Self-Sexualization in Relation to Sexual Harassment and Body Shame

While many researchers have identified harmful consequences of the sexualization of women, still little is known about voluntary self-sexualization and its potential effects on women who engage in the practice. Although the idea that self-sexualization is self-fulfilling remains contentious, women who self-sexualize are naturally expected to receive sexualized attention, including unwanted attention. This study starts with the question of whether self-sexualizing women, including those who use self-sexualization as a source of power, experience sexually objectifying encounters, measured by nonphysical sexual harassment, and its negative consequence, measured by body shame. Furthermore, we investigate how age moderates the relationship. An online questionnaire was created and a total of 308 women completed the questionnaire. Structural equation modeling was conducted to test the hypothesized causal relationships from self-sexualization (self-empowering sexualization and non-power self-sexualization) to nonphysical sexual harassment, which can lead to body shame. The results showed that the effects of self-sexualization were dependent on the intent for self-sexualization as well as the self-sexualizer’s age. While self-sexualization without intent to gain power led to increased sexual harassment incidents and body shame, mature women’s self-sexualization as a source of power did not lead to increased sexual harassment experiences nor increased body shame. However, unlike the mature women’s self-empowering sexualization, the young women’s self-sexualization, with or without intent to gain power, led to more sexual harassment experiences. The findings of this study indicate the need to uncover the various intentions for self-sexualization as well as their different effects.


Introduction
In 2014, a social movement organization called Right to Be (formerly Hollaback) created a viral social experiment video that featured a woman walking around New York City for 10 h (http://www.robblisscreative.com/10-hours-of-walking-in-nyc). The video creator hired an actress to wear a black crewneck t-shirt and jeans and walk silently around the city and observed the scene. During her walk, she received countless winks and stares and was urged to smile, equated with a thousand dollars, and called "sexy," "beautiful," "sweetie," "darling," "miss," "girl," "baby," and "mami." Furthermore, a random man walked silently beside her for five minutes, whereas other men attempted to initiate conservation. In an interview, the video creator explained that he deliberately chose the outfit to debunk the misconception that women get harassed because of their revealing outfits (Butler, 2014).
Belonging to a culture in which the female body is commonly objectified, many women experience various forms of sexualization (e.g., being stared at in a sexual manner or touched against their will) daily. It also includes vicarious, indirect experiences of sexualization through exposure to media that contain sexualized images and messages of women. Scholars and journalists acknowledged the issues of sexualization, which raises concerns about its negative physical, mental, and social consequences for women and society (e.g., DelGreco & Christensen 2020; Ward et al., 2018). Simultaneously, social movements emerged to address the problem of female sexualization, such as the SlutWalk and #MeToo movements.
Despite the criticism directed towards the sexualization of women and the harm it can cause, the active and voluntary display of one's sexuality or sexual body parts is often viewed positively as a sign of women's liberation and empowerment in the contemporary highly sexualized Western culture. Some women voluntarily and willingly sexualize themselves (hereinafter, self-sexualization; Choi & DeLong 2019) for selffulfillment, such as to gain popularity and/or power, have fun, and feel excitement. Although the idea that such reasons are self-fulfilling remains contentious, women who self-sexualize are naturally expected to receive sexualized attention, including unwanted attention. Thus, the following questions emerged: Do women who voluntarily and actively present themselves sexually (e.g., wearing revealing clothing and posting sexualized selfies) experience similar degrees of sexualization as well as its outcomes? Do women who use their sexuality as a source of power, empowering themselves through self-sexualization, also experience similar degrees of sexualization as well as its outcomes? Despite their intentional self-sexualization for their own benefit, do such women experience the consequences of sexualization?
Some studies approached self-sexualization as a type of internalization or endorsement of sexual objectification and viewed it as an outcome of sexual objectification experiences, such as exposure to sexualized media. Thus, self-sexualization is a manifestation of well-internalized (or cultivated) sexualization (e.g., McKenney & Bigler 2010;Ward et al., 2016). The famous objectification theory (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997) also has a similar foundation, that is, women's self-objectification (i.e., seeing oneself as an object, leading oneself to observe one's body through the eyes of another person) is an outcome of their internalized sexually objectified experiences. However, self-sexualization as a possible antecedent of sexual objectifica-tion experiences deserves exploration. Despite the growing number of studies on self-sexualization, only a few explored the relationship between self-sexualization and sexual objectification experience and its effect.
Specifically, considering the power dynamics in the relationship between the offenders and receivers of sexual objectification (in which offenders reduce their victims to an object to take advantage; Nussbaum 1995), women who intentionally use their sexuality as a source of power (Erchull & Liss, 2013) may not fall into the lowpower victim category, whom offenders can dominate or control. Accordingly, in this study, we examine two types of self-sexualization: self-empowering sexualization, which involves a clear intent for power, and self-sexualization without intent to gain power. We explore the differences in women's sexually objectified experiences as well as their negative consequences between these two types of self-sexualization. We also focus on everyday interpersonal sexual harassment, which is a direct form of sexual objectification (vs. an indirect form, such as media influence) and the most common form of sexual aggression (Pina et al., 2009). Furthermore, as a negative consequence of sexual harassment, we select body shame, as a gateway to other severe outcomes, such as depressive symptoms (Hyde & Mezulis, 2020) and eating disorders (Mustapic et al., 2017). Thus, in this study, we aim to explore the relationship between self-sexualization (self-empowering sexualization and non-power selfsexualization) and sexual harassment, which can lead to body shame. Additionally, we seek to investigate how age moderates the relationship between self-sexualization, sexual harassment, and its negative consequence, body shame.

Sexual Objectification and Sexual Harassment
Female body objectification has been a topic of interest for a long time. Sexual objectification occurs when "a woman's sexual parts or functions are separated out from her person, reduced to the status of mere instruments, or else regarded as if they were capable of representing her" (Bartky, 1990, p. 35). Sexual objectification is a form of human objectification involving the degradation of a human being to a physical object (Nussbaum, 1995), specifically, a sexual object. Sexual objectification has two aspects: (1) the detachment of sexual parts or functions from a person and (2) the instrumentality or representability of the sexual parts or functions of a person. The degradation of a human being to an object serves as the foundation for victimization. When a body is treated as a physical object, it can be used as a tool for another's sexual purpose, either for decorative visual interest or for sexual arousal. In addition, when a person is degraded to the level of a body part, as if the body part alone can represent the person, that body part has the most value, even to the exclusion of the other characteristics of the individual.
An individual can experience sexual objectification directly or indirectly in various forms (Choi, 2017). Direct sexual objectification involves interpersonal interaction and can often include violence (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997), which may or may not involve physical contact, such as sexual assaults, verbal or written sexual remarks, and sexual staring. Direct interpersonal sexual objectification exists on a continuum, varying in the degree of severity or intensity of the event, and it can occur at any stage of life, from childhood through adulthood, such as child trafficking and sexual abuse in marriage. On the other hand, indirect sexual objectification refers to vicariously experiencing sexual objectification without direct interpersonal interaction. It can occur through various channels, such as observing a music video portraying an individual as a decorative sexual object or seeing a beer advertisement displaying a female body as a beer bottle. It also includes indirect exposure to sexual objectification as a bystander by being in a sexually charged or hostile environment, which is called ambient sexual harassment (Fitzgerald et al., 1995;Schneider, 1996).
Among various types of sexual objectification, sexual harassment is the most prevalent form of sexual aggression (Pina et al., 2009). Sexual harassment is defined as "unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature" (US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2019). The term "sexual harassment" is typically used in work and school settings (Fairchild & Rudman, 2008), but sexual harassment can occur in any situation and setting. When sexual harassment occurs between strangers in public (e.g., streets, stores, or bars), it is called street harassment or stranger harassment (Bowman, 1993) as well as public harassment, everyday sexism, and uncivil attention (Logan, 2015). Public and research attention was paid mostly to workplace sexual harassment and physical forms of sexual violence, while nonphysical sexual harassment (Gervasio & Ruckdeschel, 1992;Logan, 2015) has been largely overlooked. Nonphysical sexual harassment is more common than physical harassment (O'Donohue et al., 1998) to the point that it has become a normal part of everyday life, even among teenagers (Fineran & Bennett, 1999;Hlavka, 2014;Robinson, 2005). This type of harassment may not lead to negative consequences immediately after its occurrence, but similar to a "dripping tap," it can be perpetuated in the victim's consciousness in ordinary life through daily repetition (p. 114). In this study, we explore nonphysical sexual harassment by strangers and acquaintances in relation to self-sexualization.

