Objectification of women in Media

I’ll come around to that, but first:
We had a presentation about the media and dash project today in college. We had to speak on a sub topic for three minutes each, and then enact something related to the subject. So the other group who had got sex and media (my group also had the same topic), and a part of their skit involved one fellow (playing the part of a child) asking another fellow (the father) about a condom. So this was the conversation that followed after two other people had enacted a condom ad on stage.

Child: Papa, papa, yeh caundum kya hota hai? (papa, what is a condom?)
Father: beta… caundum… caundum balloon hota hai (a condom is like a balloon, son)
Child: Who holi mein phekte hain, waisa kya? (like the ones we throw around in holi?)

I remembered a conversation I had with my father after encountering a condom in this drawer. It was long ago, but I still remember it clearly, because he hadn’t told me what he is. Somehow, with the stories of unprotected sex, rape and prostitution going around when I was around ten, I had believed for a short span of time that my father was a rapist. I thought only rapist used condoms, and that condoms were not used at home. I thought my father was this guy leading a double life. I didn’t tell my mother only because I was scared she would thrash me if I admitted I knew what a condom was. So people with kids please not, tell kids the truth, and don’t do something like this:

(The convo took place in kannada, after I found some multi colored condoms in a drawer)

Me: id yenu? (what’s this?)
Daddy: ad rubber (that’s rubber)

This is the part I remembered, because I related to the fact that fathers don’t tell their kids what a condom is, but instead tell their kids a slang term for the same thing, hoping it will satisfy their curiosity. I told this to a friend sitting next to me, and remembered more of the conversation, and suddenly realized exactly how perverted my father is. Maybe it was unintentional. Maybe.

Me: yen rub madake? (to rub what?) (In this context, better translated as, “for what purpose?”)
Daddy: nanna costly penge (for my costly pen)

At that point of time, I was only allowed to write with a pencil, so even a pen was a big thing for me.

Anyway, there is something I have to come back to:

Objectification of women in the society:

So almost everyone spoke about how the media portrays women. There were two groups talking about ‘media and sex’ and ‘media and women’ each. So that meant a total of twenty four speakers, and almost everyone touched upon the objectification of women in the media. I was the only guy with a different view.
They spoke about the same old crap, that the media represents women only with their breasts and vaginas, and that women are portrayed as if there is nothing more to them. The media is to be blamed for this portrayal of women, and that this was having undesirable consequences on the watching populating. This allegedly, made rapists out of people. This also lead to an increase in rate of crimes against women, and there were statistics to prove this. Also, most films portray the heroine as merely an object of the hero’s attention, just something that he would achieve at the end of the movie. The media was again, to be blamed for this.
Someone also spoke about pornography, about scenes of bondage, about how this again, was portraying women as sex objects (a very commonly used term). Someone else touched upon advertising, and proclaimed loudly to the whole class something totally unnecessary, “Media basically only objectifies women” and spoke about shaving and underwear commercials that had female models in them that were totally unnecessary. The kingfisher airlines ad had bikini clad females, and there was some explanation on how the common people associate their arousal to the brand itself, and therefore prefer it over other brands. I will not elaborate further on this, but basically, it was a general feeling that the media was to blame for the objectification of women.
The key word here is “objectifies”
The media does not “objectify” women. The media is merely reflecting something inherent in the society… the society already had objectified them. That is why the entire gender was suppressed for so long. Women were essentially reduced to their breasts, butts and vaginas long before the media came along and merely reflected this. Although the media does, to a certain extent reinforce the idea of females as sex objects, it does not construct females in sex objects. The media is NOT responsible for a build up of sexist ideas.
The media is actually very responsible when it comes to the objectification of women. There does a simple question to be asked. What does the media have to gain if they portray objectified women? This is where the “sex sell” part comes in. Scopophlia, or the desire to see people as sex objects is the reason why sex sells. This is an intrinsic characteristic in human beings, starting with young kiddos who want to peek at the private parts of others. This develops into voyeuristic tendencies is adolescence. Women are depicted as sex objects because people want to see them portrayed as such.
However, the media is getting very responsible about this. The feminist movement is in fact, fuelled by the media itself. For example, take the movie Lakshya. This soldier has got a baby child, and he approaches his senior with this information. The senior enquires about the gender of the child. The soldier proudly replies that it is a female.
Now anyone in India would have expected a male child to be
Oh shit I just realized there was a major flaw in my presentation. What I just said has nothing to do with objectification. Blogging does help! Screw anyone who says it doesn’t. Damn, I realized this while typing. Ok anyway, to go on with the rambling….
Anyone would expect a male child to be born for the purpose of the soldier showing his pride. The media is actually helping desexifying the entire gender. Te media is the cure and not the cause.