Why do you think women get hypersexualized in modern media?

[mistixs]

I don't buy that it's because "sex sells". I think the creators typically just want to see sexy women. Examples:

1) Carrie 1976: made by a straight man. There's a locker room scene that leers over the girls' naked bodies as they take showers & prance around.

2013 remake (directed by a woman, script written by a gay man): no voyeuristic leering. The girl who played the protagonist was underage, but even the other actresses who were 18+ all had clothing on & there was no leering at their bodies whatsoever.

2) In media created by gay men, the sexualization is reversed. Look at AHS, created by a gay man. Compare 2 shower scenes, one involving men and one involving women.

The first video voyeuristically leers at the men's wet naked bodies as they shower, but the second video is filmed from outside the shower stalls & doesn't show the women's bodies at all. Why? Because the creator is a gay man & he's not attracted to women.Also, in AHS, masturbation scenes for women tend to focus on their face and their fantasies (even in the case of a sexy seductress trying to seduce a man, she had clothes on), whereas in the masturbation scenes for men, the men are naked with their buff bodies on display.

3) In more media created by gay men (such as Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, created by the same gay guy who wrote Carrie 2013) you get scenes like this, with buff men walking around nearly naked & displaying their butts in thongs.(I actually didn't know the creator of this show was gay, and then after seeing those scenes I suspected it was created by a gay guy, so I looked it up & my suspicion was confirmed.)

So yeah. If women are hypersexualized for logical reasons like "sex sells" then the sexualization wouldn't be reversed when the male creator is attracted to men and not women.

Thoughts?

(Note: I know some women hypersexualize characters too. That film Cuties is proof of that. I think it's more common for male creators, though.)

[EnglishArtsteacher]

I voted Option C, because I think it's a combination the fact sex sells, and the creator wants to see naked women. It's unfair for women, because many of them are very good actresses, but they're only noticed for their bodies, and sex appeal.

These people saying "men are equally sexualized" are quite the hoot though. In what society is that EVER true? The average middle-aged woman is sexualized more than the average 20-something year old man lol. Modern media will showcase an overweight man for his talents, humor, etc., but if an overweight woman is in the modern media, or mainstream television market, they're only showcased to make fun of the "poor fat girl", and they're often ostracized from other roles.

[Anpu23]

Ancent Rome men were hypersexualized at least as much as women. To answer your question.

[EnglishArtsteacher]

@Anpu23 Where did you learn that? I never heard that before.

[Anpu23]

art class I think... probably the normalization of homosexuality had a lot to do with it.

[TheorionMage]

In ancient Greece, men wrestled in the nude and unmarried women were not permitted societally to be in the audience. In ancient Rome especially regarding wrestlers and gladiators even their masculine sweat was considered a testosterone pheromone-soaked female aphrodisiac... cause TWO things motivate a male to secrete... arousal for reproduction and the GENUINE fear of the risk of DEATH.

[Anpu23]

I think that you have a point when I make art I make what I find sexy. The movie script I'm working on has a couple of nude scenes and it's because I want to see them. Interesting.

[Searlas]

Not in the "modern" media but in the media in general, this has always been, it only that, it's more visible today.

Why women getting more hypersexualized?

1) The societys' demand for nudity has gone higher. Sex sells. This is cutting through both genders. So content creators whether straight or gay are just capitalizing on what they believe will sell which is actually selling.

2) Naturally, women dress to look good and feel good, they use their dressing to show their personality and attitude. Unfortunately, whatever choice of dressing most (not all) women prefer are clothings that reveals a lot of skin or the body shape/figure. So, women become more sexualized as a result of they themselves encouraging it #MyDressMyChoice, the celebrities, the music videos - the bikinis, the social media, if you don't want to do it, why do it? Check what is happening on instagram, the nature of images being showcased by most women, check the number of followers and likes and you will know what is on demand, so content creators are only after satisfying this demand.

[MrOracle]

Carrie 1976 was a smash hit that was talked about for years. Carrie 2013 came and went and hardly anyone even noticed. And while I don't think the female nudity (or lack thereof) was the only reason, it was a contributing factor.

Sex does indeed sell, and surveys have shown that even women, on average, tend to prefer to see naked women more than naked men.

[mistixs]

There was a movie a few years after Carrie 1976 called Zapped that featured a guy who gets telekinetic powers and uses it to strip women. Hardly anyone has even heard of it.

[mistixs]

My point is that the nudity probably wasn't even on the radar of why Carrie 1976 became popular. That is not why people went to see the movie. It was not in the trailer. It became popular because it was one of the first movies that gave a voice to the rage felt by people who have felt outcasted (which is a majority of people). By 2013 there had already been countless revenge movies made since 1976.

[MrOracle]

Oh, I remember Zapped quite well. But it was also very common in the 70s to have nudity - male and female in fact - in mainstream movies. That was the era of "porn chic" after all - the "counter culture" growing up a bit and getting into movie making among other things.

[mistixs]

If nudity is the reason Carrie 1976 had more success than Carrie 2013 then Zapped would have grossed a lot more than Carrie 2013.

But it grossed 15mil, 46mil adjusted for inflation. https://m.the-numbers.com/movie/Zapped

Meanwhile Carrie 2013 made 85mil in the box office. www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl1112049153/

Tons of movies have nudity and aren't nearly as popular as Carrie.

The main difference between Carrie 1976 and 2013 was novelty. In 1976 it was a groundbreaking and new story that spoke to a lot of people. But the novelty wears off eventually which is why the remake wasn't as popular.

An example of the novelty wearing off is the jumpscare at the end of Carrie 1976. Stephen King wrote that when he first saw the film in theaters, people screamed at that scene, and 2 adult macho men in front of him screamed and held onto each other. That was in 1976 when that sort of jumpscare wasn't common.

Meanwhile I saw the film as a skittish 16 year old girl and I don't even remember how I reacted to that scene so it couldn't have been too intense. That's because I grew up during a time when that sort of jumpscare was common. The novelty wore off.

[VanillaSalt]

Just having nudity and MA on the ratings draws a different kind of audience. Sex sells no matter which type of sex. Your argument gay men vs women just changes the demography of who the sex is drawing in. If the women in Charlie’s angels weren’t hot nobody would care to watch it as their actually not great movies unless you like action comedy’s. A hot or naked lady will draw me in and I’ll watch the whole 2 hour movie for a 30 second sex scene. Click baits a real thing that’s why YouTube uses hot half naked women as thumbnails to draw in the clicks. Also porn literally sells sex and makes in estimate of between 6 billion and 97 billion $ annually in the USA... despite being illegal in most parts prostitution is still a major money maker with prostitutes in major cities being major money makers. I’ve heard of one girl costs $800/hour... at a client per night she’s making just under 300k/year... tell me sex don’t sell.

[WhiteSteve]

Well... I think a lot of it comes down to the male mind. It is fucking FILTHY in there, lmao. I don’t think it’s necessarily bad, or good, it just...”is.” Men are naturally hypersexual, in my opinion. When I go through my day, my un
conscious mind is just scanning the surrounding area for attractive females, and as my eyes find them, there’s this binary system going that’s like “would... would... wouldn’t... wouldn’t... wouldn’t... would...” Now, this is not strictly how I perceive interactions with women or all I value them for on a conscious level, far from it. I’m just saying my natural wiring when unhindered by “nurture” is very hypersexual and seems to have a primal mating urge attached.

So, I made a Tinder account once (just to see what all the clamor was about, I have a girlfriend), and as you swipe through it, pretty much every single girl was like “Not here for hookups” in her bio. In my mind I’m kind of like “why in the world would you be on tinder if you aren’t looking for something casual?”, I thought that was the whole point of the app, to meet people for casual hookups, and then there are other apps if you’re looking for a relationship. That’s whatever, I’m just a little confused about what people are thinking there, lmao... but my point was, girls don’t seem to have the same wiring for a desire for sexual variety, if I had to make a general rule. Most guys I know, with permission if in a relationship, would be fucking anyone who would let them lmfao, and that would be completely separate from what they have with their partner. I think a lot of guys can compartmentalize sex and love, they don’t necessarily go hand in hand, it’s just nicer when they do. So I say all that to say that I think that women, on average, are very content with one sexual partner, whereas men limit themselves to one only by choice or possibly by not being adept at pulling women, for whatever reason. If the option were available/allowed, we would love to have that sexual variety. And I think that goes back to very natural instincts, where females are about choosing one or a few high-quality mates, while males will mate wherever and whenever possible, to “spread the seed.” We see it so much in nature with other animals, it’s kind of foolish to discount it for our own species of animal. So basically, on the males’ end, monogamy is a learned behavior, not instinct.

