This is a post mainly about infantilization in advertising.
This was first brought to my attention by my mother, who, while we were walking through an exhibition of photography from the 1980's, told me how she mourned the loss of pubic hair. She echoed the sentiment of Alan Davies, her favorite comedian and permanent QI panelist, and how he "fondly remembers the days of pubic hair".
As Jean Killbourne says, in her film Killing Us Softly 4, infantilization of women has become the newest thing in ads. More and more photographs are showing models who look young, or dress like young women. They seem innocent and weak compared the dominant men photographed in advertising. This culminated in the most disturbing ad I've ever seen, which had a girl who could not have been over 12 holding her teddy bear. This line reads "Who knew innocent could be so sexy?". Its an ad for ointment.
I want to approach this in two parts. Firstly: Since when was it socially acceptable to say that 12 year olds are "sexy"??? Did I miss the memo, or has something changed. I thought that was pedophilia... but I could be wrong. Secondly, this is greatening the age divide even earlier: Know even 18 is too old, and you need this ointment to look sexy, because it is so restorative. This ad really makes me sick, and I believe it paints a horrible view of feminism. I hate it and everything it stand for. Its is disgusting.
Lastly, I was watching a song by the comic Tim Minchin, entitled "If I didn't have you" and one of the ways he describes a perfect women is one with neck down alapechia. Again, just... gross.
Monday, 23 April 2012
Funniest ad I've seen in a while
I wanted to take a quick second to describe an ad that I saw when I was in Greece last year. It will be fairly quick, because I laughed when I saw it, and have been confused by it's message ever since.
Location of the ad is important. It was a 20 foot tall billboard in the middle of the city. Proudly it hung by the acropolis and parthenon, symbols of society and culture for the last 2,500 years, now sullied by this ad.
The ad was fairly simple: A pair of women's breasts which were fairly large in a yellow bikini. In her cleavage rested a packet of cigarettes. When my brother pointed it out to me, we both burst into fits of laughter at the ridiculousness of the ad, it had nothing to do with the cigarettes, the woman was not smoking them.
I have, since then, been trying to figure out the target audience of this ad. Had I been able to understand the Greek underneath, I perhaps would've been able to solve this problem quicker, as a tagline sat underneath the breasts. Here is my confusion though: Is this ad telling women that if they smoke these cigarettes, they will have breasts like this, which is physically impossible? Or are they telling men that if they smoke these cigarettes they will get to sleep with women who look like this? Or, that men only want to be with women that have large breasts and smoke this brand of cigarette? Or even, that this is the cigarette for women with big breasts. I have puzzled it over in my head for a while, and I can't figure it out. Both seem like very "valid" ways of advertising. Indeed in the film, Killing Us Softly, disembodiment is one of the central ideas in advertising: "we don't need to see the face, just the body", as the filmmaker says, because that is all that it is important.
Now that I think about it more and more, I realize that this ad shouldn't be funny, and my brother and I shouldn't have laughed when we saw it. Now that I understand the power that the media has, and what that ad taught people looking at it. It would've poisoned people's brains into killing themselves in an attempt to look beautiful. What was once the center of progress and democracy in the world is now home to these. Yet, I suppose this shouldn't surprise me, as the current centers of progress and democracy are full of these images as well.
Location of the ad is important. It was a 20 foot tall billboard in the middle of the city. Proudly it hung by the acropolis and parthenon, symbols of society and culture for the last 2,500 years, now sullied by this ad.
The ad was fairly simple: A pair of women's breasts which were fairly large in a yellow bikini. In her cleavage rested a packet of cigarettes. When my brother pointed it out to me, we both burst into fits of laughter at the ridiculousness of the ad, it had nothing to do with the cigarettes, the woman was not smoking them.
I have, since then, been trying to figure out the target audience of this ad. Had I been able to understand the Greek underneath, I perhaps would've been able to solve this problem quicker, as a tagline sat underneath the breasts. Here is my confusion though: Is this ad telling women that if they smoke these cigarettes, they will have breasts like this, which is physically impossible? Or are they telling men that if they smoke these cigarettes they will get to sleep with women who look like this? Or, that men only want to be with women that have large breasts and smoke this brand of cigarette? Or even, that this is the cigarette for women with big breasts. I have puzzled it over in my head for a while, and I can't figure it out. Both seem like very "valid" ways of advertising. Indeed in the film, Killing Us Softly, disembodiment is one of the central ideas in advertising: "we don't need to see the face, just the body", as the filmmaker says, because that is all that it is important.
Now that I think about it more and more, I realize that this ad shouldn't be funny, and my brother and I shouldn't have laughed when we saw it. Now that I understand the power that the media has, and what that ad taught people looking at it. It would've poisoned people's brains into killing themselves in an attempt to look beautiful. What was once the center of progress and democracy in the world is now home to these. Yet, I suppose this shouldn't surprise me, as the current centers of progress and democracy are full of these images as well.
