Advertising media and feminism

The developments in pop culture and its impact on feminism are definitely most prominently visible in the form on mass communication and media. Furthermore, advertising is the most widely used pop culture item and it is seen almost everywhere in tabloids, magazines, television commercials, billboards and also movies.

In the recent times advertisements have  been successful in creating a stereotype on how women need to be portrayed to sell products. Advertisements in the modern world have become the key to defining the codes of sexuality and sensual-ness. Feminism is being routinely disparaged and the way women are depicted is leading to the disempowerment of feminism.

The purpose of ads is to convey to the audience why and how the specified product would make their lives better, luxurious and be a good use of their hard- earned money. But these days, this very purpose is dissolved by ads that only play with the human minds and as Ziesler mentions in her book revolve around themes pertaining to male gaze. Though, the male gaze in the recent times is also applicable to women seeing themselves through the eyes of men, it is still the male that is the watcher of the woman depicted to be no more than a sexual and erotic object. Like John Berger said, the sexualization of women in advertisements is not helping in bridging the inequalities of gender but is reassuring men of their sexual power and at the same moment denies any sexuality of women other than the male construction.

LEVI'S jeans clothing ad

Drugs, sex and violence are the three prominent things that sell the most these days and advertisements leave no stone un-turned in displaying their products by linking feminism with these motifs.
In the Sisley clothing ad, the product is being shown as an irresistible drug and the women in this ad as junkies who can’t imagine not living without this particular item of clothing. This ad is targeted for the female audience and gazing at this ad would make them think about and desire the product in the same way the females in it do so. There is not even a tiny message delivered to the audience about the quality or specialty offered by the brand. Another remarkable fact is that the women in this picture have well toned bodies with no blemishes at all, have nicely done hair and are wearing tons of makeup. This is one way in which advertisements have stereotyped the 'perfect' woman.

SISLEY clothing ad

The hunky dory chips ad on the other hand is trying to sell its product using the visions of sex. Let alone the vulgar image with the female showing her cleavage, the caption itself is very provocative and un-necessary for a food product. Men are such beings who can’t resist gazing at the woman in this picture and thus the product too would indirectly appeal to them.We are actually being forced by the ad-makers to gaze at the female's body and not the product itself. Making the model's picture larger than that of the product aids in achieving this goal Another cheap trick seen here  is that the advertisement expects to provoke feminist condemnation as a means of generating publicity. Even this ad is stereotyping the 'perfect' woman with straight-long hair, big boobs and a fit body. Another fact to be noted which would seem appealing to the audience is that the woman is a rugby star which shows a well-empowered woman in the field of sports.

Hunky Dory chips ad

PROVOGUE (for men) clothing ad

Gender inequalities are also  prominent in advertisements. The men have been least effected in the way they are depicted in advertisements. There is minimal vulgarity and shredding of clothes in the ads they are in and also the ads would focus more on the product than on the model displaying it. In the Provogue clothing brand ad  , the male model is well clothed and does not have a perfect look since his hair is a bit ruffled and he does not have a clean shave. Placing a semi-nude man in a woman's place in an advertisement  would be considered atrocious by the audience as it does not satisfy the assumptions of a likely viewer. These assumptions have come up only due to the changes brought by modern day representations in pop culture items.

As we can see in all  these ads, the woman in them have almost no role to play. They are not only the objects of male gaze but also the products that are being bought and sold in an indirect way.I would conclude by saying that, though pop culture items and advertisements in particular play a pivotal role in our daily life, there is a grave need to change the negative way of portrayal of  feminism and to reform the status of women depicted in these forms of mass media.

_________________________________________________________________________________
sources:
levis jeans clothing ad--- http://lh6.ggpht.com/_woUarEGSU5o/S59eoaeFVWI/AAAAAAAAAEM/ZMrulJowpzY/Levis%20Low%20Rise.jpg

sisley clothing ad---https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzoPzDLzpnUbsoOJToYVWalGBhWOMpjab2m37VBXh-MTtrQqnltTI2M0n7LkE6qO_5x5y2rt3rgwf-NpfNc-t-irjLCm1Gr-x2wtm_jjv9R3SzQ3ZY784oE3PeZax6I024Zf64Mo3mBbI/s1600/controverisial+ads+%2528sislye+drug%2529.gif

hunky dory chips ad--- http://www.independent.ie/multimedia/archive/00563/hunky_lib_563306t.jpg

provogue for men clothing ad--- http://api.ning.com/files/Whx*fzpuoP4M6ZnfVXSZrpO08k469eLN2H4*CKPO4uNIxqvjC*ucJzS5Djf3bNUdyFCanem12mhWpS3Js0NHUcB6CQm85XU5/13351_358257930453_862925453_10048494_2386947_n.jpg

Good Insurance For A Man

This is an insurance ad from 2005. I actually laughed out loud when i read it and realized it was real because i thought it was a joke! This ad strongly implies, almost directly states, that the only services a wife contributes to a household are easily measured in monetary value. What's more, it hints at the idea that a sum of money could just totally fill the hole left in a family should something happen to the wife. That is completely absurd! This ad takes the stance of pity for the husband, not because his wife, his lover, his partner, passed away, but because now he has to do her jobs! This is one of the most blatantly sexist advertisements i have ever seen! And they didn't even need a lightly clothed woman to accomplish that.

