4.3 Article

Less Than Human? Media Use, Objectification of Women, an Men's Acceptance of Sexual Aggression

Journal

PSYCHOLOGY OF VIOLENCE
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages 537-546

Publisher

EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION-AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/vio0000198

Keywords

sexual objectification; sexual violence; rape myth acceptance; pornography; TV

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Previous research has documented connections between media use and violence against women, yet the mechanism behind that relation remains unclear, especially for media that do not explicitly depict sexual violence. The purpose of this study was to examine whether objectification of women mediates the relations between media use (TV and pornography), and attitudes and behaviors supportive of violence against women. Method: Participants were 283 undergraduate men who completed surveys that assessed TV consumptions (across four genres) and pornography use; acceptance of objectification of women; and rape myth acceptance and sexual deception behaviors. Results: Consumption of reality TV, sports programming, and pornography was each associated with greater acceptance of objectification of women, which in turn was associated with greater rape myth acceptance and more frequent acts of sexual deception. Objectification of women mediated the relations among sports programming consumption and rape myth acceptance and sexual deception, and among pornography consumption and rape myth acceptance and sexual deception. Conclusions: Objectification of women is one mechanism by which TV consumption (even TV that does not explicitly depict sexual violence) and pornography use are related to attitudes and behaviors supportive of violence against women. Media literacy programs for men that challenge the idea that women exist for men's sexual pleasure may be an important step in combatting acceptance of rape myths and sexual violence.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available