Stranger/Acquaintance Harassment and Body Shame
Researchers have showed that sexual harassment has a negative influence on body image and body appreciation. People who have experienced sexual harassment tend to have higher levels of body concerns such as body weight and shape (Buchanan et al., 2013), increased body dissatisfaction (Murnen & Don, 2012), and greater eating disorder psychopathology (Buchanan et al., 2013;Holmes & Johnson, 2017;Terhoeven et al., 2020). These negative effects are not surprising because researchers have found that any appearance-related comments (that are not in the form of sexual harassment) can also have a significant impact on the development of body image (Herbozo & Thompson, 2006), and even positive appearance comments can lead to increased body dissatisfaction (Tiggemann & Barbato, 2018).
As per Sullivan et al.'s (2010) analogy of street harassment, when men provide unsolicited comments on women's bodies and appearance, it puts women in a position of being judged in a daily beauty pageant without their consent, where any man can appoint himself as the judge to evaluate one's attractiveness or lack thereof.
Although Gardner (1995) found that there are women who interpret street harassment as harmless or even complimentary, this only applies to cases when the comments were positive, which is not always the case. Regardless of positive or negative comments, men still serve as the judges in the approval or disapproval of the way women look, and women are unknowingly placed in the pageant competition on a random day, with no guarantee that the initial comment will not escalate into a more vulgar form of harassment.
Accordingly, non-physical sexual harassment by strangers or acquaintance can have a negative impact on women's body image and well-being. Because the verbal sexual harassment is a form of judgement on women's bodies and appearance, placing them in a position where their physical attributes are evaluated and commented on, it can reinforce the idea that their bodies are constantly being judged by other. Then, it can potentially exacerbate the feelings of inadequacy and body shame, because body shame is the emotions that arises from the evaluation of one's body against cultural standards and expectations (Wang et al., 2020). Body shame is associated with a variety of negative consequences such as body image concerns (Daniel & Bridges, 2010;Jackson et al., 2016), depression (Hyde & Mezulis, 2020), low sexual assertiveness (Manago et al., 2015), low self-esteem (Mercurio & Landry, 2008), and eating disorders (Mustapic et al., 2017). Therefore, we explore body shame as a result of nonphysical sexual harassment by strangers and acquaintances.

Self-Sexualization and Outcomes
The difference between sexual objectification and self-sexualization is the presence of agency. While sexual objectification is imposed sexualization on a woman by others, self-sexualization occurs when a woman voluntarily treats herself as a sexual object (American Psychological Association, 2007;Fredrickson & Roberts 1997;McKinley & Hyde, 1996). The promotion of one's sexual attractiveness, specifically in romantic interactions, is not new; however, the widespread popularity of active self-sexualization in the public sphere has attracted attention as a topic of interest. For instance, McNair (2002) called the cultural trend of the democratization of sexual self-exhibition and exposure as "striptease culture." Similarly, Levy (2006) termed the practice of women subjectively becoming sexual objects "raunch culture." As visually documented in the previously mentioned video, women experience street harassment regardless of how they dress. However, women who present themselves in a sexual manner are perceived to experience increased objectification incidents. De Wilde et al. (2021) investigated the interpersonal consequences of selfsexualization and reported that self-sexualizing women are not only perceived to experience more daily objectification but also more likely to be objectified by men. Specifically, the male participants expressed their intention to establish a relationship for intercourse, rather than a long-term relationship, which is a reduction of women to their sexual functions (Bartky, 1990;Stuart & Kurek, 2019) presented similar results among self-sexualizing adolescent girls. The authors investigated girls who frequently take sexualized selfies and reported that they tend to experience aggression online. Furthermore, the self-sexualizing girls tend to demonstrate more aggression as well; they were both victims and perpetrators of online aggression.
Acknowledging women who seek and enjoy "sexualized, appearance-based attention from men," Liss et al. (2011) conceptualized the enjoyment of sexualization and determined if it attenuates the negative effects of internalizing objectification experiences (p. 57). The authors observed that enjoyment of sexualization enhances negative effects by increasing the impact of self-objectification (measured by constant body surveillance) on disordered eating behavior. In the study, the authors reported the significant correlation between enjoyment of sexualization and sexual objectification. The women who reported enjoying self-sexualization also reported having increased sexual objectification encounters, such as unwanted sexual advances and sexual gazes. Similarly, Ramsey et al. (2017) highlighted the negative effect of enjoyment of sexualization on romantic relationships. The women who indicated that they enjoy sexualization felt sexually objectified by their partners, which led to reduced relationship satisfaction.
Researchers who approached self-sexualization in different ways also found unintended consequences. For example, Choi (2021) viewed self-sexualization as holding a narrowly defined standard of physical attractiveness that equates with being sexy and argued that this narrow view of attractiveness can lead to body shame. Moscatelli et al. (2021) explored the effect of self-sexualizing belief (i.e., internalization of sexualized feminine roles, such as believing that women should be sexually appealing to men) and revealed that self-sexualizing belief can lead to greater tolerance of sexual harassment. Based on the aforementioned studies showing the negative effects of self-sexualization, we posit that women who self-sexualize will encounter more sexually objectified experiences, measured by sexual harassment, as well as its negative consequences, measured by feelings of shame for not having a satisfying physical appearance.