On top of that, look at the targeted
audience. In the second paragraph the ad refers to "her" as his spouse, as if trying to hide behind some sort of genderless label for the situation. But look back at the title, the picture, and the rest of the ad in general. It is not in any way genderless. It shows a man's job being to provide life insurance for his family. It enforces stereotypical gender roles of the woman and household and children related duties. It shows how "hard" his life will be now that he must care for his child and feed his child and take his kid around. It totally implies that he does none of that while the wife is alive! This idea of sexism is counteracted by the sentence in the second paragraph, "Then consider any income your spouse might earn..." This sentence is the oddity of the ad, since there is such an attempt to make it sound genderless and applicable to either family member of a two income marrage, but this is just a feeble attempt to appear slightly less sexist than the ad already is. The rest of the ad clearly details "her" duties as the stereotypical woman's duties, not earning money, or God forbid, having a career! This poor attempt at silencing the sexism of this ad was overwhelmed by the raging disparity between men and women the rest of the ad desperately tries to instill.

It should also be noted how the young boy and father appear. To have just lost their wife and mother, they seem overly composed, not crying, not unkempt, just clean and happy as ever. There is no mourning, no depressed mess left behind by a man who has just lost all that was dear to him, just a happy, normal man and his son. It shows the feebleness of women and the strength of men, as well as the financial dominance of men and the duties of a woman. After all, that's what makes great life insurance.

blog assgn. - advertising media and feminism

blog assignment - RA

The developments in pop culture and its impact on feminism are definitely most prominently visible in the form on mass communication and media. Furthermore, advertising is the most widely used pop culture item and it is seen almost everywhere in tabloids, magazines, television commercials, billboards and also movies.

In the recent times advertisements have actually been successful in creating a stereotype on how women need to be portrayed to see products. Advertisements in the modern world have become the key to defining the codes of sexuality and sensual-ness. Feminism is being routinely disparaged and the way women are depicted is leading to the disempowerment of feminism.

The purpose of ads is to convey to the audience why and how the specified product would make their lives better, luxurious and be a good use of their hard- earned money. But these days, this very purpose is dissolved by ads that only play with the human minds and as ziesler mentions in her book revolve around themes pertaining to male gaze. Though, the male gaze in the recent times is also applicable to women seeing themselves through the eyes of men, it is still the male that is the watcher of the woman depicted to be no more than a sexual and erotic object. Like john Berger says, the sexualization of women in advertisements is not helping in bridging the inequalities of gender but is reassuring men of their sexual power and at the same moment deny any sexuality of women other than the male construction. Placing a man in the woman's place would be considered atrocious by the audience as it does not satisfy the assumptions of a likely viewer. These assumptions have come up only due to the changes brought by pop culture in the advertisements. We are actually being forced by the ad-makers to gaze at the female's body and not the product itself. Another cheap trick is that the advertisement expects to provoke feminist condemnation as a means of generating publicity.

Drugs, sex and violence are the three prominent things that sell the most these days and advertisements leave no stone un-turned in displaying their products by linking feminism with these motifs.

As we can see in these ads, the woman in them have almost no role to play. They are not only the objects of male gaze but also the products that are being bought and sold in an indirect way.

In the Sisley clothing ad, the product is being shown as an irresistible drug and the women in this ad as junkies who can’t imagine not living without this particular item of clothing. This ad is targeted for the female audience and looking at this ad would make them think about and desire the product in the same way the females in it do so.

The hunky dory chips ad on the other hand is trying to sell its product using the visions of sex. Let alone the vulgar image with the female showing her cleavage, the caption itself is very provocative and un-necessary for a food product. Men are such beings who can’t resist gazing at the woman in this picture and thus the product too would indirectly appeal to them.

On the contrary, men have been least effected in the way they are shown in advertisements. There is minimal vulgarity and shredding of clothes in the ads they are in and also the ads would focus more on the product than on the model displaying it. 

I would conclude by saying that, though pop culture and advertisements in particular play a pivotal role in our daily life, there is a grave need to change the way feminism is being negatively impacted and to reform the status and potaryal of women depicted in these forms of mass media.

“woman displayed as sexual object is the leit- motif of erotic spectacle" - mulvey.

There are no ugly women only poor women

Most of the times we believe our ideas are our own ideas. We believe they belong to us. But once in a while, we realize that what we have been thinking for a long time is not actually ours but from everybody else. It’s the same thought that your friend, your neighbor or you classmate has.

