Objectification In Feminist Research

Feminism is one of the critical and theoretical studies that are reshaping literary studies. Many feminist theories have been developed in different places and different periods of time. Each of these theories and studies criticize the way that the economic, political or traditional systems deal with women’s rights. Some of the feminist perspectives protest against the distinction and discrimination against women in modern society (Johnson 57). In this paper I will concentrate on how some feminist theories approach objectification by reviewing many different definitions of objectification; second I will explain the wrong thing about objectification and then what is ok about to see if they all those feminist critics agree about the idea of

In 1995, Martha Nussbaum describes seven ways that are included to deal with women as an object. For instance “instrumentality” which illustrates how women are treated as a tool when somebody uses it as needed or “denial autonomy” which means the dealing with a woman as dependent who doesn’t have a “self-determination” (Papdaki 1) After that Some feminists focus on the way of dealing and treating with women as an object and the main concern is on sexual objectification. This theory is definitely explaining the sexual side as one of the means of women’s exploitation. The sexual exploitation can be described in different means, for instance pornography is discussed by many feminist critics like Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin who are affected by studying the Immanuel Kant’s “conception of objectification” ( Papdaki 1). Kant, in his definition of objectification, is discussing sexuality when he focuses on the ethical side. He argues that any sexual relationship outside the “monogamous marriage,” will be considered as “an object of appetite.” This study has different considerations and one of them concentrates on pornography which is the way of dealing with a group of women as a tool for men’s desire (Kant

Tamar Saguy, Diane M. Quinn, John F. Dovidio and Felicia Pratto, for instance make an experiment to know the influence of women’s sexual objectification on “women’s behavior in social interactions” (178). The critics’ present research is focusing exactly on “the consequential impact of objectification” (178). The result of the test explains that women, who are subjected to the test, reduce their presence in society when they spend a “little time talking and particularly with men” (178). The sexual objectification happens when woman is only considered by her physical body and appearance as it is shown in social media. Saguy, M. Quinn, Dovidio and Pratto review a research that had happened in the past which discovers the negative impact of women’s sexual objectification on women’s psychological “well-being.” This objectification will lead society appreciates women’s desirable bodies in different social activities such as “marriage opportunity, popularity and economic benefits” (178). Another impact of objectification particularly in mix sexual objectification is that women may consider themselves as a “stereotypically female” (179). This explains that women will talk less not because they present themselves as an object but because they want to keep their femininity and to be more acceptable. So this theory proves another negative impact of women’s objectification as explained to be called