Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 79, Issue 3–4, pp 190–205 | Cite as

Objectifying Women’s Bodies is Acceptable from an Intimate Perpetrator, at Least for Female Sexists

  • María Lameiras-FernándezEmail author
  • Susan T. Fiske
  • Antonio González Fernández
  • José F. Lopez
Original Article
First Online:
  • 618 Downloads

Abstract

Objectification of the female body is generating much research. Nevertheless, this has revealed little about whether women’s evaluations depend on the level of psychological intimacy with the perpetrator of that objectification. Intimacy theory predicts that objectifying comments would seem more acceptable coming from a close partner, especially for sexist women. The present study begins to fill these gaps by analyzing responses from 301 heterosexual/bisexual adult women in the United States (M age = 37.02, range = 18–72) to appearance and sexual body comments made by four different male perpetrators: strangers, colleagues, friends, or partners. Measures assessed women’s perceptions of objectification, as well as reported enjoyment of these comments. As long as they were not negative, comments from heterosexual partners were perceived as the least objectifying and enjoyed the most; comments from colleagues, strangers, and friends were linked with greater objectification and less enjoyment. Additionally, sexist attitudes toward men and women—but more clearly toward men—linked with objectification and enjoyment. Future research directions and practical implications are discussed.

Keywords

Objectification Sexualization Sexual harassment Romantic relationship Body image Heterosexuality 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The first author was supported by the Government of Spain, Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport State Program of Promotion of Talent and Employability R + D, State Sub-program of Mobility (State Plan of Research and Technology and Innovation 2013-2016).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Authors don’t have any conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

The research on which this article is based was reviewed by the IRB or human subjects committee of Princeton University. Active informed consent was required.

Supplementary material

11199_2017_862_MOESM1_ESM.docx (58 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 58 kb)

