Dream Big June 28, 2011

In the world of advertising, we see animals talking, furniture coming to life, and people flying through city streets. These all seem to be out of a fantasy land that does not exist in reality but one that we’ve only dreamed of. In Sut Jhally’s article, Advertising, Gender and Sex: What’s Wrong with a Little Objectification?, the focus lies on gender relation in this alternate reality of ads and why we don’t seem to find it strange. Jhally uses examples brought up by Erving Goffman, author of the book Gender Advertisements, of the depiction of women as children and the notion that gender relations are created by social norms.

In North America, it seems as though people’s sexuality is the most valued element of their identity, it is defined by culture, and it is the central theme of the majority of advertisements seen today. As Goffman points out, there is nothing natural about gender relations and every society has to continually work in order maintain the prototype of what it means to be man or woman. Women are frequently shown in a child-like state, looking weak, and in constant need of comfort and protection, to be provided by the man, of course.

In the Dolce&Gabbana ad, the woman is presented at the lowest point in the shot, lying on the floor, her eyes vulnerable as she looks away from the crowd around her. At the same time, her hips are thrust forward, making this ad slightly ambiguous: is she scared that she is being overpowered by a group of men or is she enjoying the proximity of these four extremely fit and good-looking models? Is she being objectified? Are we presenting her as nothing but a sexual prop in this male-dominated society? Personally, I think this ad is beautiful. It shows a group of very attractive people wearing elegant clothing with a perfect blue sky in the backdrop. What more can you ask for? Now, I’m not saying that this should run in a campaign for something like Costco or Old Navy but for what it is, a high fashion company, I think that it’s tasteful and sophisticated. It may not be an accepted code of advertising if it hangs in the middle of a Wal-Mart in southern Georgia, but in a fashion magazine such as Vogue, I don’t see why not?

Similar to the Dolce&Gabbana ad, many advertisers try to create a realistic image of a world that could be real. Cosmetics companies are now releasing campaigns with actresses from movies and TV shows that we’ve become familiar with instead of models, whose slender legs and full heads of gorgeous flowing hair seem completely unattainable to us. By showing a more familiar face using a certain product, such as that of Ms. Cruz, who we have grown to love in films like Vanilla Sky and the new Pirates of the Caribbean, we feel more connected to them than the realm of supermodels. Trust me, I bought this mascara, and no, my eyelashes did not look like that. Come on now, nobody’s eyelashes are that long! At the same time, there was a part of me that believed that maybe, just maybe, if I used the same brand of makeup as Penelope Cruz, I could have eyes like that. The minor details that I didn’t take into consideration when buying the product (or maybe even purposely chose to ignore) were that I would need a whole new wardrobe, tons of hair extensions, and some good air brushing that Penelope probably got before shooting this ad.

In this land dominated by beautiful creatures such as models and actresses, their reality doesn’t always seem very real to us, does it? By taking our hopes and aspirations, packing them into a photo-shoot or a 30 second commercial, companies are able to sell us
what we dream of. By leaving the specifics out of ads, we are allowed to live vicariously through these nameless, soulless personalities that we strive to be. So then tell me, is portraying a woman to be this striking, flawless, and elegant ‘object’ such a bad thing? This view may no longer agree with the traditional 1950s housewife image, but there is a time and a place for everything.

Moulding Women Into Contemporary Advertising June 26, 2011

In today’s advertising, women are shown to be constantly empowered by everything that they do. It is not the typical depiction of power; women are not necessarily shown as the front-runners in a political campaign, cooped up in a lab, searching for a cure for every incurable disease under the sun, or even saving endangered species in the Amazon. A lot of the time, we see the Sex and the City type women; the ones that go to lunch at classy cafés on 5^th Avenue, the ones that spend $800 on a pair of sparkly Jimmy Choos, or the ones that go get their nails done on their lunch breaks from their fabulous jobs. There has been a shift in power for women today, suggests Rosalind Gill, author of Empowerment/Sexism: Figuring Female Sexual Agency in Contemporary Advertising.

