The Myth Of Self-Objectifying Clothing

Certain types of clothing are sometimes said to not only invite sexual objectification from other people--as if clothing is itself sexual--but also to make the wearers objectify themselves.  As one might expect, the threshold past which clothing is considered by some to be "self-objectifying" is purely arbitrary, but an idea is not false because its adherents cite arbitrary lines; this only means the arguments are fallacious.  An idea is false when it contradicts reality, as does the notion of self-objectifying clothing.  Self-objectifying clothing doesn't exist because clothing can't objectify anyone: people objectify other people or, hypothetically, themselves.

The only way that a person could actually objectify himself or herself is by literally thinking that they have no significance beyond their sex appeal or by thinking there is nothing to their existence beyond their sex appeal or sexuality.  To acknowledge the other dimensions of oneself is to not reduce oneself to a sexual object.  Since nothing short of this is objectification, people do not objectify themselves by wearing highly revealing or sensual clothing, by appearing without clothing, or by displaying themselves for the sexual pleasure of the opposite gender.

Men and women who show off their bodies for the sake of modeling, such as at beauty competitions, are not disrespecting themselves in any way merely by doing so even when they have almost no clothing on.  Rather, they may actually derive a sense of empowerment from allowing others to see and admire their perceived physical beauty.  Unfortunately, not only is exposure of one's body considered inherently sexual or objectifying even in utterly nonsexual contexts, but this is especially true of women's bodies.

The male body is unjustly treated as if it has a lesser beauty by many in Western culture, whereas the female body is unjustly treated as if it is particularly offensive and desirable all at once.  Both errors are thoroughly irrational, sexist, and hurtful to men and women alike.  However, charges of "self-objectification" are thrown at women more overtly or frequently than they are thrown at men.  A woman has nonetheless done nothing to objectify herself by wearing any kind of sensual clothing--no matter how much that clothing exposes.

Baring one's body is not an act of degradation.  Because this is the nature of bodily exposure, a rational person refuses to assume anything about someone's motives or moral character based on what they are wearing or not wearing.  A voluntary lack of clothing itself has no objectifying aspects whatsoever.  When a person has not bared their body with illicit intent (perhaps the intention is to display themselves out of arrogance, for example), there is nothing to object to.