Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House:

(1)

notes with concern the increasing sexualisation and objectification of girls in mainstream media;

(2)

recognises that both media and peer influences contribute to the sexualisation of girls including:

(a)

television, music videos, magazines, music lyrics, movies, cartoons, clothing, toys, computer games and the internet; and

(b)

attitudes of peers and family;

(3)

notes with concern the potential negative consequences of the sexualisation of girls on children and young adults, including negative body image, eating disorders, low self esteem, mental illness, poor physical health and gender role stereotyping;

(4)

believes further research is necessary to understand the full effects that early sexualisation and objectification of girls in the mainstream media has on children and young adults;

(5)

urges governments, publishers, broadcasters, advertisers, retailers and manufacturers to:

(a)

work together to review and develop appropriate standards and industry guidelines to address the sexualisation of children and limit its negative impact; and

(b)

assist parents and children to understand and manage the influence of sexualisation of girls in the mainstream media and associated negative consequences.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to rise tonight to move this motion, because the increasing sexualisation of our girls through mass media has become of increasing concern to me. Having raised this issue publicly over the last few weeks, I have come to appreciate that this is a concern shared by many people—most of all, parents who feel that they are at a loss when it comes to moderating the images and the messages that their children are exposed to. Whether it is the Bratz dolls, who are wearing fishnets, heavy makeup and boob tubes and are targeted at young girls, the music video clips that depict women gyrating around fully clothed male singers that play alongside the Saturday morning cartoons or the pre-teen magazine ads for sexy lingerie, we have all seen confronting examples of disturbing messages that are being sent to young children through the mass media: a message that is telling women and girls that being sexy is the only thing that defines who they are.

My own decision to speak out publicly on this issue was made after watching many of my friends trying to navigate through this area with their own children. Through them I could see that ensuring that the messages that their children were exposed to were age appropriate was becoming more and more difficult. It goes without saying that it is not just children who are absorbing messages from general advertising, but what I find particularly disturbing is the increasing stronger and more persistent message being sent to girls through toys, magazines, clothes, cartoons and the internet that they need to be sexual objects. A very topical illustration of this—and this has been reported on recently—is the My-Minx website, which is gaining popularity amongst pre-teen girls. On this website young girls are encouraged to create their online profile, or avatar, selecting features like breast and lip size, as well as skin colour and hairstyle. This online persona, or Minx, is then required to be dressed and can buy lingerie and designer clothes from outlets using fake ‘pink pounds’ from an account which needs to be topped up with mobile phone credit. Having dressed their persona, users can then take their Minx to clubs, earn money by working as a stripper and increase their Minx’s happiness rating by getting plastic surgery. I think everyone in this House would find that is not the message that we want to be sending to our young children.

While adults are hopefully capable of critically reflecting on and evaluating games such as this one and other general advertising, we know that younger children are more likely to accept the behaviour depicted in these false realities and, through the mass media, more generally accept it as a norm. It is not difficult to understand and see that this exposure is having a negative influence on both young girls’ self-perceptions and relationships to peers.

The findings of research and academic work into the consequences of the sexualisation and objectification of young girls are quite alarming. In response to public concern in this area, the American Psychological Association recently outlined the impacts that it can have: negative self esteem, appearance anxiety, eating disorders, more depressed moods and depression, and negative effects on cognitive functioning. Certainly, in some accounts that I have heard these have a significant impact on a young person’s life.

From the correspondence and support I have received, I know that these fears are shared by many. To mention just one, I would like to mention Mr Andrew Lines, a teacher from a school in my electorate who recently contacted me, highlighting his concerns about the effect that objectification of women in the mass media is having not on women but on the attitudes of young boys, especially in the way he sees them treat girls and women. Mr Lines’s concerns have prompted him to develop a school program called The Rite Journey, which seeks to help young people develop into self-aware, responsible and resilient adults.

Since raising this issue I have been overwhelmed by the support of parents, psychologists, teachers and authors who have expressed their support and concern. In particular I would like to thank and acknowledge Dr Amy Slater, a researcher from the Flinders University near my electorate, for her assistance and patience in helping me understand some of these complex issues and the negative impacts that will be felt by the next generation. In collaboration with her colleague Professor Marika Tiggeman, Dr Slater is conducting much-needed research into the negative impacts on young people of this disturbing message. This motion before the House recognises that this is a complex issue, but it also recognises that, as a society, we need to start actively addressing this issue.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are many wise words about how a childhood shapes a man or woman irrevocably and for life. One of my favourites comes from Nigerian author Ben Okri, who said:

We plan our lives according to a dream that come to us in our childhood, and we find that life alters our plans. And yet, at the end, from a rare height, we also see that our dream was our fate.

Our job as parents and leaders in society and the community is to make sure that we do everything possible to ensure that positive dreams come to our young people—especially our girls—and I think that that quote provides a good sense of the critical importance of childhood and the way it shapes a future.

The sexualisation of girls is all around us and it is damaging our youth—bras and wet-shine lip gloss for five year olds; see-through lace, Tweety Bird G-strings, plunging necklines and full make-up kit.s for eight-to-12 year olds. It even leads through to the car advertisements, where we see a man who gets the top-of-the-line sports car and then a glamorous woman to ride in it—two possessions to be acquired. Sexualisation occurs when a person’s value comes only from his or her sexual appeal or behaviour to the exclusion of other characteristics and when a person is portrayed only as a sex object. This debate is not about sexual liberation—the freedom of women to have the sexual relationships they choose where and when they choose—we all have our individual views about these things. What this is about is the corporate exploitation of children’s sexuality. It is not the sexuality itself but the sickening falsification and then the mass marketing of children as sexual beings that hurts us all.

I had a look at the current issues of Dolly and Girlfriend. ‘Dolly doctor’ this month has been asked about how you get rid of cellulite, how you get rid of big breasts, how you get rid of the freckles on your face and how you get surgery to get rid of the scars on your knees. The cover of the February issue of Girlfriend, which I think is only aimed at primary school and early high school, has a girl of somewhere between 13 and 23—the level of airbrushing makes it impossible to tell—wearing an off-the-shoulder dress and a come-hither look. One of the stories featured is how to be the girl who gets the guy that everyone wants.

As a society we are visually absorbed; it is all about how you look. And to a certain extent we recognise and lament this fact, and some of us from time to time feel the need to embrace it and jump on the bandwagon. It is a hugely conflicted and contentious area that challenges women of all ages, but it should not challenge children. Children are being bombarded with huge volumes of graphic sexual content and they simply do not have the maturity to process or understand the images or the messages. What are young girls to make of all this? There is a clear message which associates physical appearance and buying the right products with being sexy and successful. These lessons learned early will shape identity values, sexual attitudes and the capacity to love and connect with other people.

A woman I know who is the mother of three girls recalls when her oldest, who is now 25, came to her when in primary school, wanting to know why she was not as pretty and little as the girls on TV. Teen clothing manufacturers have introduced a zero size for women in America. What does that say to women—that anything in a positive number is a failure? Could we imagine a zero size for men? The message that our mass media and, more importantly, the advertisers who are their revenue stream, are giving to children is that sex has nothing to do with pleasure, desire or intimacy and everything to do with the things you consume and the things you buy. In this universe, the space in our brain where we should be developing sympathy and understanding is not nearly as important as the space in our shopping malls.

When children are imbued with adult sexuality, it is imposed on them rather than chosen by them. There is so much evidence of the sexualisation of women and girls in television, music videos, movies, magazines and sports media. The next step is self-objectification, where girls actually think of their own bodies as objects to satisfy others’ desires, as objects to be evaluated for their appearance. The research tells us that sexualisation and objectification undermine confidence, comfort and self-esteem, leading to a host of negatives: shame, anxiety and self-disgust. This in turn leads to eating disorders and depression. There is evidence that young women who hold the conventional feminine beliefs—avoiding conflict and valuing being nice, sweet, pretty and thin—are more likely to be depressed. This debate is about the current and future emotional, physical and psychological health of our girls. In telling our girls they can be anything, are we actually demanding that they be everything? In a world where girls face paralysing pressure to be perfect and where competitive pressures shape such a large part of who we are, surely we can allow girls the freedom to be children.

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to begin by congratulating the member for Kingston for bringing to the House this evening this very important motion on the sexualisation and objectification of girls in the mainstream media. The relationship between modern media and our children is of ever-increasing importance to us all. It is a complicated issue that becomes more challenging as the media and corporate interests seek new and innovative ways to influence and encourage the thoughts and behaviour of children and, in particular, young girls.

I speak to this motion this evening as a mother of two teenagers. I am keenly aware of this issue and watch with a degree of anxiety as both my children grapple with the pressures of their adolescence. I watch as they try to keep up with the latest fads and fashions, and I have watched with concern as they and their peers have been enticed by the many forms of media that target them and attempt to sell them images and lifestyle choices that are well beyond their years.

