Abstract
Sociologists have developed compelling pedagogical strategies to focus the undergraduate gaze on problems of gender and sexuality. Nested within the social construction of gender norms, the sexualization of girls and women negatively impacts individual, interpersonal, and societal levels of social interaction. Nevertheless, this important issue remains under-explored in the sociology of teaching and learning. This article reports on a pedagogical module that utilizes a multimedia presentation to define and illustrate the sexualization of girls and women. Lesson impacts were assessed through an online survey. Results indicate a critical gap between the social importance of this topic and educational exposure. Students unanimously recommended this module be taught in introductory sociology courses and offered specific examples of individual and interpersonal impacts. Our findings suggest an ongoing need to address the sexualization of girls and women inside, and outside, of the classroom.
Keywords
Contemporary mass media and popular culture are saturated with highly erotic imagery of girls and women (Coy 2012). In a recent Twitter exchange, one activist mother called the sexualization of girls and women “the elevator music to American culture” (Wardy in Cepeda [2012]). The ubiquitous portrayal of females as objects of sexual desire has led to a toxic cultural milieu, encouraging the desensitization to and normalization of female objectification (Egan and Hawkes 2008). This toxicity extends to all facets of gender socialization and is linked to various problematic outcomes at the individual, interpersonal, and societal levels (American Psychological Association [APA] Task Force 2010; Coy 2012; Wesely 2012).
Despite the serious and wide-ranging implications of this phenomenon, pedagogical techniques for helping undergraduate students recognize and combat sexualization are scarce. This article aims to address the literature gap and add to the excellent pedagogical strategies developed to highlight inequalities of gender, physical appearance, sexuality, and sexism (see, e.g., Berkowitz, Manohar, and Tinkler 2010; Edwards 2010; Kleinman, Copp, and Sandstrom 2006; Kwan and Trautner 2011).
In this article, we define and explore sexualization and its impacts, provide an overview of relevant theory, and describe a pedagogical module that (1) introduces students to the problem and (2) encourages them to reflect on the scope and depth of sexualization in their social environments. We also present findings from a qualitative and quantitative post-class survey that measures lesson plan efficacy and impact.
The multifaceted process of sexualization occurs when an individual’s value and worth come solely from his or her sexual appeal or potential, one is objectified or regarded as an item for another’s sexual use, an individual is held to a narrow standard that equates attractiveness with sexiness, or sexuality is inappropriately imposed upon an individual (APA Task Force 2010). Occurring on a continuum, it ranges from subtle (e.g., eyeing a child in a sexual way) to severe (e.g., sexual violence) (Wesely 2012).
Though problematic for both genders, sexualization primarily affects girls and women (APA Task Force 2010). Part of gender socialization, it “teaches” girls about their limited life choices and contributes to gendered binary constructions (e.g., masculine/feminine, dominant/submissive) (Coy 2012; Wesely 2012). Sexualization also reflects deeply embedded societal inequalities and strongly reinforces dominant ideals of white beauty (Thompson 2012). These narrowly conscribed ideals promote body dissatisfaction across all races and ethnicities (Ward et al. 2012).
Sexualization, like gender socialization, is “profoundly heterosexual and heteronormative” (APA Task Force 2010:4). Yet women who are sexual minorities (e.g., lesbian, bisexual) are not exempt. Increasingly, mainstream media and pornography include “attractive, hyperfeminine ‘hot’ women” who perform “girl-on-girl action” tailored for the heterosexual male gaze (Thompson 2013:132). Thus, these women may be doubly sexualized—as women and as sexual minorities (Thompson 2013).
Research has highlighted the critical role of the media in reinforcing sexualized constructs of women and girls (Peter and Valkenburg 2007). Media “sells” idealized, eroticized imagery and reinforces the idea that women’s primary utility lies in being a sexual object (Peter and Valkenburg 2007). Girls are inundated by graphic sexual messages and marketing campaigns well before puberty, and “tweens” (aged 9 to 13) are a key demographic for sexual consumerism (Meyers, Fisher, and Marcoux 2007). There is also increased pressure for older women (particularly white, middle-class women) to maintain their status as sexual objects well beyond previously constructed social norms (Hine 2011).