And to relate it to gay men... maybe it’s ignorant, but I’ve always kind of semi-jokingly thought that the gay scene must be absolute DEBAUCHERY, lmao, just on the strength of its two dudes, and gay or straight, I figure guys are just hypersexual by nature. So with no woman involved to have to tone it down and harness it for... YIKES😂 If you’re into it, being a gay dude must be a fucking great time when it comes to the dating game, hahaha. Maybe I’m off base, but that’s my theory. And conversely, what’s the old joke about lesbians? “What does a lesbian bring on the second date? A U-Haul.” So there’s obviously an inclination towards monogamy between two women, and in a hurry.

So I think the belief, if not the reality, is that men want to see hot chicks, and the less clothes involved, the better. I can’t call it, it’s the most natural instinct I have, I swear. Women of course like eye candy too, but I think women get more stimulated by ideas of romance, etc. Hugh Grant wouldn’t have an acting job in an all-male world, lmao, we hate all that romantic comedy shit, it’s just cheesy. And it saddles men with unfair expectations the same way the super hot chick with the fake tits and cosmetic procedures saddles everyday women unfairly, it’s just on a different note. Sex sells to men, romance sells to women, that’s how I see it.

I’m a little confused by your contention though... are you saying the male audience wants to see it, or the male directors, producers, etc who are working live with the actresses?

[IronLady6354]

Sex sells. It happens to men too.

[katiesmuff]

I'm sticking with A sex sells! Always has and always will

[ChooChooHaha]

Cuties? Noooooo... that's not sexual. That's just fucking wrong and creepy.

[ChooChooHaha]

AND: you're right about the nude thing. I remember how often Emilia Clarke was naked in GoT, and how Dingus and Dipshit pressured her so much. 😱 And you start us off with a shot of that scene. 😭🤩🤯😂😍😎 Salma Hayek, making women AND men HOT since 1996.

[Киттйлинк]

Wow that’s interesting... I had never thought about that..

[OlderAndWiser]

One of the notable characteristics of pit bulls is what also makes people frightened of them.

Yes, sex sells. It damned sure does, and you can deny it all day long, but it is still true. When a heterosexual man directs a movie, he knows what appeals to his sexual interests and that is what he inserts in his movies: lots of tits and ass. If a woman directs a movie, she assumes that what appeals to her is what will appeal to her audience and (surprise!) The focus is different. . . because men and women are different! And if a homosexual man directs a movie, it features scenes that appeal to homosexuals.

If a woman doesn't want to show her tots and ass in a movie, she is not required to do so. If women want to see movies made differently, whining is not an effective strategy to accomplish change. If you are so fired up about this subject, go start your own production company!

[hahahmm]

Ask the women who don’t bother to put in the hard work to become talented actresses based on nonsexual characters/stories who eagerly use their looks tp get jobs & sleep their way to the top. In countries with strong professional acting traditions there’s less extreme depictions of women in the media.


Ask yourself why the WNBA doesn’t make much money... because women guys don’t find attractive and who cheat (playing with undersized basketballs) & don’t practice hard enough (miss easy lay ups & dunks all the time) want to be treated the same as male basketball players. You can’t fit a square peg in to a round hole. Not by being lazy anyhow.

[hahahmm]

Then you have talented actresses who choose to make money off being half naked. Salma Hayek is a very talented & smart woman who directs & acts. I imagine she would say that there’s nothing wrong with using your body to get ahead in life. Maybe it’s the women who can’t use their bodies who complain the most about it. Like washed up actresses.

[lilyanony1]

Because sex sells. If all women joined forces and decided no more, 1 and I guarantee at least one would.

[Fatherhere901]

You do have a very well and valid point about the sexualization of men and women in films. I also applaud you for giving us the reason for this.

You yourself said, in your posting, “women aren't given as much opportunity as been to have an acting role in a non-sexualized content”.

Now with that said, can you name any films, where the woman has the leading role , in a non-sexualized story line of a movie, that made more than average in Box Office sales in an given year?

If you can, great!

But I'm pretty sure that you will not be able to, which will give you the facts on why costumes are the way they are , and why women are dressed the way they are and why men are dressed the way they are.

It is not because the director wants to see his crush in as little clothing as possible.

It's because it's the only way to make more money for the film industry.

