Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Stepping up the fight against childhood s*xualisation

By Elizabeth Willmott Harrop - posted Friday, 19 February 2010


The most shocking clip shows the band Girlicious dressed as pornified schoolgirls. Courtney Ross, continues: “What exactly are we saying to people about the sexual maturity of school girls when we portray them as adults infantilised in pigtails and school uniforms, and sexualised with panty flashing and stripping scenes?”

Her colleague on the project, Katie Malone, 21, adds: “The Girlicious clip sent the message that young girls who want to rebel should do so by presenting themselves as sexual objects. It further promotes the idea of the naughty school girl and makes potentially underage and vulnerable girls sexual targets.”

Parent and child education

If the Australian experience is anything to go by, what New Zealand needs is an individual to champion the issue. Dr Emma Rush, lead author of Corporate Paedophilia comments “Kids Free 2 B Kids founder Julie Gale is phenomenally effective. More than anything else, this is what the issue needed - a champion. Julie is a fantastic networker and has brought together a great range of people to act on the issue. She is also constantly talking about the issue to schools, at conferences and to the wider media.”

Advertisement

In her work in schools Julie tells young girls they are being manipulated to believe their value comes from how “hot” and “sexy” they look, talking about “appearance culture” and the pressures on girls to conform. As a comedy performer and writer, Julie uses humour to get her message across, and dresses up as a cross between a Bratz doll and a Playboy bunny.

Julie comments “Marketers and advertisers aim to make girls feel they are not good enough so they have to buy products, and this process starts very early. It's important kids and adults understand that sexualisation is not about prudish, old fashioned adults, but about the mental health and well being of kids.”

Reflecting Elizabeth Bang's desire for an education campaign in New Zealand, the Auckland University undergraduates also identified parent and child education programs as a key action for change. Nicola Gavey explains “the students concluded it is no use being didactic and saying to parents and children 'this is wrong'. Instead you need to teach critical literacy in terms of how media and advertising are viewed so that the messages portrayed can be unraveled.”

This is born out by a 2008 Canterbury University study Innocence Lost which revealed that many girls in the eight to 12 year age group wanted adult type clothing “padded bras, sexy underwear/lingerie, boob tubes, mini skirts and high heeled shoes”. The good news is that for girls aged eight to 12 years, parents remain the most influential factor on clothing choices. Meanwhile studies into television viewing show that parents also have a powerful role in buffering children against inappropriate content.

However, Dr Emma Rush cautions against a reliance on education, saying “Media literacy as the answer is a common conclusion but a problematic one in that it puts the onus back on children, parents, teachers and other professionals working with children to 'deal with' the onslaught of premature sexualisation from the corporate world. Media literacy is important for all of us, but should pre-teen children really have to be responsible for de-coding premature sexualisation? This looks alarmingly like blaming the victims. Rather, the corporate world should back off - we need to stand up together as a community and tell them so, in no uncertain terms.”

Effects on children

Consumer culture gives women and girls a narrow ideal with which to conform - that of a slim, pert breasted, sexually available late teen or 20-something. As such women are asked to look younger and slimmer, and young girls are asked to adopt sexual markers which are well beyond their years. Innocence Lost comments “as what is considered attractive and sexy in contemporary society is conflated more and more with youth, the line between sexual maturity and sexual immaturity is becoming more ambiguous”. And hence the line blurs between young girls being sexually appealing, sexually available and appropriate sexual objects.

Advertisement

According to the Australian Senate report, there is evidence that those with pedophilic tendencies use sexualised images of children within advertising material. The report quotes a police manager of Forensic Interviewing of Sexual Offenders as saying that sexualised images of children in advertising “provide validation for those considering further exploration of children and sex, as part of a pernicious descending spiral”. Meanwhile healthworkers report a marked increase in perpetrators of sexually abusive behaviour using the children's underwear section of home-delivered advertising magazines.

A growing body of organisations claim that because sex is widely represented in our culture as pleasing to adults, girls adopt sexy clothing and behaviour to gain societal and adult approval and are effectively being groomed for pedophiles. This is exacerbated by girls’ magazines encouraging readers as young as primary school age to have crushes on adult male celebrities.

Despite the appeals from corporations that their products are demanded by parents and children, there is damning research into the effects of the sexualisation of children. A report by the American Psychological Association catalogues a range of adverse effects resulting from girls' exposure to sexually objectifying images, including “development, self-esteem, friendships and intimate relationships, ideas about femininity, body image, physical, mental and sexual health, sexual satisfaction, desire for plastic surgery, risk factors for early pregnancy, abortion and sexually transmitted infections, educational aspirations and future career success.”

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

31 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Elizabeth Willmott Harrop is a freelance writer. She is based in Christchurch, New Zealand, and has a Masters Degree in Human Rights and Social Change.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Elizabeth Willmott Harrop

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 31 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy