The content below was summarized and written by ChatGPT. No need for me to interject opinion into the facts, and even ChatGPT’s equivocation can’t deny what is true. Supporting documents, if available, are provided as downloadable PDFs, and URLs for primary web sources have been linked, when known.

The objectification of women has been influenced by social media and the rise of incel culture in several ways:

1. Increased Exposure and Accessibility: Social media platforms have made it easier for individuals to access and share images and videos that objectify women. This has contributed to the normalization of objectification and the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes.

2. Pressure to Conform to Beauty Standards: Social media often promotes unrealistic beauty standards, which can contribute to the objectification of women. This pressure to conform to certain standards of beauty can lead to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem.

3. Online Harassment and Misogyny: The rise of incel culture has led to an increase in online harassment and misogyny directed towards women. This can include derogatory comments, threats, and the spread of harmful stereotypes.

4. Impact on Mental Health: Exposure to objectification and online harassment can have a negative impact on women’s mental health, contributing to feelings of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem.

5. Normalization of Objectification: The normalization of objectification on social media and in incel culture can contribute to the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes and attitudes towards women.

6. Objectification and Violence: Research has shown that the objectification of women can contribute to a culture of violence against women. This can include sexual harassment, assault, and other forms of violence.

It’s important to recognize the impact that social media and incel culture can have on the objectification of women and to work towards promoting healthy and respectful attitudes towards women. This includes challenging harmful stereotypes, promoting positive representations of women, and fostering a culture of respect and equality.

Sex Roles (2007) 56:381–395 DOI 10.1007/s11199-006-9176-y

In the early 2000s, the internet revolutionized the way people consume pornography. With the rise of streaming platforms and social media, adult content became more accessible than ever before. This led to a proliferation of pornography that often depicted women in a hypersexualized and objectified manner.

As social media platforms like Instagram and Twitter gained popularity, the objectification of women became more pervasive. Influencers and celebrities often posted highly curated and sexualized images, perpetuating unrealistic beauty standards and creating a culture of comparison and competition.

At the same time, a subculture known as “incels” (short for “involuntary celibates”) began to emerge. Incels were predominantly heterosexual men who felt unable to find a romantic or sexual partner despite desiring one. Many incels harbored deep-seated resentment and anger towards women, whom they blamed for their inability to find a partner.

The rise of incel culture was fueled by online forums and communities where members shared their experiences, frustrations, and beliefs. These communities often became echo chambers, reinforcing and amplifying misogynistic attitudes.

As incel culture grew, so did concerns about the potential for violence. Some incels expressed violent and extremist beliefs, advocating for violence against women or society as a whole. This led to several high-profile incidents, including the 2014 Isla Vista killings and the 2018 Toronto van attack.

The interplay between the predominant themes in pornography, the rise of social media objectification of women, and the rise of incel culture and violence created a toxic environment that perpetuated harmful stereotypes and attitudes towards women. It also highlighted the need for greater awareness and understanding of the complex factors that contribute to the objectification of women and the rise of incel culture.

Tranchese & Suguira. Violence Against Women

2021, Vol. 27(14) 2709–2734

van der Veer 2020 ICCT

This is an excerpt from the excellent article on incel culture and its introgression into the mainstream disguised as a review of the film “Don’t Worry Darling” by Erin Cobby, senior editor at shado magazine. Link to the article below. Go read the whole thing.

“Once language is used by politicians, it can easily spread into the mainstream, with people not aligned with incels groups mimicking their language, like this tweet referencing the ‘chad’ [an incel term for a ‘hot’ guy that women want to sleep with] and virgin meme.

I contacted Aja for a comment on this. They explain, “Mainstream creative media now unironically references things like getting ‘cucked’ [cuckolded] for example. On one hand, decontextualising MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) language arguably weakens the power of those ideas to shock and impact us and weakens the connective tissue of inceldom as a subculture. On the other hand, the mainstreaming of this culture helps shift the overton window on what is acceptable behaviour and thought. And when we’re talking about extremist misogyny, that’s of course very dangerous.”

Speaking to Aja reinforces how important it is for us to remember that incel ideals and rhetoric are not only found on hard to reach subreddits. They’re all over Facebook, YouTube and TikTok. And as Aja points out, this isn’t a sign that this language is harmless and should be accepted, but rather it points to how widespread this issue is already and how it should be treated as such. “

Cobby 2022 shado.com

McKenzie 2019 Glamour Newsletter

Barrett-Ibarria 2020 The Guardian

The following is an excerpt from The New York Times article by Jennifer Valentino-DeVries and Michael H. Keller titled, “A Marketplace of Girl Influencers Managed by Moms and Stalked by Men” that was published in February 2024. It speaks to the sexual inaction and objectification of young girls - children – by mothers and a society which has blurred the lines between what women and women-to-be are worth to society in the face of the aggressive anonymous men who use the internet and women’s relative financial need to take whatever they can and feel entitled to more.

