If you want to sell a pair of shoes, be sure to have a skinny white model with a tan and smooth long legs to wear the shoes. If you want to sell a hat, be sure to have a skinny white model with a tan, flawless skin, and painted make-up on to wear the hat. If you want to sell perfume or cologne, jewelry or a watch, purse or luggage, or even food, be sure to have a skinny white model with a tan, full pouty lips, perky round breasts, maybe a nipple if you are a risky photographer/advertiser, a flat stomach, and a round butt in the advertisement. Disregard the model’s personality, intelligence and educational level, social status, family background, religious and political views, or even her name because those aspects of a human do not enhance or increase sales. Women are objectified and disembodied in advertisements as symbols of sex in order to sell a product that may be, scratch that, is unrelated to the act of sex itself, whether for pleasure or procreation. Not only is the product on display for sale, but so is the model; you buy the product, you buy her. The collage was created to display all the images from only two magazines that objectified, disembodied, and demoralized women in a sexual manner in order to sell a product, encourage charity funds for diseases and animals, and to promote a healthier lifestyle. However consequently, these models sell their bodies to the public, encourage a patriarchal society of female oppression, and promote sexual objectification of women’s bodies.
A problem with our advertising market is that they abuse the image of women as dehumanized sex objects to increase the effectiveness of their advertisement and sales of their products. As to however obvious it is or not that advertisers use sex to sell products, Jhally states, “many commercial messages use images and representations of men and women as central components of their strategy to both get attention and persuade” (253). It appears that it is not the product that we are captivated by, but instead by the scantily clothed model in a seductive pose. Ouellette describes “…the desirability of the model [is] constructed through class-coded signifiers such as exposed cleavage, teased hair, heavy make-up, and flamboyant and suggestive costumes” (123). Ouellette even goes as far as to describe that the models, “appropriate the look of a prostitute…” (124). Now since a product apparently can not sell itself, it requires the aide of unrealistic however idealistic models with “…wigs, false eyelashes, tinted contact lenses, fake beauty spots, false toenails, false fingernails, nose surgery, padded bras, false derrieres and fake jewelry…” which will actually provide the product with a greater chance of selling (Ouellette, 121). Even when a “…cover girl was exposed as a fake [with] her breasts made to appear more alluring with masking tape and Vaseline,” advertisers and companies still profit from this illusion of a sexual woman (Ouellette, 121). Kilbourne reinforces this marketing strategy with the statement that “this mass delusion sells a lot of products” (263).
If you notice in the collage, there is a lack of diversity among the models. There is a reason behind this selection by advertisers. Since advertisers have strict hegemonic standards for their models, there is one type of model that most advertisers deem as non-effective and therefore not profitable: the black model. Higginbotham affirms this blatant standard stating “…the ideal girl is evidenced by the cover models: white, usually blonde, and invariably skinny…[and] there’s a traditional expectation that African Americans don’t sell magazines” (94).
What is amazing about our patriarchal society is that “…the ability of [our] culture to turn women into mere products, [and that] are society encourages women to see themselves as objects” (Hesse-Biber, 44 & 62). According to Higginbotham, even though “some girls criticize the magazines for being too white, too into skinny, and too superficial, but [they] readily admitted to delighting in them anyway” reinforces the patriarchal belief in our society that it is acceptable to objectify women as sex objects even if you may disagree with this exploitation (95). Newman corroborates with this notion that “…we continue to see the stereotypical image of the exhibited woman: the seductive sex object displayed in beer commercials, magazine, advertisements…” (91). Kilbourne determines that “advertisers are aware of their role and …if we looked only at advertising images, this would be a bleak world for females” (258-259). What current and future female models need to stand against is the objectification of their bodies as sexual commodities and not stand against a pole, wall, or an import car. This will be difficult and take time to accomplish because “…our bodies have been objectified and commodified for so long” (Kilbourne, 260).
References
1. Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy. Men and Women: Mind and Body
2. Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy. Selling the Body Beautiful: Food, Dieting, and Recovery
3. Higginbotham, Anastasia: Teen Mags: How to Get a Guy, Drop 20 Pounds, and Lose Your Self-Esteem.
4. Jhally, Sut. “Image-Based Culture: Advertising and Popular Culture.” Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A text reader, eds. Gail Dines and Jean M. Humez. London: SAGE Publications, 2003.
5. Kilbourne, Jean. "The More You Subtract, the More You Add: Cutting Girls Down to Size." Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A text reader, eds. Gail Dines and Jean M. Humez. London: SAGE Publications, 2003.
6. Newman, David M. “Portraying Difference: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality in Language and the Media." Identities and Inequalities: Exploring the Intersections of Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw Hill, 2007.
7. Ouellette, Laurie. "Inventing the Cosmo Girl: Class Identity and Girl-Style American Dreams." Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A text reader, eds. Gail Dines and Jean M. Humez. London: SAGE Publications, 2003.
