Argumentative Paper Prompt

Introduction 

While women’s movements have consistently fought against the objectification of women, women remain an aspect of objectification in many ways. Many organizations still use women as an object of their popularity even when they use them in the wrong manner or unfair means. Restaurants like Hooters and Twin Peaks, for instance, use young and scantily dressed women as their wait staff as they target to use the approach to gain more customers. One questions whether the approach is ethical or not and it ends up in a state of dilemma. One would first wonder whether the women are forced or not or whether they accept to dress so willingly. Nonetheless, it is not a matter of concern to many people as the society has accepted such behaviors as part of the societal setting. Some opinions on the matter prove that objectification of women still lives on because they have not been given ground enough to dismantle the occurrence. It is however not the case because many women in government and areas have influence and would do it. Objectification of women still lives because of societal standards that stereotype women as nothing other than sources of attraction. 

All around the world, the creation of brands and markets has always been about creating an attraction amongst the people. It is about making the product publicized as much as it could be use the most available and necessary means. It is integral to realize that a company does not engage in advertising alone (Lier n.p.). A business must, therefore, strive to use the most attractive approach that it could to outshine the others. Often, businesses resolve on the attraction approach to use and resolve to women. They do not find anything wrong with that because they believe that other companies still use the approach and hence it would not be hurting. 

The use of sexism in advertising is probably one of the most prominent advertising approaches that have ever existed. The use of sexism proves to be a good approach because it bears fruits in that most people who view the advertisements across the gender divide have an appreciation of beauty. Therefore, the first assumption that organizations and corporations hide behind is that they are just showcasing beauty (Lier n.p.). A growing attraction to the adverts yields an attraction to the product without the understanding of the viewer. Consequently, the organization manages to attract as many customers due to the use of women. There is no moral objectivity to the issue as many people, almost everyone including women view the approach as one that is not ill-intended because they are all blinded by the cultural fallacy of appreciation of the beauty of women.

The popular culture and women’s movements all argue for the empowerment of women by employing as the very first step towards empowering them. They believe that through employment, women can gain the ability to fight for their space and oppose objectification. However, the very employment that women movements see for their fellow women is used in disguise. Employers like the Hooters restaurant issue employment to many women to make people believe that they are in the frontline of women empowerment (CARMONA 34). However, people do not note that those women who are employed there are required to dress in a specific sexualized manner such that they can be objects of attraction to the buyer. The society inclusive of women and men are not concerned with the way that such women dress. Their attraction to the organizations is unconscious and hence they can never know that the societal objectification of women is in practice at the facilities. 

Even when the world believes that civilization is an issue that should strengthen women and prevent them from being objects of sexual attraction, it rather seems to be a galvanizer of sexual gratification of women on the other edge. It is through civilization that such things such as social media have come. According to Davis (2018), the newest form of moral corruption, especially among women, is the use of social media. The author relates the use of social media to the provision of gendered-free labor which is a form of slavery (Davis 2). Without their understanding, women upload their photos most of which are revealing of their bodies not to be paid but just because they need likes, especially from their male counterparts. The use of social media to women is, therefore, nothing but the normalization of their objectification. 

The use of a woman’s body to realize pleasure and admiration is not new. It is an advertising tactic that is sometimes hidden behind anonymity when it is not about celebrities. Most organizations maintain an anonymous use of the female bodies because they believe that it will not hurt the concerned women since they do not have public profiles to protect (Davis 2). On the other hand, organizations still believe that by use of the pictures they will attract buyers who will consequently buy from them. Some of the organizations like hooters where they have to use women as waitresses, they use the approach in a kind of moderated manner such that the women do not have to be extra naked but just somehow naked. Their approach is just the same as the use of naked women on social media since they attract their male counterparts while their fellow women see nothing wrong in it. The continued objectification of women in business is therefore not about the male gender but an unnoticed influence from the cultural perspective of the use of the beauty of women to create attraction.

The depiction of the human body as weak and which can only be used for pleasure and sexual gratification is not a recent trend. It is rather a pattern that has lived on since the use of the media came into place. When the press became a recognized trend and form of communication and commercial entertainment, there was an overly focus on women being stripped, tortured, raped and even murdered. The media houses that presented the pictures for entertainment in the very first place received not a single opposition from feminists or from the morally upright people in the society (Scala 54). Their ramifications were bound on the concept that they were just acting in free speech and that it was just entertainment. It was, however, a continued trait that the media houses were carrying on with. Sexual abuse of women had existed before they came into place and it seemed like abusing women sexually was just okay as they had nothing more to offer to them. The objectification of women from this approach therefore cannot be stated as a recent trend. 

