Is it any wonder women are sexually objectified when so many celebrities volunteer to be?

[Notsosure1]

I’ve posted about this topic before , but after seeing two pop up shortly after scrolling, I am staggered by the number of articles that pop up on yahoo news that have headlines ‘celebrating’ (objectifying) female celebrities, young and old - here’s the first two of many -

‘Sabrina Carpenter is completely naked in new magazine cover, posing in nothing but thigh high socks’ (Cosmopolitan)

‘Stacey Solomon is the ultimate Bond girl in slinky swimsuit as she holidays without Joe Swash’
(Hello)

We’re trying to teach the younger generation of girls not to accept being viewed simply as sexual objects but there’s an abundance of mainstream female celebrities doing just that and are being cheered on for doing it. Talk about mixed messages. Yeah to body confidence and positivity, of course you can be viewed as sexy as well as intelligent, kind, independent etc. but I can’t believe there are still so many of these out there with such sleazy titles. There are a few focussing on men (I presume) but way down in number by comparison.

Am I over-reacting?

Yes. Katy Perry is a prime example of a parody gone wrong if we look at the backlash she received for ‘Woman’s World’.

Here’s just one article about it that is worthy of a read -

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/music/2024/07/15/katy-perry-womans-world-video-controversy/74408007007/

I agree OP, it’s the continuation of the “it’s empowering to get your kit off” culture of the 90s - women are sold the story that if it’s their choice to wear pornified clothes/strip/shag random blokes then it’s empowering you as a sexual liberated women, yet you are still being treated like a sex object , thinking that though you are in control of being treated like a sex object because you chose it is very naive indeed.

YANBU OP.

It's definitely a race to the bottom. I don't see male actors or pop stars turning up at award ceremonies in sheer see through outfits or just wearing their underpants..
And all this 'Free the nipple' bollocks isn't feminism it's just giving the patriarchy what they want.
Everyone seems to be walking around in their knickers these days.

Absolutely this, thanks

It's not what she's wearing, so much as the pose is degrading.

Yes, it says something that as a society we seem to have been cultivated into viewing male nakedness as comedic and women’s as sexual. Wonder who came up with that one 🤔

I think it's interesting the difference in clothing for young men and women. I teach post 16. The boys wear tshirts and jeans. Usually baggy, comfortable clothing.
The girls, for the most part, wear bandeau tops (what we used to call boob tubes), or halter tops, always cropped. Pierced navel. Crunch bum leggings or shorts. Big fake eyelashes, big glossy lips. Long false nails.
It's like they're 2 different species, not sexes..
I wonder how and why female clothing has become so sexualised?

I was looking for some posters and spent some time looking through a poster shop. I was quite shocked at the amount of posters of women, none of men, as though we're nothing but adornments to pretty things up.

Carpenter is the natural progression of that because of porn culture. She gains notoriety and gets patriarchal cookies for pandering to male sexual fantasies. At the beginning of her career she leant into the Lolita look, and one of the most popular porn categories is "young teens".

There's nothing empowering about exploiting your sexuality as Britney Spears found out. In the entertainment industry you get chewed up and spat out and it's highly competitive. Some women believe that the only way to get attention is by hypersexualisation and revealing outfits.

Men sell more music than women yet don't need to gyrate on stage in their underwear. Carpenter's fanbase, outside sleazy men, is young girls and they aren't buying her music because she is feigning a spit roast on stage.

Very interesting discussion. I also feel like in some cases, women must feel like they have to say they feel empowered, because society at large doesn't love 'i feel sexy, and i made money doing it' - I kind of wish more women would come out and go 'they offered me 500k and I like money, so I did it' because sometimes it is literally that simple. However, people don't like that at all, on both sides of the fence! And as a feminist I do understand the argument that we perpetuate the culture by taking part in it, and that comes with its own set of problems, but then a bigger part of me goes 'we will be exploited and objectified anyway, might as well make some cold hard cash out of it' - i know it's not that simple.

