Five Sexist Trends the Advertising World Just Can't Shake

This was a big year for women: The first serious female presidential candidate, the first predominately female state senate, the first female Top Chef. Yet the advertising world has not caught up to the advances of half our population and continues to use stereotypes and violence to prey on our most vile desires. Here are the worst of them--the trends that won't die despite our cultural outrage, and personal boredom.

BONDAGE - This year Remy Martin debuted it's "things are getting interesting" campaign that features a mediocre Website and a series of billboards/magazine spreads depicting women in degrading bondage positions. You may think, "hey this one shows two women, there aren't even men involved, how can it be sexist?" But most of the ads (not available online) have men between the two women in controlling positions. And even without that, these women are obviously putting on a show for an outsider, not having a passionate lesbian love affair for themselves. These types of ads gain traction in cultural periods of female advancement--capturing the fantasy of "putting us back where we belong."

Remy Martin describes its followers as "influential, social, and multicultural urban males, ages 25 to 35." Men of this ilk and age range (read: over 16) should know better than to fall for this kind of pandering. If we switch the view from this being sexy, to this being a pathetic attempt to make an undersexed male feel powerful in the face of female accomplishment, the image loses its appeal. I would like to start a "things that are not interesting" campaign, which would include men insecure enough about themselves that they can't talk to women who aren't physically degraded. I would also include cognac.

RAPE -- The world of high fashion has been the worst offender in the violence-as-art game. Cavalli had pirates, Chanel had a wife beater, and now Dolce and Gabbana has this.

Let's get this out there now: It's not edgy, it's ridiculous. This is a gang rape, and any woman that sees those shoes instead of that message deserves those shoes. Any man who doesn't see that this is rape is probably looking at one of the hard bodies in the background and therefore not really a threat to women.

"SLUTS" -- Much like the Calvin Klein ads of the early 90s--you remember the ones that made you feel like you were watching child porn, cause you sorta were--this ad offers a young woman (with the face of a small child) posed in a sexually suggestive manner. They are offering you a virgin in looks and expression, and a slut in the tagline: "You know you're not the first." She's been fucked before--she knows what she's doing. She's been used so you can do whatever you like to her. That's the implicit message of this ad. She's young and nubile, but not prudish. She's the ultimate fantasy: a virgin who won't say no to anything.

This combination of the Madonna and the whore is ultimately a fantasy of degrading both body and mind. This girl is in no way a threat: she's young and won't say no, no one has to offer her anything, she is just there for your needs, just like a car.

GIRL ON GIRL ACTION -- Oh my god is this played out. We get it, some men find the idea of two women together appealing. MTV has reality shows devoted to it, casual and exploitative lesbianism is now a part of our culture. But aren't companies like Nikon supposed to be better than that? They bring us goofy Ashton Kutcher commercials (not that those are okay either) and sponsor the Boston Red Sox (yeah, that's pretty bad too). But they are a staple of the photography world and should be held to a higher standard than Tila Tequila. There are many meanings to the term corporate responsibility and one of them is not to fetishize female sexuality.

CUM SHOTS -- Forgive me that lewd term, but I didn't know how else to phrase it. I can't open a magazine anymore without seeing a thinly-veiled coital moment posing as an advertisement for some sort of beauty product. Jezebel tracked these for a while, rounding up the worst offenders.

The images and tag lines reinforce the idea of women sex receptacle, and therefore simply a receiver of sex, not one engaging in an equal process. This ad reads "I Want You All Over Me," which is as subtle as it is sexy. As Jezebel points out, women like orgasming too, sex is not just about male pleasure, it's a two way road and all of these ads find their own way around that truth.

The fact that these trends are so widespread is not the fault of the advertising world--these people are paid to appeal to our ids, they are often self-aware in their tendency to make the world harder for women, that's the life they've chosen. It is mainstream companies like BMW, Mitchum, Nikon, mainstream publications that host these images, and mainstream readers who use these products despite their appalling treatment of women that are truly to blame. The advertising world reacts to client demands and consumer activity--we have control over only one of those fields.