References

  1. Abbot, B. D., & Barker, B. L. (2011). Differences in functional and aesthetic body image between sedentary girls and girls involved in sports and physical activity: Does sport type make a difference? Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(3), 333–342.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Psychological Association, Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls. (2007). Report of the APA task force on the sexualization of girls. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report.aspx.Google Scholar
  3. Arroyo, A., & Harwood, J. (2012). Exploring the causes and consequences of engaging in fat talk. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 40(2), 167–187.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2012.654500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Attwood, F. (2006). Sexed up: Theorizing the sexualization of culture. Sexualities, 9(1), 77–94.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706053336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(5), 633–642.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Cafri, G., Yamamiya, Y., Brannick, M., & Thompson, J. K. (2005). The influence of sociocultural factors on body image: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 12(4), 421–433.  https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bpi053.Google Scholar
  8. Calogero, R. M., & Jost, J. T. (2011). Self-subjugation among women: Exposure to sexist ideology, self-objectification, and the protective function of the need to avoid closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 211–228.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021864.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Calogero, R. M., & Tylka, T. L. (2010). Fiction, fashion, and function: An introduction to the special issue on gendered body image, part I. Sex Roles, 63, 1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9821-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Calogero, R. M., Herbozo, S., & Thompson, J. K. (2009). Complimentary weightism: The potential costs of appearance-related commentary for women’s self-objectification. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 120–132.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.01479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Calogero, R. M., Pina, A., Park, L. E., & Rahemtulla, Z. (2010). Objectification theory predicts college women’s attitudes toward cosmetic surgery. Sex Roles, 63(1–2), 32–41.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9759-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chaudoir, S. R., & Quinn, D. M. (2010). Bystander sexism in the intergroup context: The impact of cat-calls on women’s reactions towards men. Sex Roles, 62, 623–634.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9735-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cortina, L. M., & Berdahl, J. L. (2008). Sexual harassment in organizations: A decade of research in review. Handbook of Organizational Behavior, 1, 469–497.  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200448.n26.Google Scholar
  14. Dillon, H. M., Adaer, L. E., & Brase, G. L. (2015). A threatening exchange: Gender and life history strategy predict perceptions and reasoning about sexual harassment. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 195–199.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.09.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doohan, E. M., & Manusov, V. (2004). The communication of compliments in romantic relationships: An investigation of relational satisfaction and sex differences and similarities in compliment behavior. Western Journal of Communication, 68(2), 170–194.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310409374795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eagly, A. H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing women and men. American Psychologist, 50(3), 145–158.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eisenberg, M. E., Berge, J. M., Fulkerson, J. A., & Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2011). Weight comments by family and significant others in young adulthood. Body Image, 8(1), 12–19.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2010.11.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Etcoff, N., Orbach, S., Scott, J., & D’Agostino, H. (2004). The real truth about beauty: A global report. White paper. New York: StrategyOne. Retrieved from http://www.clubofamsterdam.com/contentarticles/52%20Beauty/dove_white_paper_final.pdf.Google Scholar
  19. Fairchild, K., & Rudman, L. A. (2008). Everyday stranger harassment and women’s objectification. Social Justice Research, 21(3), 338–357.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0073-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fallon, E. A., Harris, B. S., & Johnson, P. (2014). Prevalence of body dissatisfaction among a united stated adults sample. Eating Behaviours, 15(1), 151–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2013.11.00.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Franzoi, S. (1995). The body-as-object versus the body-as-process: Gender differences and gender considerations. Sex Roles, 33, 417–437.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01954577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experience and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gervais, S. J., Vescio, T. K., & Allen, J. (2011). When what you see is what you get: The consequences of the objectifying gaze for women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(1), 5–17.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684310386121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gervais, S. J., Bernard, P., Kelin, O., & Allen, J. (2013). Toward a unified theory of objectification and dehumanization. In S. J. Gervais (Ed.), Objectification and (de)humanization. 60 th Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 1–24). New York: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_1.Google Scholar
  25. Gill, R. (2009). Mediated intimacy and postfeminism: A discourse analytic examination of sex and relationships advice in a women’s magazine. Discourse & Communication, 3(4), 345–369.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481309343870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gillen, M. M., Markey, C. N., & Markey, P. M. (2012). An examination of dieting behaviors among adults: Links with depression. Eating Behaviors, 13(2), 88–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2011.11.014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491–512.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.
  28. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). The Ambivalence Toward Men Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23(3), 519–536.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00379.x.
  30. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109–118.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Glick, P., Lameiras, M., Fiske, S., Eckes, T., Masser, B., Volpato, C., … Wells, R. (2004). Bad but bold; ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 713–728.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.713.
  32. Goldenberg, J. L. (2013). Immortal objects: The objectification of women as terror management. In S. J. Gervais (Ed.), Objectification and (de)humanization. 60 th Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 73–96). New York: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_4.Google Scholar