Consequences of sexualization are multifaceted and occur at the individual, interpersonal, and societal levels. At the individual level, physical and mental health, cognitive functioning, attitudes, and beliefs may all be impacted (APA Task Force 2010). Girls and women may self-objectify, leading to constant self-critique and comparison to unrealistic models. Sexualization emphasizes the “double bind” (Frye 2001) that girls and women face: They must be seen as sexually alluring in order to be noticed and admired, yet these efforts may invoke eating disorders, low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and risky sexual behavior (APA Task Force 2010; Levin and Kilbourne 2008).
Sexualization also negatively impacts interpersonal relationships. Boys and girls are frequently bombarded with images and messages of sexuality that are devoid of attachment, emotions, or consequences (Levin and Kilbourne 2008). Young people may look to pornography as the instruction manual for their own intimate relationships, reinforcing unrealistic and unhealthy expectations of sexuality (Coy 2012).
Finally, sexualization may have detrimental impacts at the societal level. Girls are considered objects, devoid of independence. Sexualization offers the false promise of “girl power,” implying “limitless possibilities” through self-objectification (Coy 2012:47). In reality, when girls and women pursue narrowly defined ideals of beauty, they may abandon their potential to develop critical skills (Coy 2012). This objectification by self and others “reinforces gender inequality . . . perpetuates associations of masculinity and predatory sexual prowess, and justifies sexual violence” (Coy 2012:46). Inequality is exacerbated by additional gendered social constraints including inequitable pay (Blau and Kahn 2007), occupational limitations (Maume 1999), and/or intimate partner violence (Bonomi et al. 2006).
A Learning Module: The Sexualization of Girls and Women
Recently developed education and counseling programs attempt to combat the widespread influence of sexualization (see Choate and Curry 2009). However, these initiatives are relatively new, and many focus on body image or objectification generally rather than sexualization specifically (Choma, Foster, and Radford 2007). Thus, most college-aged adults are unlikely to have explicitly recognized or discussed sexualization as a powerful and potentially negative type of gender socialization.
This pedagogical module teaches students about the sexualization of girls and women via multimedia presentation and large group discussion. The module introduces sexualization, identifies fueling forces, encourages students to reflect on the scope and depth of these issues in their own lives, and facilitates discussion of ways in which sexualization can be reduced at the micro and macro levels of society.
This lesson was part of a course titled “The Sociology of Health and Mental Illness” and took place at a large, public university in the Southeast. The course asked, “In a society, why are some people healthy and others not?” Unequal distributions of physical and mental health were viewed through the lenses of race, class, and gender. This course contained a service-learning component and paid special attention to issues affecting adolescents, including sexualization, as many students mentored at-risk youth in the community. This topic was preceded by a unit on gendered health differences, grounded in concepts of gender socialization.
At the time this lesson plan was created, the existent literature in psychology, education, and communications (see, e.g., Levin and Kilbourne 2008; Opplinger 2008) was more prolific on the topic of sexualization than the sociological literature (for exceptions, see Egan and Hawkes 2008; Wesely 2002). The instructor chose to use the Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls (APA Task Force Report 2010) because it was comprehensively researched and contained theoretical frameworks relevant to gender socialization. Students used their sociological imaginations to frame and interpret data that crossed disciplinary boundaries.
For this class module, the instructor highlighted four of the five theories of sexualization detailed in the APA Task Force Report (2010): socialization, sociocultural, cognitive, and objectification. The fifth theory, psychoanalytic, lacked sociological application and was not covered. Students were encouraged to use these theories as frameworks for understanding how the sexualization process is constructed and enacted in their social environments.
The socialization theory posits that girls learn about the societal expectations and roles of women via direct social cues from parents, peers, and other socializing agents. Sociocultural theory suggests that girls’ environments are rife with indirect gender cues that encourage the adoption of dominant cultural templates for “doing” gender. Cognitive theory underscores the unconscious and automatic nature of some of the schemas and structures that are developed through socialization. Objectification theory suggests that girls’ observations of their social world, combined with implicit and explicit sexualization cues, lead to an internalization of objectification and self-sexualization (APA Task Force 2010). Each of these theories is referenced in the in-class presentation section.
Two separate cohorts were taught, one in 2010 (N = 20) and the next in 2011 (N = 40). Each time, the class met for 75 minutes. Students were primarily female (74 percent) juniors and seniors. In 2011, approximately 34 percent of undergraduates at this university were minorities, compared to 40 percent and 37 percent, respectively, for these cohorts.