Sunday, 22 April 2012
Grandmother part 3: The face of feminism
This is part 3 of my 3 part series on my two grandmother interviews.
This post is about something very interesting that both my grandmothers alluded to, and which was also mentioned in The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf.
I asked Kevin is she considered herself a feminist. She responded with "No I wouldn't." She said that, although she believes in equality and most of the feminist agenda she did not want to be painted with that brush. She said that feminist were un-lady-like, bad people and generally awful "creatures" and that she didn't want to be that. She said that "I was beautiful, and successful, and I never wanted to be called a feminist to hurt my image". I find it incredibly interesting that a progressive, forward thinking, working woman did not want to be a feminist. Wolf points out the media turning the feminists into a bad thing. Nina said the same thing, that feminists artists were seen as "bitchy, complaining women" and that she could never consider herself a feminist. It's very interesting that the media was so successful. She also laughed when I asked her the question, "But I married a man... I'm not a lesbian". I was confused at first until I realised that she thought feminist meant lesbian.
This post is about something very interesting that both my grandmothers alluded to, and which was also mentioned in The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf.
I asked Kevin is she considered herself a feminist. She responded with "No I wouldn't." She said that, although she believes in equality and most of the feminist agenda she did not want to be painted with that brush. She said that feminist were un-lady-like, bad people and generally awful "creatures" and that she didn't want to be that. She said that "I was beautiful, and successful, and I never wanted to be called a feminist to hurt my image". I find it incredibly interesting that a progressive, forward thinking, working woman did not want to be a feminist. Wolf points out the media turning the feminists into a bad thing. Nina said the same thing, that feminists artists were seen as "bitchy, complaining women" and that she could never consider herself a feminist. It's very interesting that the media was so successful. She also laughed when I asked her the question, "But I married a man... I'm not a lesbian". I was confused at first until I realised that she thought feminist meant lesbian.
Grandmother interview Part 2: Nina Bentley
This is part 2 of my three part series on my grandmother interviews. This one is focusing on the story of Nina Bentley.
My grandmother told me how, growing up her father was an undereducated italian stowaway. He married a younger woman who decided to work to support her carpenter husband. She describes how she used to cross streets to avoid walking by her parents, as she was ashamed of her parents non-traditional family structure. "All I wanted" she described, "was to be a part of a traditional family."
My grandmother told me how, when she met my grandfather, he was the perfect thing for her. She said that he was an army man, and a smart international relations guy.
My grandmother told me how she loved her husband, and wanted to support him in any way possible. He wanted a traditional wife, which was all she wanted to be. "We were well-fitted" she said. She became an artist and a mother, trying to raise her kids to be the best people possible. These two things dominated her life for a long time, and when she moved to Zurich she became part of the expat mothers community that dominated social life.
My grandmother told me how that both the expat community and the community in Great-neck where they had lived before required something of her, they needed her to be the perfect housewife. "I had to lay the perfect table, bake the perfect roasts, etc." She was happy to do it as well, because as she said "I wanted to be traditional".
My grandmother told me how, growing up her father was an undereducated italian stowaway. He married a younger woman who decided to work to support her carpenter husband. She describes how she used to cross streets to avoid walking by her parents, as she was ashamed of her parents non-traditional family structure. "All I wanted" she described, "was to be a part of a traditional family."
My grandmother told me how, when she met my grandfather, he was the perfect thing for her. She said that he was an army man, and a smart international relations guy.
My grandmother told me how she loved her husband, and wanted to support him in any way possible. He wanted a traditional wife, which was all she wanted to be. "We were well-fitted" she said. She became an artist and a mother, trying to raise her kids to be the best people possible. These two things dominated her life for a long time, and when she moved to Zurich she became part of the expat mothers community that dominated social life.
My grandmother told me how that both the expat community and the community in Great-neck where they had lived before required something of her, they needed her to be the perfect housewife. "I had to lay the perfect table, bake the perfect roasts, etc." She was happy to do it as well, because as she said "I wanted to be traditional".
Grandmother interview part 1: Kevin Garland
This will be a three part series about my two different
grandmother interviews I conducted with my two grandmothers. This first bit is
about my maternal grandmother, Kevin.
My grandmother
told me about how she was named "Kevin" because her father had originally
wanted a boy for a child, not a girl. She told me about how she had to work to
put herself through college, because her father did not want to "waste his
money on a woman's education".
My grandmother
told me how she was a "Canadette", the Canadian version of a
"rockette", and was, as my grandfather described it "incredibly
beautiful". She was one of the chorus dancers for many years, including
time into her motherhood.
My grandmother
told me how, even after she was married and had my aunt, she didn't want to be
a suburban mother, a typical 1960's woman. She thought, and I believe correctly
so, that she was smarter than that. Even after having my mother, and my
grandfather's growing success in banking, she did not want to stop working. So,
she returned to graduate school, and received a master's degree in
Urban Planning. She went on to work at many different establishments and become
quite powerful in the business world of Toronto. My grandfather
described how he was "pleasantly surprised" by her new
initiative, because he "always wanted her to be [my mom], you know,
darning socks, making food... a typical house-wife," but now he says that
he "couldn't imagine a world without such a wonderful, driven, intelligent
woman to share [his] life".
My grandmother
told me about one of her most difficult decisions. When my grandfather was
transfered to Zurich for work, she had to decide whether or not to go with him.
A seemingly typical decision for the father at ASL to make, she said that few
of her female friends had any idea what a choice like this might be like. She
chose to stay in Toronto to continue her professional career, and spend every
other week with her family. "It was tough" she said, "but I had
to do it".
She is truly an
inspirational woman who fought against great odds, and has inspired me
personally. Although her struggles will be very different than mine, she will
inspire me forever. She was recently put in the top 50 most powerful women in
Canada, and indeed ahead of her time.
Madmen sexism part 2: Season 2
This is part of a series on the show Madmen, and its treatment of the issue of gender in the 1960's.
This post will focus on Peggy Olson and Roger Sterling, with some mention of Don. This may contain spoilers if you haven't seen the show.
Peggy Olson, who proudly graduated from a secretarial college is an example of two things in the 1960's. Firstly, her circumstances represent the tough situations facing women, and I believe her actions represent the very beginning of the re-birth of feminism. She begins as a secretary and is dominated by the men in the society. She has very little power in her society and is generally kept down, not only by the men who work at the office, but also by the women. When she doesn't mindlessly agree to Joan Holloway's requests, and tries to prove herself, she incurs Joan's wrath through subtle methods. Joan advises her, in a very pointedly mean statement that "This isn't China, there's no money in virginity" attacking her apparent "purity". She becomes a copywriter at the end of season 1, and is quickly attacked by her old colleagues. For example, when a copy machine is bought by the building, the secretaries angrily store it in her office. She has to fight to get a new office that is her own, and is attacked when she does that. Furthermore, when she goes out to a bar, people expect her to go home with whatever guy asks her, because she is a woman. Yet, she has advanced in society. She has been able to gain power and raise her status in society, something which hadn't happened in since 1945 at Sterling Cooper.
Roger Sterling offers another interesting view into the 1960's. He is a misogynist generally. He is often dismissive of his wife, and has constant affairs with the young women who either work at the office or come to the office to audition. He uses women fairly constantly, to the point at which he has a heartattack. His then great heartfelt revelation to his old love affair other than is wife is "Look, I want to tell you something because your very dear to me and I hope you understand it comes from the bottom of my damaged, damaged heart. You are the finest piece of ass I ever had and I don't care who knows it. I am so glad I got to roam those hillsides." This is a fairly dramatic, and yet still sexist comment, and his great expression of love.
Don offers another interesting view into the sexism in the world. Don's affairs had, for a long time, been private and confidential, yet acceptable. When the later came to light, Betty felt betrayed and left him. It was only until she became pregnant that she accepted him back. I believe that this proves both bad and good things about the society. As a good thing, it shows that women had power in relationships and could do what was right. But, it also shows the female dependance on men, and how Betty needs Don to be able to survive.
This post will focus on Peggy Olson and Roger Sterling, with some mention of Don. This may contain spoilers if you haven't seen the show.
Peggy Olson, who proudly graduated from a secretarial college is an example of two things in the 1960's. Firstly, her circumstances represent the tough situations facing women, and I believe her actions represent the very beginning of the re-birth of feminism. She begins as a secretary and is dominated by the men in the society. She has very little power in her society and is generally kept down, not only by the men who work at the office, but also by the women. When she doesn't mindlessly agree to Joan Holloway's requests, and tries to prove herself, she incurs Joan's wrath through subtle methods. Joan advises her, in a very pointedly mean statement that "This isn't China, there's no money in virginity" attacking her apparent "purity". She becomes a copywriter at the end of season 1, and is quickly attacked by her old colleagues. For example, when a copy machine is bought by the building, the secretaries angrily store it in her office. She has to fight to get a new office that is her own, and is attacked when she does that. Furthermore, when she goes out to a bar, people expect her to go home with whatever guy asks her, because she is a woman. Yet, she has advanced in society. She has been able to gain power and raise her status in society, something which hadn't happened in since 1945 at Sterling Cooper.
