Posts filed under 'sexualization'

Calvin Klein, this is NOT better.

As Nikki reported yesterday, Calvin Klein had posted a “sex orgy” ad in New York’s SoHo neighborhood. Was I irked? Yes, of course, but I wasn’t as concerned by the sexual content as I was by the sexualization (the using of sexual objects) of ALL of the models, not just the woman. So when they decided to put this one

up in its place, I didn’t breathe a sigh of relief, like some of the people interviewed for other news outlets.

Calvin Klein, this isn’t better. It’s a sexualized image of a woman, drawn large on a billboard and meant for us to lust over or envy. The idea is that this will pacify the angry masses while still keeping it slightly provocative, which is Calvin Klein’s brand history. But why aren’t we all up in arms about this one? Because we are so used to this type of image — hypnotized into thinking it’s normal — of a woman in a bikini. “Sex sells” after all, and “sex” always refers to women’s sexuality, cheapened up and used for a male-dominated culture’s titillation. But post a huge image of half-nude, sexualized women with men, and everyone loses it.

By “everyone,” I mean the news media reporting on it like crack fiends and the Christian right (who may have been responsible for getting this ad taken down) getting their panties in a twist because their children are being corrupted.

So now, I’m going to call LOUDLY for the removal of this ad too. And all the ads like it. Because women deserve better.

- Jennifer

2 comments June 26th, 2009

Calvin Klein’s Shock and Awe Campaign

Calvin Klein has built a fortune on controversy. From the suggestive 1980s commercial where a then-14-year-old Brooke Shields seductively looked into the camera and admitted to going commando, to the Secret Obsession fragrance ad depicting a naked, nipple-baring Eva Mendes (the ad was later banned from TV), Calvin Klein has always branded his product with the suggestion of sex presented in a way to shock the viewer.

Now, the world-famous jeans corporation is stirring up debate with its latest ad campaign involving a billboard in New York’s trendy, stroller-friendly SoHo neighborhood.

Calvin Klein's provocative billboard on Houston Street and Lafayette Street in New York

Calvin Klein's provocative billboard at Houston Street and Lafayette Strees in New York

The ad in question depicts a very young-looking teenage girl wearing a tiny pair of jean cut-off shorts, laying on top of one half-naked young man and kissing a second young man. A third half-naked teenager lies on the floor next to the three with his pants undone.

What is Calvin Klein selling? Oh, that's right: jeans.

What is Calvin Klein selling? Oh, that's right: jeans.

Asked about the message in the ad, a Calvin Klein spokesman said, “[the] intention was to create a very sexy campaign that speaks to our targeted demographic.” This statement is questionable considering the ad is plastered on a billboard for everyone to see, including children and teens.

Calvin Klein menswear designer Italo Zucchelli spoke out in favor of the ad more fervently. “I think it is a fantastic campaign. That is what Calvin Klein Jeans is supposed to be. Everyone needs to be scandalized and screaming. That is what we want.” Zucchelli went even further to hope the controversial nature of the ads would shock some viewers into spending. “I hope they’re going to be, ‘Ooooh, what is that?’ And then they buy our jeans. In the best tradition of Calvin Klein.”

Whether you find yourself shocked by this particular billboard or not, it raises questions about the messages Calvin Klein’s advertising deems valuable to promote. Calvin Klein deviates from the norm in the respect that highly sexualized images of young men are prominently featured, as opposed to women alone. This billboard of three men and one woman is a perfect example. What kind of statement does this ad make about young women and men as sexual objects? And what kind of impact will it have on the thousands of children and teens who will see it? Shoppers need to answer these questions for themselves.

The hope is that Calvin Klein, as well as other businesses that choose to sell based on shocking imagery, will realize smart consumers are not so easy to manipulate. Calvin Klein is free to target his “demographic,” but this does not include people who disagree with the sexual objectification of women and men, no matter how provocative the ad campaign. A truly smart consumer can see through the sex and shock, and choose to spend their hard-earned money elsewhere.

Contact Calvin Klein, Inc. and let them know how you feel about their advertising habits by either calling or writing a letter to:

Calvin Klein, Inc.
205 West 39th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10018-3102

212-719-2600

-Nikki

*Quotes sourced from here.

Add comment June 25th, 2009

Women in Advertising: Then and Now

For the past few weeks, I’ve seen this link for the 15 Sexist Vintage Ads floating around cyberspace, shared among Facebook friends and highlighted on humor and culture blogs. It takes you to a web site that showcases 15 “sexist” ads from the early and mid-twentieth century. With overtly sexist tag lines like “The harder a wife works the cuter she looks,” “Blow in her face and she’ll follow you anywhere,” and “Men are better than women,” these ads look different from what we’re used to seeing today.

Or do they?

Take a closer look.

In this first group, notice the vintage ad’s placement of the women’s lips and the lipstick. Then notice the similarities to the modern ad. Both ads portray the sexualization of women.

Then and Now

In this next group, notice how both ads portray women as less than human.

Then and Now

In this last group, notice what both ads insinuate — that women are dumb, or should strive to be so.

Then and Now

In both worlds, decades apart, women are portrayed the same: as unintelligent, as submissive, as sexual fiends, and as objects.

Sure, the vintage ads are a little different. Advertisements today don’t have blatant, wordy warnings, stating that if women don’t smell good or feel soft, they risk having their husbands literally not come home that night. But look around. Look at fashion magazines, billboards and TV commercials. The overall message of nearly every single ad is that we women are imperfect and need to strive to keep a man’s attention.

Advertisements — those from 1949 and 2009 — never let us forget that a woman is judged only on the basis of her appeal to men.

And even though we don’t see sexism spelled out, as in the vintage ad that reads, “Men ask ‘is she pretty?’ not ‘is she clever?’ ” we see that sexism when ads continually warn us to slim down, whiten teeth, curl hair, smell better, shave, primp, yet never to — get this — be strong, brave, intelligent, and powerful. In the twenty-first century, women are absolutely still being told to be pretty. Forget clever.

Then and Now

Also, notice the disconnect in the ad on the left: How is spanking a woman at all related to selling coffee?, you might be asking. But I would ask the same thing today of the ad on the right: How is a naked, faceless woman at all related to electronics?!

Furthermore, these vintage ads are nowhere near as sexually explicit as ones today. These ads don’t feature extreme closeups of women’s breasts, butts, and unrealistic and unattainable body images, all to sell a product and make girls feel ashamed. Ads back then may have been sexist, but ads now are sexist and sexually explicit.

So before you pass the 15 Sexist Vintage Ads link onto your friends, laughing at how much things have changed, think again. Have they?

Let us know what you think, About-Face blog readers. Go through the vintage ad web site and About-Face’s Gallery of Offenders to find similarities and differences yourself. Leave your findings and thoughts in the comments.

-Kate

1 comment June 12th, 2009

American Apparel—Objectification of Women made in the U.S.A.

For a company that prides itself on making all its attire in the United States, American Apparel deserves no congratulations when it comes to its ads. American Apparel already has one ad posted in our Gallery of Offenders and the obviously have done nothing to improve there act–they seem to have gotten worse!

Just take a look at these four recent advertisements from American Apparel.

American Apparel Ad for Socks

American Apparel Ad for Socks

American Apparel Ad for Underwear?

American Apparel Ad for Underwear?

American Apparel Ad for ???

American Apparel Ad for ???

American Apparel Ad for Opening in Japan

American Apparel Ad for Opening in Japan

What is the first thing you see in these pictures? Certainly not the apparel. What kind of position are the women in? What are their faces saying? What does it mean when you can’t see her face? Where are the men? What does their absence mean?

What kind of language is used in the advertisements? How do these words reflect the photos in the ads, and how do they connect to the ads’ messages?

Socks and underwear aside, what are the ads really selling?

After rubbing my eyes a couple times and staring at the computer screen with my mouth agape and my face flushing with anger — incidents that are probably happening to you right now — one of the first things I noticed was the candid-photo style of these photographs. The odd lighting, the grainy-ness — doesn’t the style of these photos give you the feeling that the women were unsuspecting subjects in the photos? There’s a sense in the ads that a man is snapping photos of the woman — helplessly left to be the object –and we are lucky enough to voyeuristically view the results. Gee, that makes me want to go buy socks!

So what are the ads actually getting at? American Apparel advertisements — advertisements that are plastered all over magazines and weekly newspapers nationwide — aren’t selling clothes. They’re selling the notion that scantily clad girls in compromising positions are hip. American Apparel caters to a hipster clientele, and the company is equating coolness with sexualized positions, and the idea that it’s okay to treat women as things that should be stared at.

The women have become the products, not the clothing. We’ve all seen the countless advertisements in fashion magazines and on billboards — women in shopping bags, women without faces, women’s body parts taking up the entire photo. American Apparel wants to be trendy, but they need to step away from this current advertising trend. They need to stop objectifying women to sell socks.

Congratulations, American Apparel. You make clothing in a socially sound manner. For that we thank you. Now please stop using half-naked models in inferior positions to convince us all to buy your company’s underwear.

If you’re as furious as me, please send your thoughts to

American Apparel Inc.
747 Warehouse St.
Los Angeles, CA 90021
United States

Or contact them directly on their website by clicking here.

-Kate

7 comments May 18th, 2009

A Brave Step for Mainstream Rap: Webbie’s “Independent”

If you have seen popular music videos recently, you know that women are often wearing little clothing and dancing provocatively around men. The lyrics to these songs can be just as oversexualized, if not more so. Although there is no shortage of music featuring women in these second-class roles, there is a brave new popular rap song and video that goes in a new direction.

That song is “Independent” by Webbie. Despite the fact that the song focuses mainly on material objects (i.e. money, flat-screen TVs, and cars), the overall message of the song is that independent women are strong and can take care of themselves. It is refreshing to see a male artist unabashedly come out with a music video that depicts women in a positive light. My favorite line in the song is:

She’s got her own house, she’s got her own car, two jobs, work hard, you a bad broad.

The song’s music video has a similar empowering message. The video shows women in classrooms studying current events and dreaming about their futures. Women are shown as doctors, business executives, and even the first African-American woman president of the United States.

Click here to watch the “Independent” by Webbie music video

Although this music video has empowering aspects, it still isn’t ideal as far as representing women goes. Women are still shown wearing small clothing and dancing for the camera. I would prefer that women’s breasts weren’t popping out of their clothing when they are in a classroom, but at least they are in a classroom and not a bedroom.  I would also prefer that women weren’t shown as dancing objects in music videos, but the camera isn’t focused solely on her gyrating hips — instead, it is focused on her face.

Is Webbie’s music video the answer to all of our prayers for positive images of women? Maybe not, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.

Webbie's album cover: Savage Life 2

Webbie's album cover: Savage Life 2

If you want to let Webbie know what you liked about “Independent” and encourage him to make more music videos like it, send him a message through his MySpace page.

- Ashley

Ashley Yee has worked with elementary-school-aged kids for more than three years and will be a graduate student this coming fall. As a former About-Face intern, Ashley strongly believes in empowering girls and women through educating them and boosting their self-esteem. Ashley worked on the About-Face Yay Scale campaign in July 2008.

3 comments April 10th, 2009

Previous Posts