Follow Alex Leo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HuffPostComedy

Comments

[Eclectic Radical]

I have a problem with broadly labeling fetishistic imagery as 'sexist'. I find most of the advertisements shown to be silly more than malicious and I don't believe (whatever the subliminal effects of advertising may be) that anyone truly takes these ads seriously. Nor do I believe they should be taken seriously, they are akin to adolescent scribbling on the bathroom walls in high school.

I will say this: the Alternative Lifestyle community is the gay liberation movement of the future. Labelling of bondage or group sex as sexist and automatically tarring the latter with the brush of gang rape could be uncomfortable in the future. If and when society finally emancipates its gay citizens as it has its Jewish, black, and female citizens, the people whose 'fetishes' are being bashed as sexist today are the people who are going to be demanding their civil rights. There are people who see the influence of bondage themes on advertisement, mainstream media, and fashion designers as signs of possible future social acceptance for themselves and their loved ones.

[gayleg]

"I have a problem with broadly labeling fetishistic imagery as 'sexist'."

I have a problem for your inability to see objectification as sexist.

It's time to bring back boycotts. This crap is out of control.

[onakalima]

Women are always attacked or challenged when we point out our discomfort or anger regarding the objectification and commodification of other women or ourselves. Rather, we should be lauded for pulling the wool away from everyone's eyes. these ads have NOTHING to do with healthy sexuality.The world of advertisement doesn't care about exploring or nurturing ones sexuality--it is a world that has one concern, making money. Advertising big wigs are using our society's antiquated norms and systems to manipulate the way we feel about ourselves and each other in an effort to MAKE MONEY. Let us not forget that.

[mbsq]

Yes, marketers shamelessly use sex appeal to sell products. But some of the objections to these ads are that they depict situations that are inherently oppressive to women. This is an ignorant viewpoint which has nothing to do with feminism and seeks to marginalize people who have sexual preferences outside the mainstream.

Anyway, where's the outrage over the nearly nude male models in abercromie, CK, american apparel, and hanes ads? Are they oppressive and exploitative with respect to men?

[onakalima]

because we live in a system that has oppressed women for thousands of years--it means something different when men are naked in an advertisement. But I don't think a feminist viewpoint has anything to do with dictating people's sexual preferences. That's not what Alex Leo's article was about and that's not what my response is about. I think it's horrible that any of us get our sexuality or self worth dictated to us by capitalism--men and women alike. Unfortunately, because of patriarchy, advertisements like the ones presented here only compound the idea that women are for sale as objects to be placed and manipulated in advertisements to sell things. Why is it so impossible for people to admit that women are commodified and oppressed? I think it might have to do with the fact that we would all have to shift the way we operate and think of each other--some people might even have to change their lives and give up some power.

Again, this has nothing to do with the ways people like or want to have sex. These advertisements cheapen sex--they make sex meaningless, they put a dollar sign on sex, they exploit it for one purpose only, to get people to buy their product.

[mbsq]

The objections to these ads mostly reveal the person's discomfort with deviant sexuality. Calling a scene suggesting group sex or voyeurism "rape" is either ignorant or dishonest. Suggesting that bondage is inherently evil demonizes the sexuality of many who would consider themselves feminist. This article is not a defense of women. It is an attack on women and men who have sexual preferences that are outside the mainstream.

[jjm87]

SimonNZ, it's NOT just advertising. Advertising is a key part of our culture, and plays a big role in shaping how we view the world. The whole point of advertising is to directly influence the way we think. Isn't it dangerous that these ads are telling us to think in such ugly ways about women?

I found this video in the comments. It's actually really good at summing up what's wrong with these ads.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMVi4xwCuUo

[brooklyncitizen]

Timely post....sick of the slutification of women in AMerica.Women are not just porn images.

[Alexoferrell]

Nothing in the adds is pornographic, so that statement holds no water. I for one am glad that women have the social freedom to express themselves in manners that groups such as the Christian right would disapprove of and condemn in an absolute sense due to an unwillingness to look beyond their own moral perspective.

[SimonNZ]

Take a chill pill. Its just advertising and you're giving it a significance it doesn't warrant.