Roger Sterling offers another interesting view into the 1960's. He is a misogynist generally. He is often dismissive of his wife, and has constant affairs with the young women who either work at the office or come to the office to audition. He uses women fairly constantly, to the point at which he has a heartattack. His then great heartfelt revelation to his old love affair other than is wife is "Look, I want to tell you something because your very dear to me and I hope you understand it comes from the bottom of my damaged, damaged heart. You are the finest piece of ass I ever had and I don't care who knows it. I am so glad I got to roam those hillsides." This is a fairly dramatic, and yet still sexist comment, and his great expression of love.
Don offers another interesting view into the sexism in the world. Don's affairs had, for a long time, been private and confidential, yet acceptable. When the later came to light, Betty felt betrayed and left him. It was only until she became pregnant that she accepted him back. I believe that this proves both bad and good things about the society. As a good thing, it shows that women had power in relationships and could do what was right. But, it also shows the female dependance on men, and how Betty needs Don to be able to survive.
The Beauty Myth vs. Madmen
Note: Sorry for the radio silence, I recently went away on a vacation, and didn't have access to the internet. All the following posts were typed on word documents throughout the trip. They were not uploaded until today because I had problems with Blogger.
This is part of a series on comparisons between the show Madmen and Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth.
I recently watched the first season of Madmen at my brothers recommendation, and for those of you who don't know, Madmen is an AMC TV series about 1960's ad executives on Madison Avenue. It paints a very interesting picture of the life for the wealthy in New York City in the 60's, and I think can open our eyes to some interesting aspects of the beauty myth.
At the beginning of the 1950's, women were supposed to be the homemaker, according to Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth. Wolf writes that the ideal self was the self that "aspires to be a good wife, a good mother, and an efficient homemaker" (66). Before Vogue's Nude Look came into power, this was what was expected of women.
This is evident in Madmen, as Betty Draper, the lead's wife, does very little other than ride horses, raise children and cook for her husband, who often doesn't even come home for dinner. This is all going on, while Don goes into the city, goes to strip clubs and cheats on his wife. Indeed, these double standards are huge, as it is not seen as strange that Don is doing this just because most people are.
Another form of the myth taking place is in Peter Campbell's marriage. In the first episode it is revealed that he is going to marry a woman who he has never met. This lack of closeness in the relationship demonstrates that men were not generally interested in women's personalities but merely wanted a wife to take care of them. To further this, he cheats on her directly before and quickly after the wedding, with Peggy Olson, another worker in the office that he knows.
A further example of the Laissez faire treatment of women comes in the form of Roger Sterling. The generally misogynistic boss, who confides in Don to "remember, whenever god closes a door, he opens a dress". This idea that women were merely faceless opportunities to take a run at is followed by most members of the cast. When Roger declares his ever-lasting love for Joan Halloway, the office manager, she, acknowledging the treatment of women says "Just wait, I hear the 61's are almost in." By referring to women as a car to be bought and exchanged for a newer model every year, I believe that Joan demonstrates the feelings of many different people in the early 1960's.
This is part of a series on comparisons between the show Madmen and Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth.
I recently watched the first season of Madmen at my brothers recommendation, and for those of you who don't know, Madmen is an AMC TV series about 1960's ad executives on Madison Avenue. It paints a very interesting picture of the life for the wealthy in New York City in the 60's, and I think can open our eyes to some interesting aspects of the beauty myth.
At the beginning of the 1950's, women were supposed to be the homemaker, according to Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth. Wolf writes that the ideal self was the self that "aspires to be a good wife, a good mother, and an efficient homemaker" (66). Before Vogue's Nude Look came into power, this was what was expected of women.
This is evident in Madmen, as Betty Draper, the lead's wife, does very little other than ride horses, raise children and cook for her husband, who often doesn't even come home for dinner. This is all going on, while Don goes into the city, goes to strip clubs and cheats on his wife. Indeed, these double standards are huge, as it is not seen as strange that Don is doing this just because most people are.
Another form of the myth taking place is in Peter Campbell's marriage. In the first episode it is revealed that he is going to marry a woman who he has never met. This lack of closeness in the relationship demonstrates that men were not generally interested in women's personalities but merely wanted a wife to take care of them. To further this, he cheats on her directly before and quickly after the wedding, with Peggy Olson, another worker in the office that he knows.
A further example of the Laissez faire treatment of women comes in the form of Roger Sterling. The generally misogynistic boss, who confides in Don to "remember, whenever god closes a door, he opens a dress". This idea that women were merely faceless opportunities to take a run at is followed by most members of the cast. When Roger declares his ever-lasting love for Joan Halloway, the office manager, she, acknowledging the treatment of women says "Just wait, I hear the 61's are almost in." By referring to women as a car to be bought and exchanged for a newer model every year, I believe that Joan demonstrates the feelings of many different people in the early 1960's.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)