The module entailed a required, pre-class reading (pages 19–39 of the APA Report) and a PowerPoint presentation containing definitions of important concepts, illustrative images, and embedded links to news articles and short video clips. Classroom discussion occurred throughout.
The first author (hereafter, the instructor) began the presentation by operationalizing the concept of sexualization by presenting the four tenets outlined in the APA Report. She emphasized that the tenets represent sexualization alone or in combination, before underscoring key aspects of each. For the first tenet (“a person’s value comes only from his or her sexual appeal or behavior”), the instructor noted that sexualization was a narrowly conscribed social force that was qualitatively different from normal, healthy sexuality (i.e., sexuality that fosters intimacy, shared pleasure, respect, and consent).
To illustrate the culturally circumscribed nature of the second tenet (“a narrowly defined level of physical attractiveness is required to be ‘sexy’”), students were asked to name some of our current cultural beauty ideals. In both cohorts, students listed light skin, thin body, big breasts, round buttocks, and long blonde hair, citing examples such as former Baywatch star Pamela Anderson. The instructor encouraged students to reflect on attainability of these ideals for all women. Students noted that such appearances are not typically natural and may be achieved through self-starvation, plastic surgery, lots of makeup, and hair dye. They also pointed out that women of color may feel these characteristics are even less attainable, though highly visible women of color (e.g., Beyoncé) increasingly embody these standards.
The third tenet of sexualization (“a person is sexually objectified—made into a thing for others’ sexual use rather than seen as a person with the capacity for independent action and decision making”) highlighted how a woman’s intellect, achievements, and autonomy are stripped through objectification. A subsequent slide asked, “What were you doing/wearing when you were sexually harassed?” and reports on the results of a poll that was posted on Jezebel, a feminist blog. The wide variety of answers, including “Unbathed in the aftermath of a hurricane,” “dressed as a toy soldier for a production of The Nutcracker,” “at age 12 crying my eyes out over a family death,” were used to dispel the notion than women are only objectified when they “ask for it” by dressing or acting in a certain way.
The final tenet of sexualization (“sexuality is inappropriately imposed upon a person”) included child abuse statistics. An estimated 13 percent of boys and 30 to 40 percent of girls experience child sexual abuse (CSA), and rape and sexual harassment are on the rise among girls younger than age 18 (Bolen and Scannapieco 1999; Wesely 2012). The instructor emphasized that these statistics are likely too low, as CSA is typically underreported, especially for boys. Though CSA is one extreme of the sexualization continuum, and other factors contribute to its perpetration, “the cultural milieu in which CSA occurs is one that condones the pornified sexualization of children” and “promotes sexiness by blurring lines between young girl and adult woman” (Wesely 2012:66).
Next, the instructor gave a brief overview of primary outcomes: beliefs about the social self emerge (i.e., “You’re not good enough the way that you are”), behavior is informed by perceived sexual norms (e.g., engaging in risky or precocious sexual behavior), body image is skewed by unrealistic ideals (e.g., body dysmorphic disorder), mental health is impacted (e.g., depression, anxiety, and eating disorders). The primary underlying message of sexualization, “You’re not good enough the way that you are,” was underscored multiple times, using a variety of prompts.
The majority of the presentation centered on the identification, exploration, and student-initiated discussion of social and cultural contributors to sexualization. Underscoring the powerful socializing influence of the media, the instructor relied heavily on images from the Internet and YouTube videos. She chose to illustrate a handful of interrelated causal factors identified in the APA Task Force Report (2010): clothing and accessories, changing norms of attractiveness, media images, and cultural trends. These factors fuel and inform each other and were intended to be both instantly identifiable and uniquely compelling to the majority of undergraduate students. For a complete list of sources used in this presentation, please contact the first author.
Clothing and Accessories
The instructor presented recent news stories highlighting the use of “adult” clothing and makeup by adolescents. For instance, in 2010, Primark, a department store in England, came under critical fire for introducing a line of padded bikinis for girls as young as age seven (Poulter 2010). In 2011, a popular United States clothing chain, Abercrombie and Fitch, introduced a similar line of clothing for young girls (Mandell 2011). Students in the 2011 cohort also watched a media clip documenting the rise of a five-year-old “makeup guru” featured on Good Morning America.