Young women who have bodies that appeal to men can feel powerful due to having something that people want and, therefore, has value (an asset). I can understand how they could mistakenly view people who object to using / conceptualising bodies as an asset as being motivated by jealousy.

I find the ‘sex positivity’ narrative that props up acceptance of objectification tends to be paired with accusations of ‘you are over thinking it’.

When engaging young women in conversations about this, they are sympathetic to the arguments I put forward, but usually claim that I over-egg the points. E.g. a magazine cover is understood by people as an art form and not something to applicable to daily life and, in saying that BDSM is acceptable, this is only saying it’s acceptable with true consent and won’t lead to people feeling pressured to consent.

They are not rejecting the idea of the patriarchy or objecting to real and live experiences of sexism, they disagree with arguments about what does and doesn’t prop it up.

I knew this was going to be about the Sabrina Carpenter pictures in Rolling Stone. Straight out of an 80s porn mag.

But this is what you end up with in an “anything goes and if you object you’re Mary Whitehouse” society - the boundaries to push get more and more extreme.

But then we’ll swing to the other extreme and end up with morality laws.

Does society objectify women because celebrities trade on their appearance? Or do celebrities trade on their appearance because society objectifies women?

I think the ’lads mags’ have a lot to answer for, persuading female celebrities to strip off in the name of empowerment.

I always struggle with sexual objectification as a concept.

By definition, when people feel sexual attraction to them, they are being ‘objectified’ sexually. Obviously, if you know someone, that is only one part of attraction.

But, if you don’t know someone, and they are an average singer or actor (as so many are these days), then they are aiming to be admired for their looks as much as their work.

This has gone on since humans first got up on 2 legs and the only way it changes is in religiously authoritarian societies.

These things are subtle. It's not about singing about sex, or expressing sexuality. My point was that she is very sexual, but there's a reason a certain kind of man hates her. Her image is strong, and she isn't just trying to please men.

The Rolling Stone shoot is just 'same old thing' to me, it's the album cover that I find awful - the violent porn aesthetic is now truly mainstream

I see sexual attraction and 'objectification' as being very different. The latter is when a man can only see a woman as an attractive object there for his own sexual gratification. It implies disrespect and all the awful behaviours that go with that. Sexual attraction is a complex and wonderful thing that is fundamental to human life.

I think female clothing is very determined by class and location as well. We are in London, DD is at a private school as well, and mainly the girls don’t dress like this - though in uniform they all still roll their skirts. We went to Manchester for the day recently and the difference in look was really obvious.

There is nothing rebellious about Carpenter's album cover. If she'd been pulling the man's hair instead, that would be rebellious.

That is actually what I think of David Beckham! He looks silly imo.

I don't think Carpenter is brainwashed or doesn't know her own mind. I just think she hasn't done anything empowering.

Also, given that porn has given boys the idea that slapping, choking and pulling hair is a normal part of sex, we need images and culture to counteract that, not art that further degrades them and normalises sexual violence

I do actually feel uncomfortable about the focus on Sabrina Carpenter - my concern is the culture and how it is getting even worse for girls and women, not better. It's always the culture and the power systems that should be the focus - I don't blame women for being affected by these things. That album cover just sent me over the edge...

I’m old fashioned and yearn for the days when strong women in entertainment were Bette Davis, Katherine Hepburn and the like, not Sabrina Carpenter or JLo.

Indeed. Katherine Hepburn wouldn't have put up with this nonsense!

People are addicted to their phones
Once you could take decent photos and share them around people decided that reading anything was too lengthy and difficult.
So it's all images
And if you can capture more of the eye attention you make more money
And it's as old as humanity itself, almost, sex sells.
Money, sex, power, it's never going to change just the method in which it's delivered.

Once we are all plugged into the AI virtual worlds it will be the same thing in a different format.

Henry VIII created a whole new church for sex and power

It's never going to change.