Power Dynamics in Sexual Harassment and Self-Empowering Sexualization
Although self-sexualizing women may experience more sexually objectifying incidents, many women experience sexual harassment despite not presenting themselves in a sexual manner, because sexual objectification is a form of abuse of power and disrespect (Kearl, 2010). Sexual harassment is relevant to the subordination of victims' sexuality (Tuerkheimer, 1997), and thorough history, humans have used power to obtain sex (Brown, 2006).
Two views exist in the literature regarding the power dynamics of sexual harassment perpetrators. The first view posits that the perpetrators of sexual harassment hold more power and target individuals with low-power as a mean to demonstrate and assert their power and dominance over their victims (e.g., Browne 2006;Davis, 1994;Tuerkheimer, 1997). A broader feminist perspective suggests that men's sexual harassment is a reflection of the lower status of women in comparison to men (Gutek, 1985) as a gender-based violence (Bonderstam & Lundqvist, 2020). Fitzgerald (1993) argued that sexual harassment functions as social control over women, drawing on Bularzil's (1978) outline of harassment with its historical roots as an expression of contempt and hostility toward women who deviate from their traditional feminine spheres of the home. In addition, the power dynamic between male perpetrator and the female victims is evident in the perpetrator's frustration when the victim attempts to raise themselves to an equal position with the perpetrator. In cases of street harassment, Davis (1994) pointed out that responding with a "thank you" to the perpetrator can escalate hostility, as it thwarts the perpetrator's attempt to objectify and assert power over her; Her response creates a dialogue, and she shifts her object position to subject position in which she becomes an active party of the dialogue.
In contrast, a recent study by DelGreco et al. (2021) challenges this view, arguing that perpetrators who perceive themselves as having low power are more likely to engage in harassment as an attempt to gain power. This view posits that individuals who already perceive themselves as having strong power feel no need to engage in harassment to demonstrate their power. Furthermore, the authors explained that individuals who perceive themselves as having little power may lash out to gain a sense of power, as they may feel that they have nothing left to lose. Despite these differing perspectives, both views acknowledge the fundamental existence of power dynamics in sexual harassment.
In relation to power dynamics, the distinct consideration of self-empowering sexualization justifies a separate investigation from that without intent to gain power. The notion of self-sexualization as a source of power for personal benefit (Erchull & Liss, 2013), which involves perceived empowerment through self-sexualization, has been a topic of debate. Akin to a double-edged sword, women may be punished for their self-sexualization (e.g., De Wilde et al., 2021;Stuart & Kurek, 2019) or, if successful, receive rewards for being attractive. The perks of being attractive have been welldocumented in the hiring process (Cash & Kilcullen, 1985), performance evaluations (Landy & Sigall, 1974), salary grades (Hamermesh & Biddle, 1993;Roszell et al., 1989), success in sales (Reingen & Kernan, 1993), and in receiving help (Benson et al., 1976). Particularly, Hakim (2010) specified erotic capital (e.g., sex appeal and attractiveness) as a personal asset similar to economic, social, and human capital and encouraged women to invest in and be proactive in capitalizing on their erotic capital to advance in life "from the boardroom to the bedroom" (p. 2).
Accordingly, self-empowering sexualization may have a meaningful influence on sexual harassment for several reasons. As self-empowering sexualization is motivated by power and intent to gain a foothold over men, women who practice it may not be seen as susceptible to being targeted. Perpetrators may also believe that their attempts will not be successful, because self-empowering sexualizers actively present themselves that they have agency over their sexualization. Therefore, unlike selfsexualization without clear intent, we posit that self-empowering sexualization may not be linked with a greater degree of sexual harassment or body shame. Thus, we propose Hypotheses 1 and 2 to explore the direct effects of the two forms of self-sexualization (i.e., power and non-power self-sexualization) on sexual harassment and body shame. Meanwhile, we propose Hypothesis 3 to examine the effect of sexual harassment on body shame. Hypothesis 1 Self-empowering sexualization will not increase (a) sexual harassment and (b) body shame.

