Woman Portrayed In Adverts- Sexism?

Ya, Oscars right.
I used to do some volunteer work in the design department of a media/advertisement enterprise.
That was quite interesting. Adds are supposed to trigger our wishes which are closely linked to our feelings and instincts. And indeed, all these pictures of goddess-like models with endless legs and beautiful hair are photoshopped. I did quite a few myself. It's fun to see the "real" pictures though. After working in such a company you become kinda resistant. However, all these sexy women in fashion adds have us "normal" women as target group. Think about that.

celestial12 wrote:

i get annoyed at the sex sells,and i have no idea of how to change this. I absolutely love the dove ad campaign for real beauty and the pro age products that they offer. everytime i see those ads they make me smile. I agree with the catch cry beauty has no age limits, it is one of the truest simplest statements that i have heard.

I despise those Dove ads as they arn't helping the issues of eating disorders and body worries. A woman's not a real woman unless she has a body like the Dove woman? Or is a size 14-16 that's a real woman? Those type of adverts subsequently attack the slimmer woman as not being real women and attack bigger women as not being real women because they don't look like them.

anchoredwunderlust wrote:

people! with the issue of a real woman, unless you gain or drop a chromozone youre a real woman! unless you prefer to identify with the other gender of course

I strongly disagree that modern advertising portrays a "real" woman. Instead, the portrayals usually consist of a fabricated image of women, women's place in society, and women's sexuality, all of which interconnect.

I believe that advertising is often like a societal institution which refuses to accept females as they really are, and instead choose to present airbrushed fantasies. How many females do you see in real life with "perfect" physical equipment, and such an air of submission to male counterparts? Men aren't attracted to hot pieces of butt seen in adverts just because of her physical appearance, but the clear message transmitted that she is nothing more than a docile instrument of his pleasure. Haven't you noticed that the unique nature of female sexuality is often ignored, and instead rebuilt to support male sexuality? (Because, of course, males are the only one with real sexual desire. A woman never wants pleasure for herself, but only to please her man. Oh, unless he needs some validation by gaining her sexual approval.)

Society calls on women to be the observed, while men become the observers. I hate the image that the media continues to perpetrate. Sexuality, and the interrelationships between genders, is now a societal construct. I see a huge problem with this. It appears to be keeping women in a place which is unequal to that of a man because the biggest value she has is her body - not her intellect or moral virtue etc. It's not just media that's targeted at men either. Look at mainstream magazines. The cover of men's 'zines? Scantily clad females. The cover of women's magazines? Scantily clad females. Does anyone see a problem with this? I don't have a problem with sexuality in the media as long as it is portrays equality, I just have serious issues with the "men are dominant/women are passive" mindset.

How about the emotional damage that results? The damaged relationships between genders, the damaged relationship with "real" women and their bodies, and men who are afraid of emotional intimacy with women because all their lives they haven't acknowledged the true nature of the female heart and mind. I don't think true gender equality can be achieved until the media stop this "women are objects" bullshit, because all it's doing is conditioning a new generation of males to think the same way as their fathers and grandfathers.

I am neither agreeing nor am I disagreeing with personal views on advertisements.

I am sure that most women's studies groups/ classes/professors would have plenty to say about this site.  It is all objective as to what you find offensive opposed to artistic and you have to remember who the adds are being barketed too.

look at Joe Camel,  we could have an entire discussion related solely to the falicness of their add campagne.

We gotta be careful discussing ads since what offends one girl will not offend the other. What I have never liked about the current flavor of advertising is the general assumption that I Am Not There. I am of the Young Female demographic--what am I going to do with an ad of a woman-shaped beer bottle geared for the Young Male demographic? The problem worsens because many ads are geared towards this Young Male demographic. This happens because advertisers believe young men have more money than young women and are more likely to make big impulse buys--like cars and electronics. Advertisers know women impulse-buy as well, but they believe it is in small quantities. Impulse-buying a $30 shirt is not the same as impulse-buying a $30,000 car. For the advertising industry, it is still 1950. So, in their heads, it seems to be that my money and my purchases are not good enough. Ford, I believe, still won't run car ads in Ms. magazine because they refuse to meet the publication's standards and won't make a woman-centered car ad!

If you don't believe me, IGN-corporate's "Media kit" page makes for some very interesting reading. There's a media pdf you can download too, which is just more mind-boggling.

http://corp.ign.com/advertising-solutions.html#mediakit <--- Look how they talk about the Young Male Demographic.

"Attracting a monthly audience of more than 35 million* — with the coveted and elusive 18-34 male demographic at its core — our strong portfolio of media properties provides strategic, winning solutions for advertisers of videogames, filmed entertainment, technology, and consumer products."

This is a stark contrast to other staples of advertising, like "Two Cs in a K". (Wiki article ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Cunts_in_a_Kitchen) I mean, wow! What do you say to that? The male group is "coveted" and "elusive", and the female target...?  That commercial-type's still around too! I'm sure we've all seen it more than twice.

And now--I'm gonna hope that link doesn't get me banned. ^^;;

anchoredwunderlust wrote:

Nat07B wrote:

Women are sexy. Why not use that to it's advantage. It gets people's attention and that the whole point of advertising. Why bother to get all offended by it, it's just an advert, it got your attention didn't it? And it's not going to change your views, so what does it matter really.

because adverts are constant. sure theres nothing wrong with each one or being proud of one's own sexuality, but in the long run it rubs off on people's ideas of women in general. just because she finds it empowering to flaunt herself on TV doesnt mean i want to be catcalled walking down the street, or if i choose not to look like that, to be shouted even worse things at. its a combination of a lot of things.

and it isnt just that. you are either sexy or you are the housewife/nagging wife. i actually think these are worse as they put both men and women in their place. the beer swilling footy blokes that are incompetent to do anything without their annoying missus, and the insinuation that you arent a REAL MAN if you arent this way. by showing men to be this helpless youre actually putting a lot of responsibility on women to do everything for them because apparently they can't help it!

plus they are making a bomb putting back the gender divide in products. WOMEN! DONT EXPECT HELP ON A WEDNESDAY/MENS CRISPS OIII/ITS NOT FOR GIRLS, never mind on the kids! their cartoons and ads are even more separated than when i was little. i saw a prittstick "for girls". a small size for the same price as big size because the wrapping is pink. dont even ask most girls these days to watch a boys show:

6 year old girl on sonic: the boy and the girl didnt get married at the end they didnt

Exactly!
Ultimately an ad the portrays men as idiots or women as subservient are both harmful to society as neither is contributting in a positive way.