Students were asked to consider the following questions: Why does a seven-year-old girl need a padded bikini? Why should a five-year-old girl be an expert in makeup application? Generally, students reacted negatively, although some said the five-year-old girl applying makeup was just “having fun” and “imitating her mother.” The instructor countered that the child is possibly learning two very important lessons, perhaps before she can even read: (1) Her appearance is not satisfactory the way it is, and (2) changing her appearance to match that of current adult female beauty norms merits her adulation and attention.
Changing Norms of Attractiveness
Next, the instructor focused on changing attractiveness norms of the wife/mother image, as viewed through the lens of popular television shows. She contrasted an image from the iconic 1950s television show Leave it to Beaver with one from the recent, long-running series Desperate Housewives. In the former, June Cleaver wears pearls, lipstick, and perfectly coiffed hair while holding a bowl and spatula over an oven. The highly groomed centerpiece of a domestic tableau, she performs the expected chores of a 1950s housewife. In addition to demonstrating that attractiveness norms change over time, this example provides an opportunity to emphasize that heterosexist norms permeate our sexualized society. Women in media are often portrayed engaging in domestic activities intended to seduce or please heterosexual males (Kimmel 2013).
In contrast, the “Desperate Housewives” are provocatively dressed and arrayed in a laundromat. While the beauty and sexuality of these women is the scene’s centerpiece, domesticity is still present, albeit literally in the background. The shirtless, headless body of a repairman emerges from one of the washing machines. This image provides an opportunity to note that men are increasingly sexualized in our society. However, the instructor intentionally avoided the creation of a “false parallel” (Schwalbe 2001) by emphasizing the fact that women (and in this case, middle-aged “cougar” women), not men, are the primary targets of sexualization.
Media Images
The next segment focused on sexualized magazine imagery. Several of the images reflected the increasingly common “pornified sexualization of children” in which children are portrayed as objects available for sexual pleasure (Wesely 2012). For instance, a recent spread in French Vogue depicted a 10-year-old girl in highly erotic poses. The model, Thylane Loubry Blondeau, is described in various U.S. media outlets as “Fashion’s Newest Muse” (Sauers 2011). Several photos involve explicit or implied nudity, pouty poses, and a bed as a prop. Students expressed distress that such a young girl was depicted in ways that, in another context, could realistically be directed at a pedophile.
Cultural Trends
The next segment of multimedia images highlighted cultural trends, including beauty pageants and dance competitions that recruit and focus on young girls’ appearance to the exclusion of their other skills. The instructor first showed a photo of a young girl (aged approximately four to six years) participating in a pageant (Child Beauty Pageant 2010). She is wearing a two-piece swimsuit, heavy makeup, and coiffed hair. When asked how old she looked, students shouted out ages ranging from 25 to 45.
The next slide linked to a 49-second clip from the popular television show Toddlers and Tiaras that had been posted on the feminist blog Jezebel (Morrissey 2011). A child pageant participant is shown wearing a replica of a bare-midriff Dallas Cowboys cheerleader uniform and engaging in a brief dance routine that culminates with her thrusting her pelvis into the air. The instructor asked, “When did the little girl get the most applause, laughter, and affirmation?” The students, some horrified, concluded that the audience was most positively receptive when the girl performed moves that would be considered sexual, or even sexually aggressive, in an adult.
The subsequent slide shows before and after pictures of a young African American pageant participant. Students are asked to spot the differences: lighter skin tone due to foundation; blusher, lipstick, and false lashes; a “dental flipper” (fake teeth to hide gaps left by baby teeth); jewelry and a glittering gown; hairpieces. The instructor asked the students, “What message might this young girl receive about her looks?” Students responded, “You’re not good enough the way that you are.”
Shown next was a YouTube clip of seven-year-old girls dressed in ruffled black and red bra tops, hot pants, and knee-high black boots performing highly sexualized dance moves to Beyoncé’s hit song “Single Ladies” (Single Ladies Dance 2010). This brief video received significant student reaction. Most were in disbelief that children were performing such a salacious dance routine. A few students commented that the girls are clearly talented dancers. The instructor responded, “Just because these girls can perform this highly eroticized dance routine at age seven, does that mean they should?” Moreover, she noted, girls and women are given greater affirmation when they choose to participate in activities where athleticism may be enacted as sexualized performance and any skill or physical prowess is underplayed for the sake of objectification (Shugart 2003).
