It is absolutely incongruous to champion TV3's late-night 'chatline' ads as signs of a new, sexually liberated era. By Clara Fischer. Last week, Fine Gael TD Derek Keating called for the banning of late night adverts, shown on TV3, for what he described as “sexual entertainment services”. There appears to be some dispute about the exact nature of these advertisements, with ComReg purportedly calling the ads “chatline” or “partyline” services, rather than “sexual entertainment services”. Judging by the scantily clad women starring in these particular spots, though, that seems rather odd. Do women always chat and hold parties in their underwear? As a woman, this is news to me. Keating went on to assert that they serve as a front for organised prostitution. This is a strong claim, and one Keating professes “given the information” he has. The question remains: what is that information, and is his claim true? The Government has dealt with the issue by referring the matter on to ComReg, the regulatory body for electronic communications; and Vincent Browne, whose show has become rather unfortunately embroiled in this debacle, has referred the matter on to the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. It is indeed regrettable that ads objectifying women are broadcast during and after a political programme that regularly tackles issues of inequality, including gender inequality, and that includes more women contributors than most. As a keen fan of the show, I’ve felt aggrieved at these ads myself, and have responded to the problem by switching channels. If TV3 believe that the practice of broadcasting objectifying images of women is financially lucrative, I wish to deny this, as it simply encourages politically conscious viewers to not tune in. For other advertisers keen to show off their products during and after a very popular programme, this is also a loss-making strategy, as their adverts will not be viewed once the offending ad has been aired. Many readers, at this stage, will, like the company in question, assert that TV3’s ads are “entirely legal and popular”, or that criticism is “of another era”; after all, they’re just a bit of fun – but fun at whose expense? Research clearly shows us that women’s and girls’ exposure to sexually objectifying images entails harsh detrimental consequences in terms of physical and mental wellbeing. Depression, low self-esteem, eating disorders, and impaired cognitive ability result from the constant sexualisation women and girls now experience as a matter of course. One study in a wider research report on girls’ sexualisation by the American Psychological Association vividly illustrated this point. Young women were asked to complete a mathematical test wearing either a swimsuit or a jumper. When asked to wear the swimsuit, women’s ability to complete the test was significantly impaired, while for the male test subjects no differences were found. The APA concluded that “thinking about the body and comparing it to sexualized cultural ideals disrupted mental capacity”, while “sexualization and objectification undermine confidence in and comfort with one’s own body”. Notably, such discomfort and its resultant outgrowths in terms of negative body image, feelings of inadequacy, and so forth, manifest themselves in girls “as well as in adult women”. Given the evidence for the harmful effects of objectifying images, why should we still be subjected to them? Surely the State, the broadcaster, and the regulator have a responsibility to protect, or at least not to damage, the wellbeing of consumers of media. And yet, the ads were still being shown only last Tuesday evening shortly after 12 o’clock when this writer happened to turn on TV3.Would we be as tolerant of racist advertising being broadcast, and if not, then why are we so tolerant of sexist and objectifying advertising? The answer might lie in the common conflation of such ads with a kind of progressive, open-minded liberalism, which hides the financial drive to commodify women’s bodies behind high-handed claims to sexual freedom. As the lawyers for the company in question assert, criticisms of their adverts are from a bygone era, a relic of Ireland’s history of sexual repression. While I am certain that few people want to return to an age where sexual mores were dictated by the Catholic Church, it is absolutely incongruous to champion such objectifying ads as signs of a new, sexually liberated era. Besides the fact that they are aired to make certain people a lot of money, they are expressive of a reductive interpretation of sexuality. Rather than being progressive, such ads are regressive, as they limit more complex, joyful, desirous, pleasurable expressions of sexuality, while entrenching all of the negative effects women and girls experience as a result of objectification. Monolithic, reductive models of sexuality that are peddled for profit, and that are ultimately harmful to women and girls, are hardly the type of models the new, post-Catholic Consensus Ireland should aspire to and foster. If the State truly has its citizens’ best interests at heart, then it must now take further steps with regard to these particular ads, and also with regard to any future advertising. We need a robust framework of regulation that views gender equality not as a side issue, to be addressed only when people complain, but as a central and desirable feature of our society. Dr. Clara Fischer Co-ordinator, Irish Feminist Network Image top: From That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance (Fredrickson et. al, 1998).Cross-posted from politico.ie, TUESDAY, 15 MAY 2012http://politico.ie/social-issues/8557-objectifying-ads-a-sign-of-a-regressive-ireland-.html
A while back I attended a sexual empowerment workshop with a group of female friends. The workshop was all-inclusive and (gasp!) interactive. The forty or so participants formed a circle in a high-ceilinged room; all plush sofas and weathered pine floorboards. Then, moving in turn to each and every individual, sexual preferences and experiences were openly discussed.
That’s right, out loud. With everyone watching, and listening. Of course, it was perfectly terrifying at first. But then, after a few brave and independent souls got the ball rolling, we all loosened up, the tense atmosphere dissipated, and we got very much into the spirit of things.
The chat was light-hearted, respectfully curious, totally accepting, and very little was held back. Toe sucking, lip biting, belly rubbing, you name it; it was all there, laid out on the table for all to see. The depth and breadth of people’s stories and quirks was amazing, and the variety that emerged in such a short time really struck me. My friends and I left the room that day in glow of ebullience, a new kind of dialogue opened up between us, a new spring in our collective step.