Hypothesis 2
Non-power self-sexualization will increase (a) sexual harassment and (b) body shame.
Hypothesis 3 Sexual harassment will mediate the effect of self-sexualization on body shame.

Role of Age in Sexual Harassment
Age is a risk factor in sexual harassment (Rolfe & Schroeder, 2020). Many researchers reported frequent sexual harassment experiences among women during their adolescence and young adulthood (e.g., Eom et al., 2015;Romito et al., 2019;Romito et al., 2017). Compared with university students, high school students are more tolerant of sexual harassment (Bogart et al., 1992;Foulis & McCabe, 1997) and experience an increase in sexual harassment as they develop physically and begin to initiate romantic and sexual interactions (Petersen & Hyde, 2009). As they age, high school students become more sensitive to and less tolerant of sexual harassment (Foulis & McCabe, 1997). Furthermore, compared with young women, older women are less receptive to sexually toned behaviors (e.g., shoulder squeeze, arm around a shoulder, and winks) and more likely to label such behaviors as harassment (Colarelli & Haaland, 2002).
Although younger women are less sensitive to sexual harassment and more likely to tolerate such experiences than older women, it does not mean that they experience less harassment or are immune from harm. In fact, young women are the most vulnerable group. According to the US nonprofit organization Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN), younger women are especially at risk of sexual violence, and sexual assault victims are mostly under the age of 30 years (RAINN, 2022). In view of the vulnerability of young women, their self-sexualization, including self-empowering sexualization, may lead to high risk of sexual harassment and its negative consequences. Regardless of their intention to gain power, they are at the highest risk of sexual violence. Moreover, young women's projection of power in their sexualization may not be perceived as empowering or sufficiently powerful because of their young age. According to Arnett (2000), individuals in emerging adulthood, from their late teens through their twenties, are demographically and subjectively distinct such that they are currently exploring their identity and direction in various life possibilities, such as love, work, and worldview. Their intention, through self-sexualization, may not be firmly established, which may lead to a low projection of power. Therefore, we explore the influence of age in the examination of the effects of self-sexualization on sexual harassment and body shame and propose the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 4 Age will moderate the effects of self-sexualization on (a) sexual harassment and (b) body shame.

Data Collection Procedures
Data were collected from a sample of panel members enrolled in Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). MTurk is a crowdsourcing platform where panel members can complete a survey for compensation and widely used for online data collection owing to its low cost compared with other research firms (Brandon et al., 2014) and broader reach to diverse populations (Behred et al., 2011;Buhrmester et al., 2011;Smith et al., 2015). Most important, its online anonymous nature increases participants' comfort while reducing pressure to provide socially desirable responses (Shapiro et al., 2013). From the MTurk site, potential participants read the research invitation, including a brief introduction and a web link to an online survey. When the potential participants clicked on the survey link, a full informed consent page appeared. The participants were required to acknowledge that they read and understood the information on the page and gave their consent to participate in the study. To participate in the study, a participant must be an English-speaking American woman, 18 years of age or older, and have passed the three attention check questions mixed in with the questionnaire items, evaluating her attention to the survey. The participants were informed that they could withdraw from the study at any time.

