WARNING: The following contains broad generalizations and is supported with no evidence what-so-ever.
I had seen the box of SCi Games’ Gender Wars countless years ago. It was collecting dust in the bargain bin at Big Lots, and let me tell you, it takes a monumentally poor product to sit around indefinitely for a buck ninety-nine. Emblazoned on the box in bright red lettering was the retrospectively hilarious tagline “The Ultimate Battle of the Sexes.” While a tag like that may simply sound bizarre and (hopefully) sexist to the rationing adult, the mere presence of the word “Sex” is positively magnetic to an adolescent male, especially a sexually repressed, conservative Christian one like myself. With a quick whirr-around to make sure my parents were preoccupied in the snack aisle (is there any other reason to go to Big Lots?) I grasped the box and flipped it on its back like a pancake, hoping to see some spicy screenshots of pixilated, buxom babes. Sadly, this was not to be, as the screencaps were of crayola-colored, armor clad figurines, shot from a million miles away, with about as discernable sex-traits as a Furby. I was disheartened, and tossed the box aside as one would toss the DVD of “Some Like it Hot” when the they found out it was a code-era caper flick.
And so lay my, and many of my colleagues’ pre-adult engagement to sexuality—if it doesn’t amuse, toss it aside. The process of physical objectification (that is, qualifying whether it’s sexually arousing or not) to the child is entirely gut-reaction, as there’s rarely any higher brain function deciphering the question: “does this excite me?” And is this necessarily a bad thing? The thoughts of youth will forever be fascinated by sexuality: its uniqueness from any other aspect of life will always be something the young will pursue. Whether a kid looks at the fully-nude fold out in Playboy, or the remarkably disappointing back of a scintillatingly-titled game box, the allure of sexuality will not be satiated. It is not the youth who need protection from the dreaded “objectification,” but rather, those who should probably know better.
What is often perceived as a “Gender War” on the issue of objectification is really more of a war on taste. Feminist groups look down on seeing Britney gleefully tromp on stage in a pink bodysuit simply because it damages many of the strides they’ve taken to be seen as equals, not because “sexy is wrong.” While there are countless males who join in on this argument (not including the religious-agendad ones, as they do encourage objectification, just not through sexuality), males who fight the issue are looked down upon as traitors to their sex (male feminists are often labeled as either gay or accused of holding ulterior motives). While the same can’t be said for female feminists, those women who do choose to objectify themselves are held in high esteem among chauvinists and it can be remarkably easy to become addicted to this elevated state. There are very few kick-backs for those who choose to remain in opposition to objectification. But really, why should there be? Since when was doing the most sensible thing worthy of a reward?
I’m not sure about most of these issues really, but neither was my mother when she punched my jaw after she caught me staring at the back of the box of “Panty Raider: From Here to Immaturity” inside of an Electronics Boutique, yet also purchased me an "Interactive Movie" that contained the first physical display of sex I had ever seen.
Questions:
Objectification. Do you care?
Is the European approach to sexuality on television and in film (a substantially more open and progressive stance) more or less harmful to youth? Have you any personal examples that would back up this claim?