Theories of Sexualization
After establishing that we live in a sexually saturated culture, the instructor turned to theories of sexualization. In addition to defining them, she offered illustrative examples of each. She emphasized and spent the most time on the sociologically relevant socialization and sociocultural theories.
Illustrating the direct cues key to socialization theory, the instructor used an article from the Daily Mail (2010). Sarah Burge, 50, calls herself the “Human Barbie” and has spent approximately $750,000 on appearance enhancement. In one photo, blond and busty Ms. Burge wears a tight pink T-shirt proclaiming “Botox Rocks.” The instructor noted that Ms. Burge has enrolled her seven-year-old daughter, Poppy, in pole-dancing classes, claiming that they keep her fit. She is quoted as saying, “Poppy wants a boob job when she is old enough, and what my daughters want, they get.” What message, the instructor asks, is she giving her daughter? Students echoed the (increasingly routine) response: “She’s not good enough the way that she is.” Here, the instructor has found it useful to highlight increased rates of plastic surgery and the ways in which surgery is used to “accomplish” feminine gender norms (Dull and West 1991).
Sociocultural theory highlights the pervasive influence of indirect cues. Students immediately recognized a picture of Ariel from Disney’s The Little Mermaid (Clements and Musker 1989). The instructor then played a spoof of Ariel from a Second City sketch featured on Sociological Images (Wade 2010). The actress portraying Ariel says things like “My best feature is my voice . . . so I sold it for plastic surgery” and “Don’t ever talk to a man until he kisses you on the lips first. Then, as a woman, you’re allowed.” While clearly a caricature, the students immediately grasped that the underlying messages of the movie are actually deeply disempowering to girls and women.
Next, the instructor briefly highlighted the “babyface” cognitive theory, juxtaposing pictures of supermodel Kate Moss and a young girl. While society and culture are strong providers of direct and indirect messages about female attractiveness norms, some psychologists have hypothesized that underlying cognitive schemas (e.g., preference for large eyes, full lips, rounded cheeks, etc.) also influence what we find attractive. However, the instructor emphasized that attractiveness norms are social constructions that change across time and place (Kimmel 2013).
According to objectification theory, the final theory covered in the module, girls are encouraged to internalize the sexual, objectifying male gaze and “you’re-not-ok-as-you-are” message at ever-younger ages. To illustrate this point, the instructor played a YouTube video of an infant girl trying to apply lipstick while an off-camera, female voice (presumably her mother’s) is cheering her behavior (Little Girl Putting Her Lipstick On 2008).
The PowerPoint presentation ended with a slide reiterating the negative effects of sexualization on physical and mental health. Students then volunteered examples from the reading that they found compelling and linked them to their own observations. Female students discussed the prevalence of eating disorders among their peers and linked this trend with self-objectification and unrealistic societal ideals. Male students also saw the impacts of unrealistic ideals, primarily in the appearance anxiety they observed in their female intimates.
Wrapping up the class, the instructor asked, “What are ways that we can impact the sexualization of girls and women?” Some students said that they planned to limit their future offspring’s participation in the culture of sexualization. Others highlighted the prevalence of gendered language, “slut-shaming,” and body-shaming on college campuses. Students acknowledged that the perpetuation of such norms and vocabulary among their peers only reinforced the ideas that women are not “good enough.”
Self-Reported Learning
In order to measure learning outcomes, feedback was elicited from students using an anonymous online survey comprised of scale and open-ended questions. We used a posttest only design. Students from both cohorts (N = 60) were contacted using their university e-mail addresses. The survey link was embedded in the e-mail text. One reminder e-mail was sent. Several students had graduated and no longer used their university e-mail accounts; we were unable to reach them. All feedback was anonymous. No data were collected via e-mail, and we had no way of knowing which students completed the online survey. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) determined that our survey was “classroom evaluation” containing no personal identifiers and was thus exempt from IRB action.
Among our 32 respondents (53 percent response rate), most were female (84 percent) and white/Caucasian (63 percent); the modal age at time of class participation was 20 (Table 1).
Survey respondent demographics (N = 32).
Since some time had passed since this module was taught (3 or 15 months, depending on the cohort), we asked the students if (1) they remembered the class lecture/exercise on the sexualization of girls and women, (2) it was a topic they had thought of before the presentation, (3) it was a topic they had been formally taught prior to this course (if “yes” in what context), and (4) they had been formally taught about this topic since Sociology of Health and Mental Illness (SHMI) (if “yes” in what context).
