Brown 1

Kevin Brown
Lauren Nuckols
Philosophy 014
6 April 2015
Empowering the Individual Body
The subject, outside all objects, fixes the object in its gaze, mastering and knowing it
with unambiguous certainty. The object is passive, inert matter, having no self-moving capacity,
its movement all externally and mechanically caused (Young 78). Every culture objectifies the
human body to a certain extent, for better or worse. More often than not, the lenses through
which others view our body (and how we view our own bodies) are collectively shared and
culturally regulated rather than being crafted on an individual basis. Social expectations and
cultural norms guide our perceptionswe experience and view the human body with certain
learned expectations, and if those expectations are not met or if they are compromised, we may
either seek to remedy those differences or convince ourselves that the deviation does not take
away from what we believe to be the general overarching principles. We expect the human body
to adhere to these principles, even though these expectations may be unrealistic or unfounded. In
this essay I will explore and inquire into several different kinds of symbolism of the body that are
relevant and pervasive in American culture today. Furthermore, I will discuss the fallaciousness
of these associations and suggest alternative ways of viewing the human body and removing
these potentially harmful meanings and associations that are currently attached to them.
One of the most prevalent anxieties to plague the lives of many young men in American
culture stems from their insecurity concerning their masculinity. Among the many fantasy

Brown 2

idealizations that men in American culture have to cope with are being strong, confident,
unemotional, virile, calm and collected, etc. Despite how unfair and marginalizing these
expected attributes already are, to make matters worse, the possession of them may be called into
question or compromised by one physical measurementthe size of ones penis. The phallussignifying generic male superioritybegan its career as a symbol of reproductive potency but
ultimately came to stand for an authority that is not biological at all, but rather advertises manly
capacity to transcend the power, needs, desiresand even the biological sexof the body
(Does Size Matter 31) It is an unfortunate fact of our time that too many menwhether
consciously or unconsciouslyare constantly measuring themselves up (perhaps quite literally)
against frivolous ideals that they will never attain. There is a tendency in our culture to associate
a larger penis with greater masculinity, power, and ability. Not only are these associations sexist,
for they also insinuate that male genitalia are the locus of power, they are false and detrimental to
every male. If a person wishes to be strong, unemotional, and confident (which I want to clarify
are unfair expectations of men to begin with and are not necessary for a person to qualify as
male), I would argue that male penis size, or even the possession of a penis, is not a biological
barrier to the attainment of any of what we categorize as typically masculine characteristics.
These are superficial characteristics, and although there may be evidence to suggest they are
biologically inclined, I do not believe there is any evidence to suggest that they are biologically
determinedleast of all by the size of ones penis.
Another realm of the human body that is unfairly and repeatedly imbued with meaning
are womens breasts. In her article Breasted Experience, Iris Marion Young describes how the
objectification of breasts has compromised many womens sense of themselves:

Brown 3

If the chest is a center of a persons sense of being-in-the-world and identity, men

and women have quite different experiences of being in the worldHow could
her breasts fail to be an aspect of her identity, since they emerge for her at that
time in her life when her sense of her own independent identity is finally formed?
For many women, if not all, breasts are an important component of body selfimage; a woman may love them or dislike them, but she is rarely neutral. (Young
76)
Young explains her belief that women will often regard their own breasts through the lens of the
objectifying male gazethey will perceive their breasts and criticize them against an ideal that
is not realistic or fair. It is well known that large and perky breasts are seen as the ultimate sign
of feminity, but I think the more important question is to ask why this is so? I believe it is
because our patriarchal society associates feminity with vulnerability and malleabilityit is
linked to a misogynist cultural tendency to subjugate women to roles of service. The norm is
contradictory, of course. If breasts are large, their weight will tend to pull them downIn its
image of the solid object, this norm suppresses the fleshy materiality of breasts, this least
muscular, softest body part (Young 79). This ideal traps women in an unnatural contradiction
where their breasts not only must signify their status as females (and thus softer than men) but
must also be signs of their sexual prowess (in a way, stronger than men). How can women
manage to be simultaneously servile and sexually powerful as our phallocentric culture would
like them to be? How can their breasts be both signs of their vulnerability and signs of their
feminine authority? This is an ideal that undoubtedly creates great tension and stress in the
identity of any American female, not only because of the near-impossibility of such a physical
attainment, but also because of the complete impossibility of such a personalitythe personality

Brown 4

being that of a large-breasted and seductive women whose sole purpose is to fulfill the desires of
her man. If the male penis is culturally constructed as a symbol of power and command, then the
breasts are made into symbols of feminine beauty, weakness, and vulnerability.
In her article Unbearable Weight, Susan Bordo further deconstructs the cultural
imperative for women to be thin, revealing this pressure for skinny waists to be an oppressive
cultural psychopathology. In this battle, thinness represents a triumph of the will over the body,
and the thin body (that is to say, the nonbody) is associated with absolute purityFat (that is to
say, becoming all body) is associated with the taint of matter and flesh, wantonness, mental
stupor and mental decay (Bordo 148). It would appear that our culture associates thinness with
purity and controlwe glorify thinness to the extent that is becomes unnatural and sickly. If one
were to read into this culture of feminine thin bodies further, it might even suggest that our
patriarchal culture worships thinness in females as a way of oppressing all females. Every female
is biologically built and inclined to have larger hips and more body fat than men for the purpose
of childbearingso why is it that our culture attaches an ideal of beauty to a body-type that goes
against our biological instinct to reproduce? Anorexia may be the result of years of oppressive
male dominance and the disempowerment of women, and I believe that the ideal bodies that
women are subjected to viewing every day in the media are psychologically terrorizing their very
sense of self. The anorectic is always convinced she is taking up too much space, eating too
much, wanting food too muchIve often felt that I was too muchtoo much emotion, too
much need, too loud and demanding, too much there, if you know what I mean (Bordo 160).
Thinness appears to be a way for our male-centered culture to minimize the influences and roles
of women, by quite literally discouraging them from satisfying their most basic physiological

Brown 5

and psychological needs for nourishment. A nourished woman is stronger woman, and in a
patriarchal culture, a stronger woman is a threatening woman.
I think that we can battle these harmful associations with the body by recognizing the fact
that they thrive off an industry that exploits our insecurities about whether or not we can achieve
a cultural ideal. Although I think the root of the problem is our own culture, the fact that we
continue to buy into products that promise to help us remedy our defects certainly aggravate and
reinforce the symbolic meanings that are attached to our bodies. I think the first step in battling
these toxic associations is by disempowering this industry by refusing to participate in itthis
means we need to learn to stop watching televisions shows, buying magazines, and investing in
treatments and products that reinforce or glorify these cultural ideals and symbolic meanings. We
must reclaim an aesthetic of beauty that is not oppressive to the human body. It is only by
disregarding the fallacious ideals and through re-empowering the human body that these cultural
meanings can be overcome.