objectification under Term A, and all non-harmful incidences under Term B.

That way you don't have people like me defending their right to find their girlfriend sexy and vice versa.

Thanks,

Any response would be much appreciated

JC

Being sexually attracted to another person, whether they be male or female, is not sexual objectification. Sexual objectification is when you see another person only as a means for sexual gratification. That is, when you only see a person as "sexy" and not as anything else. Prostitutes, porn stars, and strippers all come to mind as people who are often only seen for this one thing: sexual satisfaction and desire. When you start to see a woman only as breasts and a vagina on two legs (to put it rather crudely), you are objectifying that woman. It's when you stop seeing or treating them like human beings. And this applies to any sexual attraction, not just a male's attraction to a woman.

Sexual objectification is when a person views another person as an object rather than a subject.

Why is this problematic? It's not in all cases. It becomes problematic when it's widespread and encouraged within a society (when it becomes the norm). This is the case because when someone objectifies a person, they are reducing their humanity and hence their value within the eyes of the other.
To give some further context, it is a common tenet of fascism to de-humanize a group of people in order to facilitate the extermination/removal of these people from the general populace. Basically, people need a relatively good reason to hurt and destroy another group of people. If they consider this other group to be 'less-human' than themselves, it is very easy to rally around the cause.
Sexual objectification involves this de-humanization in many ways and forms. Given that human beings are subjects, when they are treated simply as objects they lose their value as a human.

This is why sexual objectification can be dangerous. If it is widespread enough it can lead to the whole scale disenfranchising of a gender and their subsequent reduction to second-class citizens.
On a small scale it's not really a problem as many people like being objectified in bed, but that's within the context of sexual intercourse with a friendly partner.

Hope that helps,
- August