  33. Hakim, C. (2010). Erotic capital. European Sociological Review, 26(5), 499–518.  https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcq014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Harriger, J. A., Calogero, R. M., Witherington, D. C., & Smith, J. E. (2010). Body size stereotyping and internalization of the thin ideal in preschool girls. Sex Roles, 63, 609–620.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9868-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Haslam, N., Loughnan, S., & Holland, E. (2013). The psychology of humanness. In S. J. Gervais (Ed.), Objectification and (de)humanization. 60 th Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 25–52). New York: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_2.Google Scholar
  36. Hesse-Biber, S., Leavy, P., Quinn, C. E., & Zoino, J. (2006). The mass marketing of disordered eating and eating disorders: The social psychology of women, thinness and culture. Women's Studies International Forum, 29, 208–224.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2006.03.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hirshman, L. R. (2006). Get to work: A manifesto for women of the world. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  38. Holmes, J. (1988). Paying compliments: A sex-preferential politeness strategy. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), 445–465.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90005-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jones, D. C., & Crawford, J. K. (2006). The peer appearance culture during adolescence: Gender and body mass variations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, (2), 257–269.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9006-5.
  40. Kozee, H. B., Tylka, T. L., Augustus-Horvarth, C. L., & Denchik, A. (2007). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Interpersonal Sexual objectification Scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 176–189.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00351.x.
  41. Lameiras, M., Fiske, S. T., Gonzalez, M., Rodriguez, Y., & Carrera, F. (2017). Hostile versus benevolent objectification: Development and exploration of the objectification and enjoyment of Sexualitation scale. Paper under review. Google Scholar
  42. Lazar, M. M. (2006). Discover the power of femininity! Analyzing global “power femininity” in local advertising. Feminist Media Studies, 6, 505–517.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14680770600990002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lee, T. L., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2010). Ambivalent sexism in close relationships: (hostile) power and (benevolent) romance shape relationship ideals. Sex Roles, 62, 583–601.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9770-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Legenbauer, T., Vocks, S., Schäfer, C., Schütt-Strömel, S., Hiller, W., Wagner, C., … Vögele, C. (2009). Preference for attractiveness and thinness in a partner: Influence of internalization of the thin ideal and shape/weight dissatisfaction in heterosexual women, heterosexual men, lesbians, and gay men. Body Image, 6(3), 228–234.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2009.04.002.
  45. Levine, M. P., & Harrison, K. T. (2004). Media's role in the perpetuation and prevention of negative body image and disordered eating. In M. P. Levine, K. T. Harrison, & J. Kevin (Eds.), Handbook of eating disorders and obesity (pp. 695–717). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  46. Levy, A. (2005). Feminist chauvinist pigs: Women and the rise of raunch culture. London: Simon.Google Scholar
  47. Liss, M., Erchull, M. J., & Ransey, L. R. (2011). Empowering or oppressing? Development and exploration of the enjoyment of Sexualization scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 55–68–14.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210386119.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Loughnan, S., & Pacilli, M. G. (2014). Seeing (and treating) others as sexual objects: Towards a more complete mapping of sexual objectification. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 21(3), 309–325.  https://doi.org/10.4473/TPM21.3.6.Google Scholar
  49. MacMillan, R., Nierobisz, A., & Welsh, S. (2000). Experiencing the streets: Harassment and perceptions of safety among women. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37(3), 306–322.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427800037003003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Maiz-Arevalo, C. (2012). “Was that a compliment?” Implicit compliments in English and Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(8), 980–996.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Markey, C., & Markey, P. (2006). Romantic relationships and body satisfaction among young women. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35(2), 256–264.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9013-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McDonald, P. (2012). Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: Review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14, 1–17.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00300.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McNair, B. (2002). Striptease culture: Sex, media and the democratization of desire. New York: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Meltzer, A. L., & McNulty, J. K. (2014). “Tell me I'm sexy... and otherwise valuable”: Body valuation and relationship satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 68–87.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12018.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Milillo, D. M. (2006). Situational and ideological stake as predictors of women's perceptions of ambivalent sexism from potential romantic partners (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Storrs, Connecticut: University of Connecticut. Retrieved from http://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/AAI3239567/. 
  56. Moffitt, L., & Szymanski, D. (2011). Experiencing sexually objectifying environments: A qualitative study. The Counseling Psychologist, 39(1), 67–106.  https://doi.org/10.1177/001100001036455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Motañes, P., de Lemus, S., Moya, M., Bohner, G., & Megias, J. L. (2013). How attractive are sexist intimates to adolescents? The influence of sexist beliefs and relationship experience. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(4), 494–506.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684313475998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Moya, M., Glick, P., Expósito, E., Lemus, S., & Hart, J. (2007). It’s for your own good: Benevolent sexism and women’s reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(10), 1421–1434.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207304790.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2010). Women’s perceptions and use of “anti-aging” products. Sex Roles, 63(1–2), 126–137.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9791-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Murray, S. (2005). (Un/be) coming out? Rethinking fat politics. Social Semiotics, 15(2), 153–163.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330500154667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Murray, S. (2008). The 'fat' female body. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.  https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230584419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nussbaum, M. C. (1995). Objectification. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 24(4), 249–291.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.1995.tb00032.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Orbach, S. (1978). Fat is a feminist issue: The anti-diet guide to permanent weight loss. New York: Paddington Press.Google Scholar