“Thousands of accounts examined by The Times offer disturbing insights into how social media is reshaping childhood, especially for girls, with direct parental encouragement and involvement. Some parents are the driving force behind the sale of photos, exclusive chat sessions and even the girls’ worn leotards and cheer outfits to mostly unknown followers. The most devoted customers spend thousands of dollars nurturing the underage relationships.

The large audiences boosted by men can benefit the families, The Times found. The bigger followings look impressive to brands and bolster chances of getting discounts, products and other financial incentives, and the accounts themselves are rewarded by Instagram’s algorithm with greater visibility on the platform, which in turn attracts more followers.

One calculation performed by an audience demographics firm found 32 million connections to male followers among the 5,000 accounts examined by The Times.

Interacting with the men opens the door to abuse. Some flatter, bully and blackmail girls and their parents to get racier and racier images. The Times monitored separate exchanges on Telegram, the messaging app, where men openly fantasize about sexually abusing the children they follow on Instagram and extol the platform for making the images so readily available.

“It’s like a candy store 😍😍😍,” one of them wrote. “God bless instamoms 🙌,” wrote another.

The troubling interactions on Instagram come as social media companies increasingly dominate the cultural landscape and the internet is seen as a career path of its own.

Nearly one in three preteens lists influencing as a career goal, and 11 percent of those born in Generation Z, between 1997 and 2012, describe themselves as influencers. The so-called creator economy surpasses $250 billion worldwide, according to Goldman Sachs, with U.S. brands spending more than $5 billion a year on influencers.

Health and technology experts have recently cautioned that social media presents a “profound risk of harm” for girls. Constant comparisons to their peers and face-altering filters are driving negative feelings of self-worth and promoting objectification of their bodies, researchers found.

But the pursuit of online fame, particularly through Instagram, has supercharged the often toxic phenomenon, The Times found, encouraging parents to commodify their children’s images. Some of the child influencers earn six-figure incomes, according to interviews.

“I really don’t want my child exploited on the internet,” said Kaelyn, a mother in Melbourne, Australia, who like Elissa and many other parents interviewed by The Times agreed to be identified only by a middle name to protect the privacy of her child.

“But she’s been doing this so long now,” she said. “Her numbers are so big. What do we do? Just stop it and walk away?”

Some girls on Instagram use their social media clout to get little more than clothing discounts; others receive gifts from Amazon wish lists, or money through Cash App; and still others earn thousands of dollars a month by selling subscriptions with exclusive content.

In interviews and online comments, parents said that their children enjoyed being on social media or that it was important for a future career. But some expressed misgivings. Kaelyn, whose daughter is now 17, said she worried that a childhood spent sporting bikinis online for adult men had scarred her.

“She’s written herself off and decided that the only way she’s going to have a future is to make a mint on OnlyFans,” she said, referring to a website that allows users to sell adult content to subscribers. “She has way more than that to offer.”

She warned mothers not to make their children social media influencers. “With the wisdom and knowledge I have now, if I could go back, I definitely wouldn’t do it,” she said. “I’ve been stupidly, naïvely, feeding a pack of monsters, and the regret is huge.”

Valentino-Devries & Keller 2024 NYT

1. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020). Median usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers by sex, quarterly averages, seasonally adjusted. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf

2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020). Consumer Expenditures in 2019. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cesan.pdf

3. New York City Department of Consumer Affairs. (2015). From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer: A Study of Gender Pricing in New York City. Retrieved from https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/dca/downloads/pdf/partners/Study-of-Gender-Pricing-in-NYC.pdf

4. New York City Department of Consumer Affairs. (2016). From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer: A Study of Gender Pricing in New York City. Retrieved from https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/dca/downloads/pdf/partners/Study-of-Gender-Pricing-in-NYC.pdf

5. U.S. Census Bureau. (2018). Income and Poverty in the United States: 2018. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-266.html

6. National Women’s Law Center. (2018). The Wage Gap: The Who, How, Why, and What to Do. Retrieved from https://nwlc.org/resources/the-wage-gap-the-who-how-why-and-what-to-do/

7. National Institute on Retirement Security. (2019). Shortchanged in Retirement: Continuing Challenges to Women’s Financial Future. Retrieved from https://www.nirsonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Shortchanged-in-Retirement-Continuing-Challenges-to-Womens-Financial-Future.pdf

8. U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2020). Expenditures on Children by Families. Retrieved from https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2017/01/13/cost-raising-child