Violence Against Women Through the Lens of Objectification Theory

The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of violence on body image variables for college women. Undergraduate women participated in an online study assessing sexual violence (SV), intimate partner violence (IPV), self-objectification, body surveillance, and body shame experiences. Findings suggest that both SV and IPV contribute to women’s body shame. In addition, the associations between IPV and body shame appear to be explained through self-objectification processes, but not the associations between SV and body shame. Thus, important differences between IPV and SV regarding self-objectification processes emerged. Theoretical and practical implications, as well as directions for future research, are discussed

The Mascs We Wear: Masculinity Contingency and Sexual Bystander Attitudes

• This study found that men whose masculinity is central to their self-worth are less likely to engage in bystander behaviors • Further suggests that gender socialization might predict bystander behaviors in men Future Research: • If this effect is a function of gender, does it still occur within queer, trans, and/or genderqueer populations? • Is there a more ecologically valid way to test these questions? (Virtual Reality Technology?

A triangulation study of young Women’s motivations for sending nudes to men

Women frequently send sexualized nude images to men (i.e., nudes), but women’s motivations for sending nudes are unclear because there are methodological limitations in the ways that cyber sexual activity has been defined and measured. To address these gaps in the literature, we employed a mixed method triangulation design to assess young women’s motivations for sending nudes to men, and how motivations compare when measured qualitatively and quantitatively. Across our qualitative and quantitative data, we found that women endorsed a plethora of motivations for sending nudes to men—far more than any one approach captured. The open-ended responses revealed positive sexual motives otherwise missing from the quantitative scales, which tended to overrepresent negative motivations. We also identified several critical discrepancies between endorsement of similar motivations in the qualitative versus quantitative responses, especially when it came to the idea of sending nudes for fun. Based on these findings, we suggest future researchers consider using more specific, and less stigmatizing language when assessing women’s motivations for sending nudes

Commentary “The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: Valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact?”

A commentary on The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: Valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact? by Schmidt, A. F., and Kistemaker, L. M. (2015). Cognition 134, 77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.09.003 Recent objectification research found results consistent with the sexualized body-inversion hypothesis (SBIH): People relied on analytic, “object-like” processing when recognizing sexualized female bodies and on configural processing when recognizing sexualized male bodies (Bernard et al., 2012). Specifically, Bernard et al. (2012) showed that perceivers were better at recognizing sexualized male bodies when the bodies were presented upright than upside down, whereas this pattern did not emerge for sexualized female bodies; thus, male bodies were recognized configurally similar to other human stimuli whereas female bodies were recognized analytically, similarly to most objects (see Kostic, 2013 for an exact replication). Based on two studies, Schmidt and Kistemaker (2015) concluded that Bernard et al. (2012)\u27s findings were: (i) due to a symmetry confound; (ii) not due to target\u27s sexualization. This commentary challenges these conclusions

Abortion Decisions as Humanizing Acts: The Application of Ambivalent Sexism and Objectification to Women-Centered Anti-Abortion Rhetoric

Women-centered anti-abortion rhetoric, grounded in ostensibly positive beliefs that pregnant people are precious objects who must be protected from having abortions, has proliferated anti-abortion activism and legislation. However, abortion stigma, marked by negative perceptions of people who terminate pregnancies, is the most widely used theoretical tool for understanding the social and psychological implications of abortion. In this article, we first integrate these two seemingly contradictory perspectives on abortion through the lens of ambivalent sexism theory. We then argue that ambivalent sexism paves the way for objectifying perceptions and treatment of pregnant people; specifically, our typology of reproductive objectification provides a tool for exploring how the abortion decision-making of pregnant people is undermined. Through this lens, abortion decisions can represent a subversion of these portrayals and treatment by affirming people who seek and have abortions as whole human beings. Throughout, we aim to counter White supremacy and cisheteropatriarchy, which have marked public discourse and psychological research on abortion. Finally, using this reproductive objectification framework, recommendations for clinicians and researchers are provided

Commentary “The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: Valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact?”

A commentary on The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: Valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact? by Schmidt, A. F., and Kistemaker, L. M. (2015). Cognition 134, 77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.09.003 Recent objectification research found results consistent with the sexualized body-inversion hypothesis (SBIH): People relied on analytic, “object-like” processing when recognizing sexualized female bodies and on configural processing when recognizing sexualized male bodies (Bernard et al., 2012). Specifically, Bernard et al. (2012) showed that perceivers were better at recognizing sexualized male bodies when the bodies were presented upright than upside down, whereas this pattern did not emerge for sexualized female bodies; thus, male bodies were recognized configurally similar to other human stimuli whereas female bodies were recognized analytically, similarly to most objects (see Kostic, 2013 for an exact replication). Based on two studies, Schmidt and Kistemaker (2015) concluded that Bernard et al. (2012)\u27s findings were: (i) due to a symmetry confound; (ii) not due to target\u27s sexualization. This commentary challenges these conclusions

An Examination of Perceptions of Male and Female Avatars

Virtual worlds are three-dimensional, computer-generated worlds in which users take the form of avatars. Through their avatars, users can interact with objects and other avatars in the virtual world. Virtual worlds are growing in importance in both educational institutions and businesses. Educational institutions have adopted virtual worlds as a medium for instructional delivery whereas businesses are using virtual worlds for recruitment, training, collaboration, and marketing. Given these emerging phenomena, a better understanding of behavioral and perceptual issues in virtual worlds is warranted. In this paper, we propose a research model to study gender stereotypicality of male and female avatars and their effects on trust perceptions. Gender stereotypes have been widely studied in the real world along with their effects on trust perceptions. This research will assess if such gender stereotypes also exist in the virtual worlds

Is It Reasonable? Reasonable and Unreasonable Accommodations for Occupational Therapy Students in Clinical Settings

Despite the growing number of graduate students with disabilities, little is known about what accommodations are considered reasonable in various occupational therapy fieldwork settings. This study explores which accommodations fieldwork educators perceive as reasonable or unreasonable for occupational therapy students with disabilities. Snowball sampling methodology was used to distribute a virtual survey, using a descriptive design. One hundred and sixty-two occupational therapists and occupational therapy assistants answered questions relating to demographic information, clinical experience supervising fieldwork students, and their clinical judgement regarding commonly requested accommodations. Using a quantitative approach, the accommodations deemed most reasonable were allowing the use of adaptive equipment (n = 156, reasonable: 96.3%) and permission to excuse oneself from the unit to maintain health (n = 152, reasonable: 93.83%). The accommodations considered the most unreasonable were the use of an intermediary to perform physical tasks (n = 82, unreasonable: 50.62%) and the use of an American Sign Language interpreter (n = 42, unreasonable: 24.93%). Clinicians in rehabilitation most often responded “reasonable” in response to an accommodation (n = 24, reasonable: 80.20%), while those who worked in outpatient pediatrics selected “unreasonable” most often (n = 4, unreasonable: 13.51%). This preliminary data provides stakeholders information about accommodations, creating opportunities to support students with disabilities in their pursuit of becoming clinicians. This will help to better fulfill American Occupational Therapy Association\u27s vision of inclusivity and equitability

Objectification in Heterosexual Romantic Relationships: Examining Relationship Satisfaction of Female Objectification Recipients and Male Objectifying Perpetrators

Sexual objectification is one of most the common manifestations of discrimination against women in Western societies; however, few studies have examined objectification in the context of romantic relationships. The primary aim of the present research was to bring the study of objectification phenomena into the setting of heterosexual romantic relationships. The present set of studies examined the relation between sexual objectification and relationship satisfaction for both the sexual objectification recipient (Study 1) and the sexual objectification perpetrator (Study 2). The results of the first study with 206 U.S. undergraduate female students in committed romantic relationships replicated a previously identified negative association between feeling dehumanized by one’s partner and intimate relationship satisfaction. Moreover, this link was mediated by greater body dissatisfaction and decreased sexual satisfaction. The second study with 94 U.S. undergraduate male students in committed romantic relationships demonstrated a negative association between sexual objectification perpetration and relationship satisfaction. Furthermore, this negative relation was mediated by greater partner objectification and lower sexual satisfaction. Results of both studies demonstrated the effect of sexual objectification (as recipient or perpetrator) on global intimate relationship health. Additionally, the results highlight poor sexual satisfaction as a key dyadic mechanism linking objectification processes to intimate relationship outcomes