[Pdubya]

I don't get it. Most of us choose our careers and career moves. If these women feel they have been degraded, maybe get a different agent? If they've sold their principles, then o.k.....what is your beef with men or the "establishment"?

What I see is an elevation in fantasy and its mix with reality. America is a wholly repressed nation, especially compared to the inverse relationship it has with violence. Many cultures laugh at our aghast with sex and sexuality.

In another Huffpo post, Betty Page is lauded. Is that o.k. since she was a Top?

You know how many commercials I see where the male species is degraded? Okay, perhaps his day has come because of America's sexist bent towards women...but compared to the rest of the world? Men obviously know nothing about cooking (save competition shows), know nothing about cleaning, can't keep erect, have no clue about communication, and certainly need to worry as much about their fingernail health and hair color as much as women. It says so on T.V.!

What distubs me more is the disolution of sexuality in some of these commercials. Fembots and Metro-men who could be interchangeable if they both wore shirts.

I say live it up large and loud and point out the fantastic relief many of us find in living out fantasy with mutual consent in the face of insecure repression.

Now I'm ready for the bitchslap.

[Eclectic Radical]

During her career, Betty Page posed as both top and bottom and in blue pictures not depicting bondage at all. What her personal predilections may have been, I do not have the information to speculate upon. That said, I don't think it appropriate to assume that every contributor agrees with every other article here. If Ms. Leo is to be challenged on her post based on a posting conveying a differing opinion, then every post here would be subject to similar challenge. I have disagreements with the post as well, but I don't find that argument really valid. I do agree with your general gist, however.

[pthalomarie]

You don't get it. Just by writing about these ads, you encourage more of them. Talking about these ads creates buzz for the companies involved, and even if you think everyone will look and disapprove of them, the fact is that their products are getting more eyeballsm,, and therefore more sales.

You're fooling yourself if you think that advertisers aren't aware that some segments of the population will be offended by the ads. On the countrary, they're counting on your outrage. The way to make them go away is to ignore them.

[gayleg]

Yeah, I remember when people said the same about porn and Rush Limbaugh. Neither has gone away. In fact both are more offensive than ever.

[Helzapoppin]

Alex - you know, when I read the headline I was all set to come in and say that you were overreacting in a typical hyper-sensitive PC lefty reactionary manner, searching for offenses where they don't exist. Then I saw the examples.

Yep. I stand corrected. You're exactly right.

[Alexoferrell]

I disagree, nevertheless while the author seems to think that her views on the content are absolute, I won't take that route by declaring the content inoffensive in an absolute sense. It is a matter or perspective, and in mine there is nothing overtly offensive about any of the adds.

[brooklyncitizen]

and you are male.

[keckie38]

Wow perfect timing on this one. Just today I read an email a friend sent titled "ads of the 1930's" one of them was an advertisment for Lysol. You know the disinfectant. The ad started with a woman questioning why her husband was indifferent to her, of course it must be her fault because she was not as clean as she should be "for him". The ad suggested she use Lysol as a douche to get that clean feeling. Ewww. The ad was a full page and utterly ridicules. (Not that I am against personal hygiene. I'm a little germaphobic.) My point is....the role women, some woman allow themselves to be cast in often times is incredibly demeaning, this has been going on forever and unfortunetly some women are quite happy with the way they are portrayed.
Feeling sexy is one thing. Thinking that sex is all men think you are good for and being OK with that, is quite another.
I call these woman Republicans (haha). Whatever they are it is quite sad.

[goodneighbor420]

My all time least favorite is the commercial about feminine products and they say "have a wonderful period" give me a break....

[tomas0808]

Sex Sells. This is the unavoidable fact. Combine that with unregulated capitalism and this is what you get. I think the problem lies in advertising itself. It's ability to out and out tell lies and make things look other than what they are bends reality somehow to the point that these kind of messages are accepted. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it's as if advertising's unreality seems to almost be a deliberate attempt to destabilise people and make them more susceptible to feeling bad about themselves with their portrayals of their 'perfect world' which is of course not possible, not real.