All of the students remembered the lesson. The majority (78 percent) said that this issue was something they had thought about prior to the presentation, but less than half (44 percent) had received formal instruction on it. Very few (12.5 percent) had been formally exposed to it since SHMI. Women’s Studies courses were the primary educational sources for students who reported learning about sexualization prior to, or after, our class.
Students also responded to a series of Likert-scale statements about the topic and its influence (strongly disagree = 1, disagree = 2, neither agree nor disagree = 3, agree = 4, or strongly agree = 5). Thirty-one respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that “the class on sexualization of girls and women challenged me to think deeply about the subject matter” (one person remained neutral). All respondents reported that the instructional techniques engaged them in the subject matter and that they learned “a great deal.” There was also consensus that the subject was socially important to them, and 88 percent agreed or strongly agreed that “This presentation influenced the way I view the media portrayal of girls and women.” Surveyed students unanimously endorsed the following statement: “I would recommend the class on sexualization be taught to students at the introductory level of sociology” (see Table 2).
Summary of scale survey responses (N = 32).
In an open-response section, students were asked, “Is the sexualization of girls and women an important topic to you personally? If so, please tell us why.” Students were also asked to “provide any other thoughts you may have on the class presentation,” including module improvement.
Student comments offered additional insight into their individual-level experiences with sexualization. Said one, “I’ve since graduated from [university] but I have found that in my workplace my supervisor is more likely to comment on how I look than my performance, which belittles my experience at work. I have many other attributes and gifts that are valuable.” Another wrote, “Just a few days ago, I got into a discussion on the sexualization of women with a friend of mine. I described to him how women are only valued as sexual objects. He said that our sexuality was an advantage, that we could ‘flash our tits’ and get whatever we want and he was hard pressed to believe that being viewed solely as an object of desire was a bad thing. It just goes to show that men do not understand what it is like to be constantly sexualized and objectified, which is very disturbing to me.”
Others noted some of the broader social impacts highlighted in the pedagogical module. “I think it is an important issue and it causes many problems to girls, women, and society including: psychological distress, eating disorders, rape/sexual assault, relationship problems, and viewing women as less competent in academia and in the workforce.” Another replied, “[N]ot only does it have negative effects (self-esteem, mental health) on females but males (reinforcing sexual stereotypes) as well.”
Some respondents highlighted impacts on younger people. One student, a volunteer at an elementary school program, said “it is important to me that these girls are valued for their personality and not their looks, because that only leads to insecurities later on.” Wrote another, “I hope to have children one day, and it is important to me that my daughter(s) do not fall victims to the malicious cycle and that my son(s) do not interact with females in a manner that promotes this problem.”
Salient suggestions for lesson modification included “[M]ore discussion/explanation of objectification. I know way too many men who think that women should be happy with the ‘compliments’ of the stares, the cat calls, the butt grabs, being constantly targeted as a piece of ass, as if our only function is to provide visual and sexual stimuli for every man. It is so important for men to understand the underlying consequences of sexualization and see that objectification is not something to be brushed off or made light of”; “[D]iscuss how the porn industry sexualizes children, or encourages women to look younger and what that does to men’s (or anyone who uses porn) perceptions of women”; also “adding how the sexualization/idealized bodies are different for different races and how these are portrayed in the media.” One student stressed that small class size is important “to create a positive environment for people to share their honest thoughts and beliefs. This was really well done in our class, but I believe there will be reservations in big lecture format.”
Discussion
Although we live in a sexualization-saturated world, most undergraduate students will not have explicitly recognized or reflected on the power and prevalence of this social force, nor are they likely to have considered ways to reduce the sexualization of girls and women. This lesson plan contributes to the pedagogy of gender socialization and inequality by introducing students to tenets and theories of sexualization and encouraging them to be sociologically mindful of its impacts in all realms of life.
Qualitative and quantitative student feedback assessed efficacy and impact of this lesson plan. Our data suggest that this pedagogical module is an important and effective tool for raising awareness of sexualization and enabling students to be reflective of its multifaceted effects. Overwhelmingly, students reported thinking more deeply about this socially important topic. They made concrete connections between the media portrayal of girls and women and the underlying message of being “not good enough.” Responses highlighted the critical gap between the social relevance of this topic and formal exposure in educational settings. All agreed that this module should be taught in introductory sociology courses.