Measurements
An online questionnaire was created to measure four variables adopted from previous studies. Self-empowering sexualization was assessed with the Sex is Power Scale, which measures an individual's feeling of empowerment by using her sexuality (Erchull & Liss, 2013). A total of five items were scored on a six-point Likert-type scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." Examples of the scale items include "I use my body to get what I want" and "My sex appeal helps me control men." The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.931. Non-power self-sexualization was assessed with the Sexualizing Behavior Scale, which measures an individual's intention to engage in sexualizing behaviors (Nowatzki & Morry, 2009). Unlike the Sex is Power Scale, the Sexualizing Behavior Scale only measures the intention to engage in self-sexualization without accessing the underlying motivation. The scale contains 10 activities relevant to sexualizing behaviors (e.g., wearing clothing labeled "porn star," taking part in a wet T-shirt contest, dancing provocatively, and flashing breasts) mixed in with 10 activities classified as adventurous (e.g., caving excursions and bungee jumping). A five-point Likert-type scale was used to score the items, ranging from "very likely" to "very unlikely." The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.950.
Nonphysical sexual harassment by strangers and acquaintances was assessed using a subset of the modified version of Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (Fitzgerald et al.1995) used by Fairchild and Rudman (2008). The frequency of nonphysical sexual harassment encounters (e.g., catcalls, whistles, and unwanted sexual attention) were scored on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from "always" to "never." The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.920. Lastly, body shame was assessed using the Body Shame Scale, which measures an individual's feelings of shame when not satis-fied with her body (McKinley & Hyde, 1996). The three scale items were scored on a six-point Likert-type scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." The items include "I feel like I must be a bad person when I don't look as good as I could," "When I'm not exercising enough, I question whether I am a good enough person" and "When I can't control my weight, I feel like something must be wrong with me." The participants' demographic information was collected at the end of the survey. The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.833.

Data Analysis
A two-step approach, that is, a measurement and structural model, was used in this study (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Descriptive analysis, correlation analysis, reliability analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and structural equation modeling (SEM) were conducted using SPSS 27.0 and Amos 27.0. Because the four variables were collected using the Likert-type scale responses and showed non-normal distributions, Spearman's rho for the correlation analysis, principal axis factor analysis, and the Bayesian approach for the SEM were employed to reduce the possible bias in the estimations.

Participants' Characteristics
From the 604 initial attempts to access a survey link, a total of 308 usable data remained after eliminating the responses from those who were not women, below the age of 18 years, not American, and non-English speakers, who failed to pass the three attention check questions, and who did not start or complete the survey. As seen in Table 1, the majority of the participants was Caucasian (69.48%), married (64.29%), received some college education (96.75%), employed full time (75.97%), and had an annual income under $49,999 (49.68%). The mean age of the participants was 36.28 years (ranged from 18 to 71), with a standard deviation of 11.26.

Measurement Analysis
A satisfactory level of reliability was achieved for all the constructs. The Cronbach's alpha values were above 0.833, and the composite reliability values were above 0.836. Convergent and discriminant validity was verified, and the factor loadings were all above 0.693 (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Furthermore, the AVE values were above 0.631, and the square root of the AVE values was larger than the interconstruct correlations (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Structure Model Analysis
Structural model analysis was conducted using the Bayesian approach, with 1,000 samples for bootstrapping. The results of the Bollen-Stine bootstrap method sup-  ported the appropriateness of the model to the data (p = .145; Bollen & Stine 1992;Kim & Millsap, 2014). The results of the CFA also supported the measurement, showing a satisfactory fit: χ 2 = 310.487 (df = 213, p = .000), normed χ 2 = 1.458, RMSEA = 0.039, GFI = 0.919, CFI = 0.984, NFI = 0.950, and TLI = 0.981. The standardized residual covariance between all the measurement items was less than |2|. As shown in Fig. 1, the results of the SEM revealed that the paths from selfempowering sexualization to harassment (β = 0.120, p = .243) and body shame (β = 0.086, p = .507) were not significant, thereby supporting Hypotheses 1 (a) and (b). However, the path from non-power self-sexualization to sexual harassment (β = 0.691, p < .001) was significant, and the path from non-power self-sexualization to body shame (β = 0.265, p = .073) was not significant, thereby supporting Hypothesis 2 (a) and rejecting Hypothesis (b). Finally, the path from sexual harassment to body shame was significant (β = 0.338, p < .001), thereby supporting Hypothesis 3. As presented in Table 3, the bias-corrected 95% confidence interval of the indirect effect   showed that sexual harassment significantly mediated the relationship between nonpower self-sexualization and body shame.
To explore the influence of age, the participants were categorized into two groups: a young group composed of women up to 30 years of age (n = 123, mean = 26.42, SD = 2.62) and a mature group composed of women older than 30 years (n = 185, mean = 42.84, SD = 9.94). The chi-square difference of the paths between the two groups showed that statistically significant differences existed in the path from self-empowering sexualization to sexual harassment, from self-empowering sexualization to body shame, and from sexual harassment to body shame. Between the two groups, no statistically significant differences were observed in the paths from non-power self-sexualization to sexual harassment and to body shame (Fig. 2). The results partially supported Hypothesis 4, stating that age moderates the effects of selfempowering sexualization on (a) sexual harassment and (b) body shame.
For the young group, the paths from self-empowering sexualization to sexual harassment (β = 0.331, p < .05) and to body shame (β = 0.474, p < .05) were significant, and non-power self-sexualization led to sexual harassment (β = 0.498, p < .001). Although the p-value of the path between non-power self-sexualization to body shame was slightly above the 90% confidence interval (β = 0.311, p = .103), it may indicate marginal level of evidence of the significance. The path between sexual harassment and body shame was not significant (β = .-172, p = .290). For the mature group, the significant paths were from non-power self-sexualization to sexual harassment (β = 0.868, p < .001) and from sexual harassment to body shame (β = 0.525, p < .001).