Also, controversy is a real good way to promote a film also. Case in point:

Can you imagine how many more people have been looking up and watching the Netflix film “Cuties” since the news story hit? I can guarantee you the viewing audience tripled after everyone started talking about it.

(P. S.- Yes I have Netflix, AND no I will not watch "Cuties" soon or ever.)

[mistixs]

"can you name any films, where the woman has the leading role , in a non-sexualized story line of a movie, that made more than average in Box Office sales in an given year?"

Hunger Games with Katniss as the nonsexualized leading role was #2 in box office sales. Frozen was #6 and focused on 2 nonsexualized young women in the leading roles. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/2013/

[Fatherhere901]

I'm sorry. Wasn't Katniss primped and groomed throughout the movie? How many times through the movie were her breasts enhanced because of the costume she wore (Skin-tight outfit, skimpy dresses, ETC). ... and you are really going to throw a Disney movie into the debate? Search "Disney" into YouTube and they will show you the "Sexualizations" they put in the movies (since the first "Little Mermaid" in 1992) they did.

[mistixs]

Did you watch Frozen? It was hailed by feminists. The most sexualization I saw in the movie was the girl's cleavage being visible for literally a few seconds.

The other Disney movies you mentioned were all made by men. Frozen was made by a woman. And therein lies the difference that I was discussing in my post.

As for Katniss in Hunger Games: Catching Fire, I admit I don't remember it very well, but I am looking at pictures online and I don't see any sexualization. In this picture it even looks like she's wearing the same outfit as the man.

[Vencam]

I think it's moslty because "sex sells" and mi Orly as a preference.

Although there are some films in which this sort of decisions are made following the kind of story or the director's preferences, I think that in most scenarios it's a way for them to easily raise the income they expect from a film (even if just for that extra naked skin that they can consequently cram into the film's trailer)

[Erobos412]

Sex do sell in a hyper active unhealthy cesspit of social media and modern commercials.

Lets face it we are all dopamine junkies.

[303savedmylife]

I said both, but thinking about it, it probably leans more towards directors. You don't need underage nudity to sell big at the box office. Good one OP!

[CharaS]

I think sex sells like you said in the answer. You're going to get a lot more male viewers to buy tickets with a skimpy woman in the movie. Same concept why streamers like Pokimane make so much 🙄

[fjh80]

“Sex sells”
I guess. I’m sure there’s more to it than that.
Ultimately our movies and television is fantasy, so you want to give the people what they want.
They give men what appeals to men, and they give women what appeals to them.


Women might be sexy in movies, but men are usually things that women want in a man.


Most people skip over that part because men don’t react to it the same way.


This is an over simplification because I’m kinda rushed. It’s not really so simple, but I had to give a quick opinion.

[ILoveAnime]

I think it's a combination of both. I've noticed this a lot myself. Principally in movies where there are explicit sex scenes, yet you never see the guy completly naked (sometimes rare to even see a butt) but the girl full on display. I'm not saying this doesn't happen to men, but that it's way more common for women. Sex sells and pretty women sell even more.

[JaneDoe377]

Something no one mentions is that the man or Woman participating in the objectification by being the model or actor, has culpability as well as the observers of it, for helping to perpetuate said objectification. If people did not participate as the object, it would be more difficult to do. Just a thought, not trying to be a jerk.

[Vencam]

Although that may be true for some, the issue is how small that "some" is compared to those that do it unwillingly, whether that is for economic needs, or even because of deception or power abuse by the direction (I think all the holliwood scandals show lengths about it)

[Jamie05rhs]

@JaneDoe377 They're children. They don't know any better. You can but the blame on the girls for this.

[JaneDoe377]

Women aren't children and I wasn't referring to children. But I do agree with you on that.

[Jamie05rhs]

Okay

[Jamie05rhs]

@JaneDoe377 I apologize. I thought you were replying to mistixs' other question. I got mixed up. That was my fault.

[JaneDoe377]

No worries 😉

[sammy1537]

It is not adequate to look at just hollywood or last 30 years. Women's body was sexualized throughout human history. Even in ancient Greece, obsessed with gay themes, a female form, especially female breasts were sexualized in art and literature. Ancient text Kamasutra, showed many images of sex acts. If you look closer, the female forms in those paintings are far more detailed than man's. This tells us that even in ancient India, people were more focused on female bodies than male.

[Godofmyownwurld]

Probably a bit of both.