‘More of Her Out There?’: The Comment Section as a Catalyst for Women’s Objectification

Image Credit: cottonbro studio via Pexels

It starts the same way every time. A woman appears in a short clip: maybe she’s discussing politics, sharing a moment from her day, or simply existing on camera. Within minutes, the comments fill with variations of the same refrain: “more of her out there?” A not-so-subtle hint asking whether explicit or sexual content of her exists elsewhere online, even if the video has nothing to do with sexuality at all. What begins as a compliment quickly morphs into something more intrusive, sliding into demands for more pictures, more angles, more access. The tone shifts from admiration to entitlement, as though her body is public property, and the audience is owed further content.

This pattern has become so common online that we barely register it. Scroll through almost any comment section featuring a woman, and the script repeats itself: remarks about her appearance, unsolicited sexual jokes, debates over her body and demands for more visibility. Sometimes framed as flattery, often cloaked in humour. Beneath this sits a familiar dynamic, where women are reduced to content and are consumed through a lens that prioritises their visibility over their humanity.

Part of the problem lies in the structure of the comment sections themselves. Anonymity encourages boldness without consequence as the speed of replies creates a pack mentality, in which one sexual remark invites dozens more, each trying to outdo the last. When someone knows they can speak without consequence, the language often becomes bolder, harsher or more intrusive. Despite this, platforms reward engagement of any kind, meaning that provocative or appearance-focused comments are pushed to the top, reinforcing their dominance and drowning out the more meaningful discussion. The result of this is a space where objectification feels normalised, even inevitable, and where women are expected to absorb the impact in silence.

The cultural backdrop is equally important, as society has long treated women’s bodies as open for evaluation: magazines rating outfits, strangers commenting in passing, tabloids dissecting figures on beaches. The digital and physical worlds reinforce each other, making online behaviour feel like a natural extension of offline norms. When a woman posts a video, she isn’t just showing herself; she’s entering an arena where hundreds, thousands, or millions feel entitled to respond to her existence. The internet is often framed as a place where anyone can speak freely, yet for women, that freedom is routinely compromised by the threat of being turned into a spectacle. Platforms profit from the engagement, commenters collect likes for witty or bold remarks, audiences enjoy the spectacle and feel part of a community. Yet the woman at the centre of it rarely receives the same reward, only the pressure that comes from being simultaneously hypervisible and dehumanised. 

Still, the resistance is growing. Many creators now limit comments or delete sexualised remarks outright. Some use humour to expose the absurdity of objectifying commentary; others refuse to engage at all. A few platforms have begun experimenting with design changes that nudge users towards more thoughtful interactions. None of these solutions is perfect, but they suggest that healthier norms are possible. Comment sections don’t have to be catalysts for objectification. A woman posting online shouldn’t have to brace for impact; she should be allowed to speak, exist and be heard without becoming a spectacle.