Discussion
Researchers examined several harmful consequences of the imposed or forced sexualization of women, but still little is known about voluntary self-sexualization and its potential effects on women who engage in the practice. The continued exploration of self-sexualization is a timely response to the growing concern about young women's engagement in self-sexualization (e.g., sexting and posting sexualized selfies online) and victimization (Crofts et al., 2015;Lunde & Joleby, 2022). Accordingly, this study contributes to the extension of the literature on self-sexualization by assessing the direct association between self-sexualization and nonphysical sexual harassment by strangers and acquaintances, which may lead to body shame.
This study starts with the question of whether self-sexualizing women, including those who use self-sexualization as a source of power, experience sexualization and its negative outcomes. The findings of this study suggest that the degree of sexually objectified experiences may vary among self-sexualizing women. Nonphysical sexual harassment and resulting body shame could be influenced by the intent for selfsexualization as well as the self-sexualizer's age. While self-sexualization without intent to gain power led to increased sexual harassment incidents and body shame, as shown in previous studies (e.g., Choi 2021;De Wilde et al., 2021;Ramsey et al., 2017;Stuart & Kurek, 2019), the mature women's self-sexualization as a source of power did not lead to increased sexual harassment experiences nor increases body shame. However, unlike the mature women's self-empowering sexualization, the young women's self-sexualization, with or without intent to gain power, led to more sexual harassment experiences. These findings emphasize the necessity of further examining the layers of self-sexualization and its different effects on women.
The effect of self-empowering sexualization versus non-power self-sexualization can be explained by the power dynamics in sexual harassment. From the perspective that sexual harassment is about power and control (Kearl, 2010), it is possible that the mature women's self-empowering sexualization may not fit the image of potential low-power victims, whom perpetrators can target easily. As such women control sexual tensions to gain power, their self-sexualization is on their terms, and they may be perceived as holding power. In contrast, when self-empowering sexualization is practiced by the young women, it could increase their vulnerability to victimization on top of the already high rates of sexual harassment they face (e.g., Eom et al., 2015;Rolfe & Schroeder, 2020;Romito et al., 2017). One possible explanation is that the projection of power may be perceived differently by age. For example, young women's self-empowering sexualization may not be seen as powerful, and their projection of power may be disregarded because of their young age. Furthermore, par-ticularly in the case of street harassment, as a game played specifically by men for other men (Quinn, 2002), male perpetrators may prefer young women as their game target for peer approval as well as to avoid embarrassment from potential retaliation or confrontation. Further research is required to better understand how age and power dynamics intersect with self-sexualization in the context of sexual harassment.
Despite the strong support for the harmful effects of sexual harassment (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997;Hayes et al., 2021;Lindberg et al., 2007), we found no significant path from sexual harassment to body shame for young self-sexualizing women. Instead, we observed a direct effect of self-empowering sexualization on body shame among them. In other words, the young women who self-sexualize reported experiencing a high degree of sexual harassment, but such sexual harassment incidents did not lead to body shame. It is possible that individual differences account for the varying responses toward harassment (Fairchild, 2010), and the young women's reaction to nonphysical sexual harassment from self-sexualization may be relevant to factors other than their feelings of shame toward their bodies. One possibility is that they may respond positively to nonphysical sexual harassment resulting from selfsexualization. Some evidence suggests that some women deem nonphysical harassment (e.g., catcalling, whistles, and stares) as a compliment and enjoy the attention (Fairchild, 2010;Gardner, 1995;Grossman, 2008;Sue 2010). When women intentionally display their sexuality, men's sexualized attention may be interpreted as a sign of success of their sexual presentation. The likelihood of feeling complimented increases if the perpetrators are young and attractive (Fairchild, 2010;Larocca & Kromrey, 1999).
Another possibility is that the young women may response to sexual harassment with negative emotions such as anger or contempt towards the perpetrator, which may not relevant to feelings of shame. According to attribution theory (Weiner, 1986(Weiner, , 2018, when people seek to understand the reasons behind an event or behavior, they will attribute it to an individual's internal quality (dispositional attribution) or to an external situation outside of the individual (situational attribution). When women attribute sexual harassment to their self-sexualization, they may internalize the issue (self-blame; Adhikari & Husain 2021), which can lead to body shame (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997;Shepherd, 2019). However, when women attribute sexual harassment to a situation or perpetrator, they may externalize the issue (other-blame) and experience other-blaming emotions such as contempt, anger, and disgust (Rozin et al., 1999). If young women tend to attribute situational factors to sexual harassment more than dispositional factors, then the nonsignificant path between sexual harassment and body shame in relation to self-sexualization can be explained. However, this interpretation should be made with caution and may only apply to nonphysical sexual harassment, requiring further investigation into the influence of age.