  64. Park, L. E., Diraddo, A. M., & Calogero, R. M. (2009). Sociocultural influence and appearance-based rejection sensitivity among college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 108–119.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.01478.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Payne, L. O., Martz, D. M., Tompkins, K. B., Petroff, A. B., & Farrow, C. V. (2011). Gender comparisons of fat talk in the United Kingdom and the United States. Sex Roles, 65(7/8), 557–565.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9881-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pina, A., & Gannon, T. A. (2012). An overview of the literature on antecedents, perceptions and behavioural consequences of sexual harassment. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 18(2), 209–232.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2010.501909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Puhl, R. M., & Latner, J. D. (2007). Stigma, obesity, and the health of the nation’s children. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 557–580.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.557.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Quinn, B. (2002). Sexual harassment and masculinity. The power and meaning of 'girl watching'. Gender and Society, 16(3), 386–402. doi:10.1177%2F0891243202016003007.Google Scholar
  69. Ramsey, L. R., & Hoyt, T. (2015). The object of desire: How being objectified creates sexual pressure for women in heterosexual relationships. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39(2), 151–170.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684314544679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ramsey, L. R., Marotta, J. A., & Hoyt, T. (2017). Sexualized, objectified, but not satisfied. Enjoying sexualization relates to lower relationship satisfaction through perceived partner-objectification. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34(2), 258–278.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407516631157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rees-Miler, J. (2011). Compliments revisited: Contemporary compliments and gender. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(11), 2673–2688.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ricciardelli, L. A., McCabe, M. P., & Ridge, D. (2006). The construction of the adolescent male body through sport. Journal of Health Psychology, 11(4), 577–587.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105306065018.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Ridgeway, R. T., & Tylka, T. L. (2005). College men’s perceptions of ideal body composition and shape. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6(3), 209–220.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.6.3.209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Riemer, A., Chaudoir, S., & Earnshaw, V. (2014). What looks like sexism and why? The effect of comment type and perpetrator type on women's perceptions of sexism. Journal of General Psychology, 141(3), 263–279.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2014.907769.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Rodin, J., Silberstein, L., & Striegel-Moore, R. (1984). Women and weight: A normative discontent. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 32, 267–307.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Rollero, C., Glick, P., & Tartaglia, S. (2014). Psychometric properties of short versions of the ambivalent sexism inventory and Ambivalence Toward Men Inventory. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 21(2), 149–159.  https://doi.org/10.4473/TPM21.2.3.
  77. Slater, A., & Tiggemann, M. (2010). Body image and disordered eating in adolescent girls and boys: A test of objectification theory. Sex Roles, 63, 42–49.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9794-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1979). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  79. Stöckl, H., Devries, K., Rotstein, A., Abrahams, N., Campbell, J., Watts, C., … Moreno, C. G. (2013). The global prevalence of intimate partner homicide: A systematic review. The Lancet, 382(9895), 859–865.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61030-2.
  80. Strelan, P., & Hargreaves, D. (2005). Women who objectify other women: The vicious circle of objectification? Sex Roles, 52, 707–712.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3737-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L., & Ferguson, M. J. (2001). Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. Journal of Social Issues, 57(1), 31–53.  https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Thompson, L., & Donaghue, N. (2014). The confidence trick: Competing constructions of confidence and self-esteem in young Australian women's discussions of the sexualization of culture. Women's Studies International Forum, 47, 23–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2014.07.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tylka, T., & Calogero, R. M. (2010). Fiction, fashion, and function revisited: An introduction to the special issue on gendered body image, part II. Sex Roles, 63, 601–608.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9888-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tylka, T., & Calogero, R. M. (2011). Fiction, fashion, and function finale: An introduction and conclusion to the special issue on gendered body image, part III. Sex Roles, 65, 447–460.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0042-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Unger, R., & Crawford, M. (1996). Women and gender: A feminist psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  86. Visser, B. A., Sultani, F., Choma, B. L., & Pozzebon, J. A. (2014). Enjoyment of sexualization: Is it different for men? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(7), 495–504.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Watson, L. B., Marszalek, J. M., Dispenza, F., & Davids, C. M. (2015). Understanding the relationships among White and African American women’s sexual objectification experiences, physical safety anxiety, and psychological distress. Sex Roles, 72, 91–104.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0444-y.
  88. Zubriggen, E., Ramsey, L., & Jaworski, B. (2011). Self-and partner-objectification in romantic relationships: Associations with media consumption and relationship dissatisfaction. Sex Roles, 64(7), 449–462.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9933-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • María Lameiras-Fernández
    • 1
    Email author
  • Susan T. Fiske
    • 2
  • Antonio González Fernández
    • 1
  • José F. Lopez
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of EducationUniversidad de VigoOurenseSpain
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyPrinceton UniversityPrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options