What’s the reason for us to first hate a pair shoes or a purse when we first see it and then, after seeing it hundreds of times, start to loving it and wanting to have one? Is Pop Culture making us believe beautiful women are related with wearing high heels and make up or having, big boobs and long hair? Since when did we start to “praise” what sometimes turns into artificial women? Plastic Women? Since when did we start to believe that “Everyone accepts plastic? Are these behaviors the effects of Pop Culture?

The picture above is an advertisement of the First Season of a series named Dr. 90210. When I see this image the emotions I feel are, first, envy and then curiosity. Not only do I envy the woman’s great body but what she is living at the exact instance she is being photographed. She seems so relaxed and to have such an easy lifestyle that it is somehow saying, that the only thing you need in life is a great body… and if you don’t have a great body, then, enough money to buy one.

This image is clearly directed to teenagers and young adults who enjoy media and are immerse in pop culture. In other words, it is focused on people who are likely to watch this series. Evidently, not all the people who watch this show are teenagers or young adults, but they definitely make the vast majority of its audience and they, most likely than not, share a taste for “pop culture”.

When I see this type of advertisement, the first thing that comes to my mind is a day when my classmates and I were in our Philosophy class and my teacher asked us to define the concept of beauty. Many said that the “beautifulness” of something was in the eyes of the person looking at the object and not in the object itself. However, when we started discussing about the beauty of women there was one girl who raised her hand and said: “There are no ugly women just poor women”.

Many of my friends alleged it was the most stupid affirmation ever and I didn’t know what to say. “Stupid” was not the word I would use to describe the comment. The affirmation itself was neither stupid nor ridiculous, as a matter of fact it was so truthful that it was hard to admit it, but the whole background it was based on was, in fact, stupid.

The characteristics of the women in the advertisement are usually the ones that define a woman as “pretty”. When a girl sees an advertisement like this, she would probably say “I want that body” and since that body she wants is on the cover of a series related to plastic surgery, she is probably going to say, “If I get plastic surgery, I’ll have that body”. But this is not for free. It is simply unthinkable to get a plastic surgery without spending a couple of thousand dollars on it, or to have a nice body without spending a couple of hundred dollars a year on a gym membership, just to name a few examples other than the one of the picture.

But sometimes having a “nice body” goes beyond just “looking pretty”. Most of the times are related with success, with luxuries and with money. Is it really probable that a “poor” woman would be lying on a bench while taking the sun, enjoying a pool and looking so good while doing so? (Not to mention that this woman is supposed to be in Beverly Hills) No, it’s not.

Furthermore, the woman on the picture doesn’t look really human… She looks more like a Barbie, yes… like a plastic doll. Since when do we like plastic so much? Is it because it’s so easy to manage? Or maybe because it helps to se images as a man would see them, and men want to see women as objects. They say an image says more than one thousand words. Well… maybe a video says more than one thousand images and this is why I want to show the following video:

The previous video was the propaganda for a series launched in Colombia about five years ago. The title of the series was “Sin Tetas No Hay Paraiso” (There is no paradise without big boobs). I believe the objectification of women and the “plastic women” style, that’s being so popular lately, couldn’t be more evident. Both, the picture of the American Series and the Video of the Colombian telenovela, want to depict women as objects and they want to make women believe everything they need to have a great body is plastic surgery and as a recompense for their investment they’ll have a “dream” life with cars, mansions, spas, jewels and other luxuries.

When I say investment I really mean it. There are thousands, if not millions of women, who pay millions of dollars every year on plastic surgery. They want to become dolls because, in a way, they’ll have the life they have always wanted to have. It’s like a cycle; you need money to become pretty, but once you are pretty (or plastic looking) you’ll get a rich husband (in the context of the video this “rich husband” is 90% likely to be a drug dealer) who is going to give you all the money you need to continue looking pretty, and so on, and so on. You just need to look good and be quiet or… object like.

The video clearly shows that the women should not only look as dolls, but they should also act as dolls. Isn’t this the same thing the advertisement of the 90210 series is telling us? They are both stating that women should be there just to be looked at and as a reward they’ll have luxuries.

It seems that no matter where we look, no matter where we live, no matter who we are, pop culture is always going to be there. It is always going to be part of our lives and it seems it is always telling us “pretty women are this way and they most spend thousands of dollars a year to be that way”. At least this is what this advertisement is trying to make us believe.

_____________________________________________________________

Sources:

Elena. “ScienceDaily: Makeover Shows Correspond With Increased Body Anxiety”. http://aseachange.com/blog-illusionists/2009/01/sciencedaily-makeover-shows-correspond-with-increased-body-anxiety/. 26 Jan. 2009. Web. 19 September 2011.

“Sin Tetas No Hay Paraiso Intro Telenovelas Caracol TV”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiblDubSvnk&feature=related. 2 Nov. 2010. Web. 20 September 2011.