As parents we strive to make our children feel happy and confident despite the media’s constant influence on their image and lifestyle choices. But it is a difficult battle given that you are also up against peer group pressure, which is itself heavily influenced by television, the fashion industry, the IT industry and of course the internet. Most vulnerable to these pressures are young girls, and it is my 15-year-old daughter and her peers that I have in mind when speaking to this motion. It is the fragility of how they perceive themselves physically and how that relates to their sense of self-esteem and self-worth that is the essence of this motion tonight.

Children begin to pick up messages at a very young age. Therefore the messages we as parents and as a society send them become critical to their development. The level of sexualisation and objectification of young girls in particular needs scrutiny from this House precisely because it can have negative consequences, consequences that we all know about and are concerned about: negative body image that leads to eating disorders, low self-esteem that can lead to mental illness, and gender role stereotyping that can lay many traps for the unsuspecting young mind still in the developmental phase.

I recall some years ago standing in the children’s clothing section of our local Kmart store. I was mortified to see hanging on the racks little bralettes, with matching undies, on sale for girls as young as five. While some see this as cute and harmless, it is actually a new frontier in children’s fashion. I objected to the availability of this attire for young girls, yet many parents would have bought it, encouraged further by the many glossy girlie magazines and supermodel reality TV shows that reinforce and in fact normalise and set the trends that make their way onto the clothes racks of our stores. Well-meaning parents become unwittingly complicit in the sexualisation and objectification of their young girls.

I am not suggesting we should regulate the personal choices parents make for their children’s day-to-day dress. But I do urgently wish to pose the questions: is this acceptable; what are the societal outcomes of dressing girls as young as five in bralettes or bras; and who is accountable? In its report Sexualisation of children in the contemporary media, the Senate Standing Committee on the Environment, Communications and the Arts made a number of important findings. The report said:

Narrow or stereotypical portrayals of body type, beauty and women were commonly identified as the major source of sexualisation of children.

While the report acknowledged methodological limitations in accurately linking the media and the sexualisation of children, it noted:

… the report’s findings may be cautiously applied to at least conclude that some level or preponderance of sexual material in advertising and media content has the potential to contribute to, and perhaps even cause, emotional and physical damage to children.

Many of the submissions to this inquiry were from individuals, grandparents and parents. As one parent submitted:

Childhood is a time of joy and innocence, and this should be an absolute right for all our children. They become adults soon enough, and childhood is a time to be cherished.

I strongly agree with this. Ultimately, however, this issue is about responsibility. This motion is important because we have a collective responsibility as legislators to hold to account those who influence but also profit from children and young people. It is their responsibility to adhere to appropriate standards and industry guidelines. We must therefore work together with the industries concerned so that children and parents can be assisted in managing and understanding the influence of sexualisation of girls. Ultimately our aim must be to give our children and indeed our young people every chance— (Time expired)

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution tonight on this fine motion on the sexualisation of girls in the media. I have enjoyed being able to hear what the previous speakers have said, to make sure that I do not go over the same ground. As a father of two girls, aged 11 and seven, these are exactly the sorts of things that concern me. I am sure that I am like all parents, particularly all fathers, out there across country. You have to be on your guard the whole time. No matter where you go, there is the potential to encounter the sexualisation, the rapid onset of adult themes, that face young people, our children. You only need to be sitting in the car listening to commercial radio and you hear some of those abhorrent ads from Advanced Medical Institute, or whoever they are, about nasal delivery systems. It seems that you can hear those ads on the radio at whatever time of day you might happen to have your children in the car with you. We must always be on our guard against those things.

Fortunately, in the area where I usually have my kids in the car with me, we do not have the sorts of billboards that seem to be so prevalent in the major cities over here on the east coast. Some of the things that are up on those billboards I do not want to have to explain to them. I do not want my 11-year-old or, worse, my seven-year-old saying to me, ‘What does that mean?’ I do not want them to be asking those sorts of questions. We must be on guard against these sorts of images, these sorts of ideas. Also, particularly as legislators, we should give careful consideration to what is authorised.

Another problem area is Facebook. I have recently become aware that there are some very young children with Facebook profiles. Let us face it, there is quite a deal of adult conversation on social networking sites. As a parent, I regularly look over the shoulders of my kids when they are on the internet—when I am in town. They do not have a Facebook profile. I am very glad that they are more into horsy websites and things like that—pretty positive stuff or, at least, not harmful stuff. But it is important to keep an eye on that. It is also important to look at filters. Parents should invest in filters to make sure that, while they are not looking over their children’s shoulders, safety for their children is still available.