Like all research and pedagogy, this module had noteworthy limitations. Although our study used a posttest design, future research using a pretest/posttest design with a comparison group would be beneficial (Campbell and Stanley 1963). Still, as this article is one of the first to address pedagogical strategies aimed at the problem of sexualization, the findings are compelling and speak to the value and relevance of this lesson plan. While this instructor utilized large group discussion (because of time constraints and small class size), other instructors may find it useful to break the class into smaller groups for discussion or to carry out this lesson plan over multiple class periods. Although we used specific multimedia links (available from the first author) to illustrate the tenets of sexualization, it would be easy for instructors to find other relevant materials, as the sexualization of girls is, unfortunately, rife in our society.
The use of a non-sociological text is also a limitation. Although the instructor made a pedagogical choice to utilize the most comprehensive source material on sexualization she could find at the time, the use of a psychological text required her to reemphasize some of the preceding lesson plans on socialization and gendered construction of health. Though the APA report provides data on the ways in which girls’ life choices and life chances are negatively impacted by sexualization, the psychological perspective was too individualistic, and some of the theories (e.g., cognitive theory) are clearly limited in their sociological application.
Although socialization processes may differ when viewed through sociological versus psychological lenses, we found it helpful to emphasize places of theoretical overlap or parallel. For instance, socialization theory is easily linked to processes of social reproduction, wherein “children learn the ways of their elders” (Giddens et al. 2013:76). Sociocultural theory relates to Mead’s ideas about the development of the self, wherein people learn “the general values and moral rules of the culture in which they are developing” (Giddens et al. 2013:78).
However, in recent iterations of this lesson plan, the first author has used Coy’s (2012) “Milkshakes, Lady Lumps and Growing Up to Want Boobies: How the Sexualization of Popular Culture Limits Girls’ Horizons,” in Andersen, Logio, and Taylor’s introductory sociology reader. This article does a superior job of positioning sexualization as a heteronormative form of gender socialization “stratified by social factors such as race, class and age” (Coy 2012:45). Instructors are encouraged to consider the Coy (2012) piece, as well as other recent sociological work (see, e.g., Egan 2013; Wesely 2012).
Finally, we wish to acknowledge that our method of presentation was not particularly novel. More noteworthy was the student response. Immediately after the presentation, the instructor received a plethora of unsolicited, positive feedback. Many students explored this topic for research papers and it was often reintroduced in class discussion. The instructor suspected that there was something in the cultural zeitgeist that registered with her students, and the follow-up surveys supported this notion.
In concert with student suggestions, we believe that the scope and impact of this module could be improved. While we are thrilled (and not surprised) that this topic is being addressed in Women’s Studies, this issue would likely reach a wider, and possibly less informed, audience in introductory sociology courses. We also believe that sexualization has highly negative impacts on boys, men, and people of various races/ethnicities and sexualities. While these issues were mentioned briefly in our module, further focus on these groups would be important additions to the lesson plan (for recent work see Thompson 2012; Tolman 2012; Ward et al. 2012).
The need to address the sexualization of girls and women has, arguably, never been more urgent. Media and technology create limitless opportunities for women to be portrayed as sex objects, but targeted pedagogy offers invaluable opportunities to combat harmful gender norms. Our lesson endeavored to create a paradigm shift among undergraduate students and allow them to recognize and combat a particularly toxic form of gender socialization. We hope that other sociologists will build upon our work and produce innovative pedagogy and fruitful discussion among their own students. This module can be readily incorporated into a wide range of courses including: Sociology of Gender, Sociology of the Body, Sociology of Health and Mental Illness, and perhaps most critically, Introduction to Sociology. Regardless of gender, age, sexuality, and race, all individuals suffer when the essential message of sexualization—“You are not good enough as you are”—is allowed to thrive unchallenged.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the State Farm Youth Advisory Board for their support of our classroom endeavors. The first author would also like to gratefully acknowledge Maxine Atkinson, PhD, Jeff Leiter, PhD, and Lisa Tichavsky.
Editor’s note
Reviewers for this manuscript were, in alphabetical order, Dana Berkowitz and Tracey McKenzie.