I remember when several years ago, watching tv with one of my male friends, he pointed out a commercial for something or other where the man was made to look like a dumbass and the woman, probably his wife or girlfriend, swept in to rescue him from his own idiocy, eyes rolling all along. My friend was irritated by this, and rightfully so. He said at the time that men (especially white men) were the only pc option left if you want to make someone look stupid for laughs. Since then, I've been incapable of NOT noticing whenever I see an example of "dumb man has to have wife buy cold medicine for him" advertising, and I get plenty irritated myself. But really, it's not that men are the new Victims, so much...It's that I'm so desensitized to offensive portrayals of women in advertising that I don't even notice it unless I make a conscious effort! So I appreciated Jean Kilbourn's comparison of the super-controversial penis ad with all of the other ads targeting women. Of COURSE people threw a fit about the objectification of the man...We're not used to seeing it. All those other ads just roll off our backs.
Over the past couple of years, I've also started to notice the pairing of average-looking guy with hot-looking woman in commercials, and unlike the glut of other hot-woman ads in magazines and on tv, this has been bothering me quite a bit. The message: Men's worth is not defined by their appearance, therefore we put average guys in the media. But women are still defined by their looks, therefore average guy still gets a super-hot wife or girlfriend. Women are never permitted to be "average." We take it for granted that it's their lot in life to make an extra effort to be physically desirable, and I NEVER see women on television that don't look like they've been grooming furiously. If you're not skinny, you'd damn well better get a good haircut, wax those legs and buy some designer-knockoff clothes.
The gist of the AFL-CIO stats is that women are now as dominant in the workforce as men (although apparently we still don't earn as much). We are now prime audience for advertisers. I find it interesting that in addition to being told to buy makeup, clothes, lingerie, perfume and shoes that will make men want us, we're also being targeted for luxury products. It's an indication that advertisers recognize the increased buying power of women, and that we no longer depend on a man's wealth to get our cars, vacations, homes. Our participation in the high-end workforce makes us independent. And that's why I find commercials like these so disturbing:
and
Are you kidding me? In the first ad, the woman is thrilled with her car supposedly because it proves to men that she's as good as they are -- but we can all see that she's really just thrilled to be such an unexpected turn-on to them. In the second ad, her sole motivator is her sexuality, that whore. Once again, women reduced to sex, but now in the guise of appealing to our independence and wealth.
The thing that's most depressing to me about all of this is the manipulation factor. Not only are women being manipulated furiously by the advertising world -- a topic that's gotten a lot of attention, esp. regarding teen girls and body image -- but we're also being taught TO be manipulative. How do girls get what they want? By batting their eyes, looking pretty and seducing. How do girls dominate other girls? By being the sexiest, the cattiest, drawing the most male attention. No wonder the little girls in the ads are so passive. There's no need to accomplish anything when you need only use your body to manipulate men and get what you want. It's damaging to women AND men, and makes for a shallow society. Teaches girls to be brats and boys to expect brattiness and treat girls with disdain.
No comments:
Post a Comment