This morning I logged on to my computer at work to find this headline: Sexed-up images in media hurt young girls: study . The above picture was the picture for the article. The caption of the picture was "Playboy Playmates line up on the runway at the Playboy Fashion Show in Las Vegas, Nevada, 2003. Inescapable media images of sexed-up girls and women posing as adolescents can cause psychological and even physical harm to adolescents and young women, a study in the US has warned."
So let me get this straight -- a new psychological study (why I'm pissed off at the news report language) was issued by the American Psychological Association about media images of grown women playing adolescents harming adolescents and AP chooses to show a picture of Playboy Playmates at a Playboy Fashion Show? Butt none of them look remotely adolescent to me. I guess the media just does pictures to get men to ogle and not read what nonsense is being published, because of course men are such drooling, testosterone laden heathens that throwing up a picture of Playboy Playmates will disconnect our brain and prevent us from any logical thought or critique of what is being said.
Fortunately, my synapses that would otherwise prevent me from maintaining logical thought are still intact because I eroded completely any arousal from a Playboy Playmate by constant guilt ridden masturbation sessions as an adolescent, from which of course I dutifully repented and have been forgiven, thus leaving my intellectual capabilities in tact.
Unfortunately the same cannot be said for those poor unfortunate girls who try to take math tests in swimsuits. As set forth in the article, college age women were given a swimsuit to try on and hang out in for ten minutes while they were given a math test. Another group of women were given sweaters to wear. The swimsuit wearing women did worse on the math test. The same test was replicated with guys and we did equally well with swim suits and sweaters, although there was no indication that the test was tried with guys taking a math test in a room full of women in swim suits -- although I can predict the results of that one. The study went on to say (Page 26 of the .pdf) that this test proved that the reason women performed so poorly in math is because they were too worried about how they looked: "Chronic attention to physical appearance leaves fewer cognitive resources available for other mental and physical activities." So here in great psychological language is the prototype of the dumb hot blonde -- it isn't that she is dumb, it is that she has just applied all of her cognitive resources into looking hot.
I just have to ask -- do these people read what they write? Do they understand the underlying implications? If I called someone a dumb blonde, I'd be execrated as a sexist bastard, but they can tell women all over the planet that if you care too much about how you look it makes you dumb. All I need to be a sexist asshole is a PhD in psychology and be female.
Of course, this isn't really a scientific study as the news article (and the new release) suggests, but a report by a cabal of women with an agenda. Like my blog (with the exception of yours truly), not a heterosexual male in sight (or homosexual guy for that matter). Unlike my blog, which would welcome contrasting points of view, the "report" is a one sided recounting of research projects that had, at least peripherally, been favorable to the writer's viewpoints. I'm no psychologist, but I know that the views in the report itself conflict and don't make sense.
Prime Example:
The Report's Premise is summarized as follows: The proliferation of sexualized images of girls and young women in advertising, merchandising, and media is harming girls' self-image and healthy development.
Support:
Page 7: It is evident that the lyrics of some recent popular songs sexualize women or refer to them in highly degrading ways, or both. Several songs are listed -- most are rap songs.
Page 28: Black female stars in the film, music and fashion industry are now as thin as their White Counterparts.
Page 31: Black adolescent girls exposed to sexualized rap videos expressed greater acceptance of teen dating violence than those not exposed.
Page 36: It appears that exposure to sexually enticing rap videos fostered perceptions of diminished positive traits and stronger negative traits in Black women in general.
Recommendation:
Page 46: We recommend that psychologists conduct research to: . . .Examine the presence or absence of the sexualization of girls and women in all media but especially in . . . music videos, music lyrics.
Conclusion You Might Come To After Reading this Nonsense:
Black girls, immersed in the rap culture are going to be highly traumatized about their sexualization and have poorer body images than their white counterparts.
What the "Report" Actually Says:
Page 41: Several research studies have explored how girls of color are particularly effective in resisting mainstream notions of female sexuality, femininity, and beauty.
Other portions without fail show that young black females as a whole have a better body image, are more aggressive in maintaining their feminine rights and have an overall more healthy attitude about sex. My God -- what hath Rap Culture wrought?
Alternate theories, alternate viewpoints and contrasting and conflicting studies were not included or even explored. The obvious conclusion is that creating a strong sense of feminine sexuality is healthy, not harmful for young girls. The dysfunction comes from a myopic and limited view of sexuality. We are all sexualized -- had to be to get here, have to continue to be to continue our seed.
I guess the only solace I can take is that the anti-sex task force of women who typed up this report have to be appalled by the picture AP used to run with the story.
8 comments:
One more example of sex negative reporting trying to grab the attention of the readers. It's great to blame kids for everything isn't it? Especially if you can do so by saying they shouldn't have sex. Personally, if you sat me in a swimsuit and had me work on math, I'd probably still suck at math. And if you put me in a SPEEDO, with a whole bunch of other guys in SPEEDOs, I'd probably do better (at age 16) because I wouldn't want to be caught looking and would focus my attention on the math problems more. Probably kind of like the guys in the study. The problem I'm getting at is, they are drawing conclusions that the research does not necessarily support.
Maybe the women (being naturally more curious) are more likely to be asking themselves "Why the hell did the researcher have me wear a bathing suit?" and then waste the whole test period focused on second-guessing what the study is about.
I know that's what I'd be doing!!!
I'm only half kidding with my previous comment.
Girls are taught to think more about modesty and about whether they're showing off too much of their bodies inappropriately. Being made to wear a bathing suit in an unusual context is more likely to be distracting to a woman than to a man.
Inferring a causal link specifically with sexualized media images (as opposed to a myriad of other cultural factors in our complex human society) is a pretty dang big leap. Did they do anything to control which cultural factors influenced the women in question?
Now that I've looked over this report, here's what I'd like to say to the "feminists" who wrote it:
Adolescent girls have their own budding sexuality and sexual feelings. Obviously it is influenced by culture, but sexuality is something that would be a part of them even if their culture were 100% free of sexism.
How can you imagine that you're encouraging them to have good feelings about their bodies by telling them that their sexuality is wrong and bad?
I'm open to exploring the idea that girls may be getting the wrong type of sexual messages and/or getting them too early. But these questions cannot be addressed in a rational way by starting with the assumption that there is no such thing as healthy sexual expression in teen and adolescent girls.
Very well put, CL. And that seems to be exactly where the reporting, if not the actual research itself, started in this case. It's bullshit.
Steve, I'll bet that the guys weren't given Speedos to do their math test in. I'm glad that everyone seemed to understand that the report was written and then the scientific reports were crammed in to attempt to match the agenda.
And c.l. -- I knew the math stuff would get you going. This is a feminist attack on the female -- no male could be this vicious.
There are a few passing mentions of "healthy sexuality" and a one sentence admission that some sexual exploration is self-motivated. These are at the beginnings of some sections before being dismissed as beyond the scope of the report. There's a whole lot of talk in this study about "age-inappropriate" sexual expression, but not a single discussion of what constitutes age-appropriate sexual behavior or healthy sexual development stages in adolescent girls. How can that fucking be absent in a study about adolescent girls' sexual behavior???!
Every concrete example of female sexual expression in this report is labeled "objectification." Giving a contrasting model of sexual behaviors that are not objectification would have been extremely relevant here considering that even actions actively chosen by the girl herself (and even some actively chosen by adult women) are labeled "objectification" by this report.
I am absolutely disgusted by this steaming pile of quackery. With friends like these, who needs enemies?
very nice issue
with funny des gallery
Post a Comment