In the 1960s, women began to gain freedom from men, whether it was by showing that a woman does not have to be married to make something of herself, like Mary Tyler Moore did in the early 1970s, or by smoking Virginia Slims, which was formerly unacceptable by society. The image of ‘being a woman’ no longer depended solely on being the good mother or the cook that has dinner on the table for her hard-working businessman of a husband when he comes home every night. Women were strutting confidently in those high heeled shoes that are more painful to wear than any man would ever know, but made her look like a supermodel straight from the runway of Chanel’s spring collection. From this sudden shift in empowerment and what it meant to be a strong, self-assured woman, came three ‘moulds’ that women in advertising were being cast into.

The first, referred to as the “Midriff”, was presented as the young, pretty, and flirty woman who intentionally uses her sexuality to get what she wants, because she knows that she can. When an ad such as the one produced by Wonderbra first appeared in magazines, it created tension. And why wouldn’t it? In an age when a woman was considered to be the caretaker of the household, the one that had the kids’ lunches packed in little brown bags before school every morning, and the one that wore traditional dresses no shorter than her knee, seeing a pouty 20-something in nothing but a black bra on a big billboard would be pretty shocking. And not only that, but she doesn’t care that she can’t cook! Oh, what a tragedy. But I’m sure Wonderbra made record sales that season.

Next was “The Vengeful Woman” persona. This woman was strong, bitter, and out to get payback on that douchebag of a boyfriend that took her car for a spin without permission. The battle of the sexes is very evident in this type of advertising and it looks as though women are getting the upper hand. In the same way as the Virginia Slims ad that says “you’ve come a long way baby”, freedom and empowerment are generated through it, but isn’t it also expressing liberation by giving into consumption? It was said that we are one of the most disciplined societies in centuries, that we get up to work every morning, we obey authority, and do as we are told. Well, most of the time. But then there is the hedonistic, selfish part of us that just wants to spend, indulge, and be as reckless as possible. According to the capitalist theory, for the market to be successful, we need to be ruthless but disciplined. Contradictory? Maybe, but it sells cigarettes!

Last but not least was the “Hot Lesbian”. What used to be under-represented in advertising was now making its way into the mainstream with  no one to stop her. This edgy, slender, and manipulative being strips away the traditional representation of lesbians, which were shown to be butch and robust. Generally, we find the gorgeous lesbian with her identical (yet opposite) double. This image is set out to live up to the male fantasy. According to the common Western perception, it’s a man’s world out there, and women are trying to get their foot in the door. Like any system that’s already working, why would you try and fix it? That would probably be the view of this ‘man-world’ if women decided to step in. As a result, the image of women became one of a sexual or pornographic nature and their identities became reconstructed into a very narrow path. From this came the matter of objectification of women in advertising.

The feminist acts stepped in and said that women are being used as objects to sell things to men. Although it may sometimes push the limits of what is acceptable in, let’s say, middle-America, what’s wrong with a little objectification? Coming back to the topic of the Sex and the City girls, who think of their empowerment in terms of the number of D&G heels sitting in their closets, and the brand names on their jackets, aren’t we taking away from this strong, independent, feminist point of view by claiming power through shopping? These representations may be significantly more sexual than those shown in the 1960s, but they give women
character. They are no longer the perfect, almost robotic, housewives; they are smart, attractive, and powerful objects. This shift may be good or bad, depending on everyone’s personal opinion, but it works. Let it will be, as Madonna said in one of her songs, advertising is only trying to keep up with what is truly happening in our present-day society.

Hello world! June 23, 2011

Welcome to WordPress.com. After you read this, you should delete and write your own post, with a new title above. Or hit Add New on the left (of the admin dashboard) to start a fresh post.

Here are some suggestions for your first post.

1. You can find new ideas for what to blog about by reading the Daily Post.
2. Add PressThis to your browser. It creates a new blog post for you about any interesting  page you read on the web.
3. Make some changes to this page, and then hit preview on the right. You can alway preview any post or edit you before you share it to the world.