Limitations and Future Studies
Regardless of how women use or communicate their sexuality, no woman has ever asked for its negative outcomes. However, in a society in which the female body is objectified, self-sexualization without clear intent to gain power may increase the risk of unintended effects, such as street harassment and body shame. The findings of this study indicate the need to uncover the various intentions for self-sexualization as well as their different effects. In addition, evident in the significant moderating effect of age, consideration of the age factor in self-sexualization is required for future studies. Specifically, the influence of age on the acceptance of sexual harassment as a compliment can be explored. Understanding the role of age using attribution theory (self-blame vs. other-blame) can also deepen our understanding of the interpretation of self-sexualization effects.
We acknowledge that our study illustrates only a fraction of the complicated nature of sexuality and human interactions. We explored nonphysical sexual harassment by strangers and acquaintances and body shame as effects of self-sexualization. Future studies may explore other forms of sexualization as well as health outcomes to further understand self-sexualization. Furthermore, we focus only on adult women. As sexualization can occur to any gender, future studies may investigate individuals from diverse demographic groups.
Given that sexual harassment experiences can increase self-objectification (Davidson et al., 2015) subsequently increase body shame (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997), it is worthwhile to investigate self-objectification in relation to sexual harassment. However, we did not include a measure of self-objectification in this study. This is because the manifestation of self-objectification, which is often measured by body surveillance, can be due to their greater interest in their appearance as they actively present their bodies in a sexual manner. Therefore, it is possible that self-sexualizing individuals may monitor their appearance more frequently than non-self-sexualizing individuals, regardless of sexually objectified experiences. Nonetheless, considering the perspective that self-sexualization can involve the internalization of sexually objectified experiences (e.g., McKenney & Bigler 2010;Ward et al., 2016), exploring the relationship between self-sexualization and self-objectification remains an important area for future research.
Additionally, the reported frequency of nonphysical sexual harassment was based on self-reported answers and may vary depending on how individuals' perceptions, tolerance, or sensitivity to sexually objectified encounters, which may differ from the actual number of encounters. Also, investigating how self-sexualizing individuals differ in their responses to sexual harassment may bring additional information in understanding the self-sexualization and its effects. Moreover, we did not measure the degree of power presentation of self-empowering self-sexualization. An experimental study that compares the levels of power projection of self-sexualization in relation to sexually objectified comments would be a valuable future study. Finally, the expression and acceptance of self-sexualization are influenced by culture. Therefore, the findings of this study may only apply to English speaking Americans and may not be applicable to other cultures or countries because cultural differences play a role in shaping individuals' experiences of self-sexualization and its outcomes.
Author Contributions D.C. and H.L. contributed to the study conceptualization and design, data collection, and data analysis. D.C. wrote the manuscript with support from H.L., J.K., and J.L.

Declarations
Competing Interests All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethics Approval
The study was carried out after permission to use human subjects in the research was received from the Old Dominion University review board .

Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.