Sexual objectification of women and the consequential use of women in the wrong way in the corporations and organizations is in the largest part enhanced by themsleves. In the current times, the world has encountered an increasing growth of feminists. The feminist group is the group that argues for the betterment of the living conditions of women in the same manner as their male colleagues. The group, however, fails in some of the basic concepts that lead to the objectification of women (“Feminist Perspectives On Objectification”). Almost every feminist agrees that the female body is created to excite. They therefore unconsciously carry on with the cultural view of women as objects of attraction while they should be in the frontline in deconstructing the narrative.

A discussion on who is responsible for showing femininity as an object of attraction other than the view of women as human beings who need to be treated equally to a man adds up to a condemnation of the cultural settings. Culture is the disciplinary power that inscribes femininity on the human body and makes everyone view a female as something pleasing that should be used for sexual attractiveness. To prove it, when a female is born, everyone struggles to prove to her that she is beautiful (“Feminist Perspectives On Objectification”). Femininity is reinforced by parents, teachers and male partners all across. The thought of being beautiful therefore makes women and society at large believe that they should be nothing short of attractive. It is the same reason that the community does not see anything wrong when objectification of women happens in organizations. Their objectification, therefore, has not one to blame other than the culture they rise from.

UNICEF an organization that seeks to see the wellness of women appreciated across the globe observed the manner in which women are objectified and concluded that they are more portrayed in a sexual manner than boys. Their bodily postures and facial expressions when they are still young are material expressions of their sexual readiness according to the organization. They grow up in societies which condone such behaviors with a view that the behaviors are just girlish and nothing other than that. The organization also acknowledges that they are or the same reason featured in magazines and advertisements in a sexually proposing way since the society accepts it (“Not An Object: On Sexualization And Exploitation Of Women And Girls”). From the very origin, as proposed by the organization, the organization has made women acknowledge that they sexual attractions and hence they do not care even when they are used as such in businesses. The society is therefore not to blame but rather, the cultural perception of women as sexual attraction objects.

Counter Argument

Some people still hold the opinion that the reason that organizations use women for the wrong purpose is that they have still not attained a self-dependence ground where they can air their claims even when the society remains silent about their stereotyping (Wood 232). The narrative is built on the view that stereotyping women is based on the fact that they are still dependent on men and hence they are unable to revolt against objectification seeing that they could lose instrumentally. The argument, therefore, fronts that if women could be allowed more space to grow socially and financially; they would eventually win the strife and could speak against objectification.

Rebuttal

The argument that women are objectified because they are still not yet empowered is weak to the thought. The modern world and nations have increasingly strengthened the ability of women to speak out politically, economically and socially, and women are currently fairing on just like men in different fields. The thought is also incorrect considering that there is a current rise in feminism that inherently argues against judging women because of how they dress. The argument is therefore blindfolded since women themselves love such kind of dressing and their portrayal in such garments in the workplace is not a discriminatory procedure to most of them. The society also lacks nothing wrong in it because of the understanding that they are not forced but they rather act at will. Observation of the societal acceptance should, therefore, show that objectification of women is a culturally acceptable practice that has been inherited down the line; the reason that neither business owners nor the society find anything wrong when women are addressed to attract customers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is necessary the reason as to why the objectification of women still lives on and is in practice even in modern organizations is because of the cultural acceptance of women as objects of attraction. Since time immemorial, the nudity of women has been used to entertain, advertise and create an affinity towards certain products. The same approach is used in the modern world with the goal of attracting customers. Even when it is viewed by many as outright objectification of women, there is very little opposition from the society because objectification of women looks like just another standard procedure. Arguments that it lives on because there are few people to oppose it are unjustified since it is a matter that women themselves seem to agree to. It is, therefore, necessary to conclude that objectification of women is a cultural matter whose solace may not be found in the incumbent society. 

Works Cited

“Feminist Perspectives On Objectification.” Plato.stanford.edu. N.p., 2019. Web. 17 Jan. 2019.Retrieved from; https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-objectification/
“Not An Object: On Sexualization And Exploitation Of Women And Girls.” UNICEF USA. N.p., 2019. Web. 17 Jan. 2019. Retrieved from; https://www.unicefusa.org/stories/not-object-sexualization-and-exploitation-women-and-girls/30361

CARMONA, MARÍA DEL MARRIVAS. “Claiming women’s rights through cartoons: the demand for a worklife balance.” New Insights into Gendered Discursive Practices: Language, Gender and Identity Construction 10 (2014).

Davis, Stefanie E. “Objectification, Sexualization, and Misrepresentation: Social Media and the College Experience.” Social Media+ Society 4.3 (2018): 2056305118786727.

Lier, Kim. “Sexism In Advertising.” HASTAC. N.p., 2017. Web. 17 Jan. 2019. Retrieved from; https://www.hastac.org/blogs/kimlier26/2017/12/11/sexism-advertising

Scala, Devone. “Media, Objectification and Sexual Assault.” Dissenting Voices 2.1 (2013): 7.

Wood, Julia T. “Gendered media: The influence of media on views of gender.” Gendered lives: Communication, gender and culture (1994): 231-244.