I think that the root of our elation that afternoon was the simple fact that opportunities for us to discuss sexuality in a non-judgemental environment and to talk honestly about what we want out of sexual relationships are so very scarce. We were uplifted after being encouraged to disinhibit ourselves in this way, and to throw the light on some issues normally only suggested at; vague dark shapes lurking somewhere on the peripheries of our conversations. In the sexual empowerment discussion these issues were pushed resolutely to the foreground, all shadow and light, in full relief, open and proud. We aired out insecurities and came bursting through the smoky miasma together with a fresh glee, clearing the room of all apprehension and doubt.
Why is it that we can’t speak to each other with such honesty and clarity so much more often? Things to do with sexuality relate to central aspects of who we are as women, and as people. Since that day, my friends and I have resolved to sit down together more regularly and ask one another: “How’s the sex going?” We do this because we’re tired of sexual experience, female sexual experience especially, being denied adequate voice. We are sick of the same airbrushed, far-removed addressing of sex being rehashed time and time again in those insulting, patronising publications we call (for want of a better categorisation) ‘women’s magazines.’ How many of us would truly want to claim that kind of didactic tripe as our own? Magazines which masquerade as something which endeavour to help us live a better life churn out ‘sex advice’ informing us how to please our men (if you’re gay you don’t even figure into the ‘advice’), and how to market ourselves acceptably, appearing submissive enough so as not to scare all the boys away.
My small group of friends and I are certainly not only ones who feel like we’re being hard done by. Many women are angry at the ubiquity of media messages peddling sexual ideals which are alien to us, so far-removed from anything we know. The problem is wider than the media too, with society in general ignoring the legitimacy of different types of experience, making women feel weird or deviant when they don’t conform to abstract ‘norms’.
Lisa Diamond wrote a book about female sexual fluidity. In it, she pointed out that there might be missing pieces in the scientific understanding of female sexuality on account of how much of the research has been conducted by men. She suggested that the current understanding of sexuality and sexual orientations might fit male experiences relatively well, but that the male-dominated landscape of the research could mean that a whole dimension of female experience has been effectively ignored.
This might seem like a thought bordering on the mind-boggling, but we must bear in mind that when it comes to research into something as variable and elusive as sexuality, variety of approach is key. This is because the kinds of questions that the researcher asks essentially determine what can be found, and also how the findings are interpreted. In turn, the kinds of questions you ask are dictated by your own experience in the first place. Therefore, only by having a body of research produced by a variety of different researchers of different genders, can we really develop a fully fleshed-out, true-to-life understanding of the nature of sexuality.
Variety is the spice and soul of life; it makes the world go round. To embrace a little more variety would make the world less dull, more interesting, and make many of us much, much happier. For too long women have had their preferences dictated to them. Those who switch from heterosexual relationships, for example, to preferring lesbian relationships or vice versa through the course of their lives have long been treated as curious outliers in research, and essentially ignored in popular culture. However, Diamond has suggested that this pattern may actually be an integral feature of the sexual experience of a large proportion of women.
Of course there are some things are changing for the better, like the emergence of some quite positive, sexually confident and outspoken role models in pop culture, such as the openly bisexual and gay rights campaigner Lady Gaga. It’s also true that many women are happy, in control, and know how to get what they want. But the freedom to do this still needs to be more far-reaching, and normal experiences and variations need to be looked on as such, rather than as deviancy and confounds. It’s great that pop culture figures are stepping out and talking about experiences that are not always heteronormative and docile, but we must go further than that, and show that you don’t need to be some kind of glamorous renegade to have attitudes like these. We all need to start talking about it, and asking one another “How’s the sex going?” and if it’s not good, then why not, and what needs to change?
We need to show each other that it’s cool to like what you like, and there are no universal standards of what’s normal. The only way to arrive at these understandings is to talk. There is a spiky urgency for better sex ed in schools, and a broader, more socially aware outlook permeating all classroom activities. Why do we think that LGBT students are having such a hard time in Irish education, and that gender stereotypes still prevail throughout many levels of our society? If children are shown early on that sexuality is not just black and white, but dynamic and multifaceted, and are given the skills to challenge stereotypes, it is certainly possible to develop a new level of confidence, acceptance and celebration of each and every kind of happy and healthy sex.
This is not as unrealistic as it may appear. A few changes to the way things are done could make leaps towards transforming a generation into one that’s naturally more open-minded, who wouldn’t be automatically inclined towards a sense of apprehensive dread before embarking upon a thing called an ‘interactive sexual empowerment workshop.’ Instead, they would see this as totally normal social discussion. Maybe then we’d all start demanding better representation in our media and our pop music, reflecting what we are really like, and not someone else’s money-grabbing prescription of what we should want to be like.
Unattainable standards and plastic portrayals of sex and bodies do men a disservice too. To say nothing of the negative impact which stiff heteronormative standards of masculinity can have on gay men, it leans dangerously towards creating a lethally boring and one-dimensional Gentleman’s Club of heterosexual men too, who are conditioned to lust after one idealised form of woman and sex because that’s what’s sold to them as normality.
Our bodies are for feeling, not just for showcasing. How wonderful if we could all get together more to reject the crazy things the media try to push on us, and get on with the far more important business of loving our bodies and learning to be more honest and true to ourselves. Let’s open the discussion and endorse the whole spectrum of variety, let’s sit down and communicate with one another. Let’s all ask each other, and ask ourselves, and answer honestly: How is your sex going? Who knows, the answers just might surprise you.
The sexual empowerment workshop mentioned in this piece was facilitated by Leslie Sherlock. Leslie has been involved with a number of different initiatives relating to sexuality and gender, and she also does research in education. She is an excellent speaker - sensitive and encouraging, but with a playful, light-hearted approach. Leslie has run many fun, engaging, and thought-provoking workshops like the one mentioned here, as well as facilitating discussion and training around heteronormativity and trans issues, among others, in a number of different locations around Ireland.
Article by Áine Travers
|