Some TV shows are also worth considering, particularly those after 7.30 or eight o’clock at night, such as Two and a Half Men. Really, these are not shows for children at all. We should not be letting our 10- and 11-year-olds look at this stuff. They do not even understand what the concepts are. I was at school one day last year for my daughter’s year 1 class, and one of the boys made a comment that I thought was somewhat offensive and obscene. I will not mention the boy’s name, but I said to him, ‘Do you want me to tell your mother that you said that?’ and he backed off immediately. He did not appear to know what he had actually said. Later, I heard from a sibling that they had been watching Two and a Half Men the night before. It just shows that being on guard is always required.

I would also like to mention another bane of my existence, and that is swearing. I am one of those people who think that if you want to swear in front of your kids, if you want to use the ‘F’ word or worse in front of your children, then you can expect nothing else but that they will use that language in the future. I think a lot of people inflict problems on their children by not showing a bit of self-control in that regard. The dangers are all around, and parents should stand up to the mark. At the same time, we should look at some of the things that we allow to be out there in front of them. I thank the member for Kingston for bringing this motion forward.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think this is a very worthy motion, and it is something I have pursued in previous parliaments. I congratulate the member for Kingston for looking at this vital area. As a mother of a 10-year-old child, I, like many speakers before me, deal with this on an ongoing basis. My daughter is, of course, gorgeous, as all our children are, and I am terrified for her on a daily basis. My husband says we are going to homeschool her from the age of about 12. But this cannot be done. I cannot wrap her in cotton wool and I cannot protect her from everything in life. We as a government cannot wrap the nation’s children in cotton wool, but we do need to do things to ensure that our children get a childhood and that they do not get bombarded with images that lead to negative thoughts that can lead to dangerous areas like eating disorders. Eating disorders is an area I have pursued in this parliament, and I want to commend the government for taking action on it. I will get to that in a minute.

My 10-year-old child was given a dreaded Bratz doll. She burst into tears because she thought her father would take it off her because he had previously told her that Barbie was ‘Satan’. This was pretty bad, as she attended the Syndal Baptist childcare centre and had said she could not have Barbie because Barbie was Satan—because my husband was of the view that it was such a negative image that we should not have it. Lo and behold, her birthday party arrived, and there is the dreaded Bratz doll, with the unbelievably large lips. Anyway, we took the Bratz doll and we have lived with the Bratz doll. We have lived with Total Girl, a magazine aimed at small children, which has pin-up posters of boys and things and also cute kittens and giveaways to attract 10-year-olds to pick it up in the store. We have had the dreaded High School Musical 1, 2 and 3. I recommend them to all of you highly—not! Again, it is bombardment with images of what my child should perceive herself to be. I want my child to be herself. That is a really dreadful thing to ask of any child, and it is a very hard lesson to learn, but we have to teach her resilience so she can get there. We had the dreaded experience of going into a store to buy her an outfit, and a woman saying she looks so grown up. I do not want her to look grown up. I want her to look 10! That is all I require. I want her to have a childhood. I do not want to mollycoddle her, I do not want her to not be a feminist, but I believe that she, like all our children, deserves to enjoy this precious time and not have the mass media somehow consume and take it away from her.

In the previous parliament, I called on the former government to take seriously the issue of body image and eating disorders. A lot of the research demonstrates that this sexualisation, this constant bombardment with what you are meant to look like, does have serious negative consequences for many young women and, increasingly, young boys. The AMA, in its most recent report, states:

Eating disorders are serious psychiatric illnesses. The prevalence of eating disorders among children and adolescents is rising. While it is difficult to assess exactly how common eating disorders are (as many cases may go undiagnosed) it is estimated that one in 100 adolescent girls develop anorexia nervosa, and that it is the third most common chronic illness in girls, after obesity and asthma. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) state that eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of any psychiatric illness, with a death rate higher than that of major depression.

And we treat this illness with contempt. We do not take it seriously, we do not fund its research and we do not treat it as an illness, which it is. I commend the Rudd Labor government for finally realising that we need to do something about it. Last year the Minister for Health and Ageing announced funding of $3.5 million over four years to tackle the growing epidemic of eating disorders, including $500,000 for the Butterfly Foundation to establish a national eating disorders collaboration. I have dealt with the Butterfly Foundation for many years, and I again want to congratulate Claire Vickery, the CEO and founder of the foundation, who has been committed to raising the issue of eating disorders and how people end up in this terrible spiral. Nothing had been done for many years, and now we are doing more.

In addition, the federal Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare and Youth has tackled this issue, appointing a national advisory group on body image. She received their first report in October 2009. The report notably called for the development of a voluntary code for body image. A lot of this needs to be done on a voluntary basis. There is a lot of angst in the debate. Clive Hamilton, who in 2006 put out a report entitled Corporate paedophilia, raised the issue, and more needs to be done.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.