Society, culture must stop objectifying women’s roles

Friday, October 23, 1998

Society, culture must stop objectifying women’s roles

WOMEN: Femininity does not equate to sex; females should find
some balance

By Maryam Baqi

I swear one would have thought I was my grandmother the other
night. The gasping, sighing and head-shaking that I was doing made
even me wonder. I mean, all I was doing was watching TV, but I
swear the screen was just boobs ­ heaving chests here,
not-so-subtle cleavage there. And then the Sharon Stone leg cross
from a 15-year-old girl wearing a slip while pursuing an
already-taken boy.

But this isn’t about "Dawson’s Creek."

See, I don’t mind women dressing in a sexy manner. I encourage
it. But what I saw was not sexy. That was Sex. They were breasts,
butts and thighs. They were being objectified, but we’ve all heard
this stuff before, right?

We’ve all heard of how women are these sex things used to sell
products. (Case in point: Tyra Banks "bending over backwards" on a
pool table to advertise a CD player).

There are people who say that women need to get over it, that
sexism isn’t bad, that we’re empowered creatures because we can
make men fall to their knees.

Well, yes. It is empowering. It’s actually really fun. I’m not
denying the strength of sexuality, but somewhere along the lines of
human history, Woman has become equated with Sex.

So, why do I shake my head in disappointment with TV when I just
said I encourage sexiness in women? Sexual associations aren’t bad
per se. It becomes negative, however, when it’s the only thing
women are associated with.

Going back to TV, there are a lot of representations of
successful women. Great, but these successful women are also
intensely sexy women. It’s the constant association with sex that
gets a bit annoying. In other words, while they’re battling the
world in a low-cut blouse and a mini, mini skirt, their male
counterparts are dressed in khakis, blue polo shirts and are
balding.

Seriously, I would like to see a bit of male chest on TV,
instead of so much female.

This extends beyond TV. Look around you here at UCLA. I firmly
believe that there are a lot more beautiful women on campus than
there are men. Why is it that this campus seems to have so many
thin, stylish women, and so many, well, men with the opposite
characteristics?

Because of the constant portrayal of women as sex objects,
regardless of their occupations, beliefs and goals, these women are
taught to expect more of themselves in terms of sexuality. You’re
going to get the Nobel Prize in chemistry? Okay, but don’t forget
your heels. What about the men? Well, if they’re going to get the
Nobel Prize in chemistry, um, pat them on the back of their
Hawaiian shirt.

I don’t think women should think that sexiness is anti-feminist.
On the contrary, a woman should be comfortable with her sexuality,
with her body and with her femininity. I don’t think women should
become void of sexual associations, but I don’t think it should
define a woman. I don’t think that everything she does should have
a sexual tint to it, just the same way that a man’s accomplishments
do not reflect on this sexuality.

Some would say, then, that I expect women to be like men. Nay. I
am firmly against women becoming like men. What I expect is on two
levels. First, I expect women to stop seeing themselves solely as
sexual objects. It’s cool to see yourself sexually, but don’t let
it define you. Second, I expect women to stop being seen as nothing
more than Sex, be that on TV, in magazines, around campus,
whatever.

Women can be beautiful and, yeah, we can be intensely sexy,
making men fall to their knees ­ but Woman is not Sex. She has
more potential. She can be (imagine this) sexy and intelligent.

Baqi is the editor in chief of UCLA’s FEM Magazine.

Comments, feedback, problems?

© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]