. I'm sure there were people involved with the making of these ads who had a bad taste in their mouth, but 'they went along' because we as individuals have been taught that we are responsible for ourselves, and not each other. The heads of these companies have naturally done everything they can to sell their products and basically at the end of the day saying I will do whatever I can to sell my product and after that it's not my problem. It's a very Republican, Lord of The Flies attitude. People who work for the company who question it are fired or shipped off elsewhere, like the Catholic priests, but not because they were scum but because they wanted to do the right thing. It's a major problem that has it's roots in advertising in general. Advertisements are lies. If lies are okay, why not this?

[Unitynow8]

Honest and quality in a product.

Is that really too much to ask for? Is the consumer really asking to be lied to by buying these products? Not me I don't by anything fashionable, sexy or other... more people should chose not to participate in presents, at Christmas, Valentines Day, Birthday's, Secretary day, mothers and fathers day... those are all just commercial PR jobs to get people to buy. Don't even get me started on the holiday sales for memorial, veterans day, 4th of July. does even a month go by without a Sale? And how many are buying on credit?

Credit and financial crash in the US was written on the wall in big red letters.

They should all watch that movie where the institutionalized ad sales man starts an honesty campaign.

[lyingtruth]

Alex Leo has mislabeled these photographs. These are not porn or X rated. There is a portion of women who seem to forget that humans are sexual beings and gender specific.

What kind of ads should Calvin Klein's agency create? Ads with women in beekeeper suits? Alex seems to see dirty sex in every ad. I think she believes that one should not divulge that they are interested in sex. (Very old fashioned.) Her vulgar language does not withhold her familiarity with arousal! So I doubt that she has burnt her sexy lingerie.

I find it cowardly for a woman to be afraid to be/show that she is a woman. It is natural for us to be attracted to the opposite sex and to sell what will help make us be more attractive. It is not new, it has been going on since before recorded time. Ms. Leo has attempted to make story out of false views and deceptive descriptions. She is advocating setting sexual freedom back a 100 years! I'm sitting here in my boxers and asking, what do women have to be ashamed of?

After all, we are not the Taliban.

[Unitynow8]

you do know there is a difference between rape, bondage and sex right? don't get me wrong, I have no issue with consenting adults doing whatever. but as long as there is too much violence in too many forms against women, I agree that less is more.

they can look sexy without posing in gang rape scenes. Sex is the easy sell, they should try to be more creative.

[lyingtruth]

I do.

[ECBA88]

You realize there is a difference between bondage and rape, right? And that bondage and power-exchange fantasies are incredibly common among both men and women? And that an incredibly large number of men have submissive fantasies? I see the author's point about bondage as dehumanizing to women in this case, but she's written off an entire genre of sexual activity as rape, and that really isn't fair.

[EdCoughlin]

I really don't see how these ads are any more horrifically bad then the rest of the tripe on TV and in magazines. It isn't as if guys escape from the kind of stupid sterotypes these ads exploit.

How many times have you seen "Everybody Loves Raymond" type ads in the last few years? I have to say its in the thousands and I don't watch much TV at all. You know what ads I mean, the idiot guy with the wife who knows better; damn someone that stupid is SO lucky to have a wife that can lead him around like the man child he is right?

There are at least as many ads that portray men badly, I would even say possibly more (since its far more "edgy" and yet non controversial to do so". I bet you anything if there were half as many dumb girlfriend/wife commercials as dumb boyfriend/husband commercials women would be up in arms even more so then with the 5 examples above.

Seriously, if you think women are getting a bad shake, you need to look at a broader sample size of ads.

[idealisticNM]

These ads are stupid and icky.That gang rape ad is especially horrific. But I suspect most people just flip over them casually without giving them much thought.

But what I find even more disturbing is how "feminism" has become, today, an excuse to show off one's body and titillate men. These teens today see strippers as role models ! To many of them, that's what "feminism" means. I am a high school teacher, and I see this constantly. These poor misguided girls, some of them cowed into and bullied into this hyper-sexualism by media today, admire strippers because they look glamorous, make money shaking their ta-tas, and men love to check them out, It makes me weep inside. This is NOT what Gloria Steinem fought for !