Objectifying women is worse than objectifying men

Monday, 18 February 2019

OPINION: It seems that when it comes to your reaction to the comments Mari Vahanen received on her Facebook job ad, most people fall in to one of two camps.

Many have a 'yuck' response. People wonder what makes someone behind a keyboard think it's appropriate to pass comment on someone else's appearance when she's just looking for a job – and for 1500 others to join in.

But the second camp is the 'she's a pretty young woman, what's the problem' response. These people point out that women have been known to make comment on the occasional attractive man, as well.

But there's something much less icky about a group of women suggesting they could 'make some room' in their flats for an attractive man who's posted on Facebook looking for a house to rent - than a group of men telling Vahanen 'you'll get ploughed more than the paddock'.

* Why advertising with shirtless blokes and six-packs isn't sexist

* Sleaze and outrage on farmer website over backpacker's search for work**

It's down to the wider social environment in which it happens.

Men don't usually get cat-called walking down the street. You don't hear of young attractive men being turned down for jobs because they'll distract the married bosses.

Mari Vahanen was shocked at the response to her ad.

Until fairly recently, it was totally legal to discriminate against women. Advertising took 'sex sells' to blatant conclusions using women's bodies. There's still a power imbalance that puts many women on the back foot.

When women ogle men or put them down, it's still a joke. Because what are they going to do?

When men ogle women, it can feel threatening.

The young guy looking for a student flat wouldn't have felt as intimidated in a room full of the women telling him he was attractive as Mari Vahanen might if she turned up to a job interview with one of the commenters who posted one of the less polite suggestions.

We are more comfortable with Magic Mike than we might be with a movie featuring female strippers.

We still harbour a nostalgic love for Carlos Spencer and that ToffePops ad.

Jessica Berentson-Shaw, founder of thinktank The Workshop, said while no one liked to be objectified outside the context of enthusiastic consent, society had generally done it to women in the context of high rates of in-person harassment and sexual violence 'that people don't like to acknowledge or accept'.

'So taken together it is different for women because of that wider context. However, it is good to have a conversation about what healthy narratives about sex, desire and consent look like in society for all people.'

Advertising Standards Authority chief executive Hilary Souter said she had not had a complaint about jockey underwear billboards featuring rugby players, for example, but there are regular complaints about Bendon's lingerie ads.

'The complaints board endeavours to reflect community standards, not set them.'

Marketing expert Mike Lee, of the University of Auckland, said women were still objectified a lot more, on average, in society.

'And are victims of abuse at much higher rates, statistically speaking. So what we see, or what media get away with, is not always reflected in society, although it may certainly influence the way the population thinks about certain topics.'

His colleague, head of department Bodo Lang, said a way to test the proposition was to think about how the portrayal in advertising was regulated.

The advertising code of conduct would only take effect when someone complained.

'Because of long-held societal views, gender-based complaints will vary because certain types of behaviours are far more 'acceptable' when they occur to males versus females and vice versa. So while the explicit standards are the same for all genders the implicit enforcement of the standards is dependent upon society. Because society is biased in what it sees as appropriate with respect to one gender over another different standards are applied.'

Comments have been closed.