I agree with a lot of Jean Kilbourne’s argument, Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt.
As everyone knows, sex sells. And I like the point Kilbourne makes about how products being sold in ads are eroticized. They give people false hopes and negative perceptions about both sexes, but mainly women. The one example she uses about the Victoria Secret commercials and how they emphasize that if you wear their product you too can be irresistible like the sexily clad model. This isn’t the message ads want to be sending to women. There is no value, no morale; it’s just teaching women to aspire to be these sexed up objects that men can’t get their hands off of. Another one of the author’s strong points was the idea that ads advocate women into desiring the “bad boy”, because in our society it is accepted to be attracted to the aggressive but sexy man. They also advocate that men should be players and that that type of man is what women like. The ad for DRAKKAR NOIR shows a man staring straight into the camera with two women hanging on to him. I don’t know that statistics, but just from people I’m associated with, the concept of being a player and cheating is in fact socially accepted.
When Kilbourne talked about the ad that said “If your date won’t listen, try a velvet hammer”, I totally agreed with her as far as ads advocating men doing anything to bed women, even if it means taking advantage of them. And it was just interesting to see the statistics of rape of women who were drunk and how ads can still advocate getting involved with women when they’ve had several alcoholic beverages. Don’t they understand that rape is very serious and isn’t something to be taken lightly? I don’t care if a person is drunk or not no one has the right to violate another person in that way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hahahha first off the title of this post actually made me laugh out loud and made me think of the little sex talk we had in class today.
I definitely agree with you on the Victoria Secret advertisements. When you see them on TV, in their catolog, or anywhere really the V.S. models are EXTREMELY sexed up! They send the message that if you wear these undergarments then you can be just as sexy and confident. But for them to exploit themselves almost naked gives men the idea that women are objected and are there just to look sexy. I think even in the reading, Kilbourne mentioned something to the sort of a woman got raped and it was considered her fault because she was wearing Victoria Secret clothing.
It's completely crazy and as you said, there is no morale to these message ads - they project a sex image.
They give people false hopes and negative perceptions about both sexes, but mainly women.
^Yeah BWill! Lol, this is definately your best sentence in the whole piece. I think it fits perfectly with our class discussion AND the article. It isn't just women targeted by these ads but men too. By degrading women, these ads negatively affect men. They create a 'false hope' within men and lead them to belive women who dress sexy WANT to be taken advantage of. I thought this was well written and i could tell you really took into consideration the corners of the rhetorical triangle because you speak of the facts and statistics with in Kilbournes article (logos) as well as the Victoria's Secret rape story (pathos).
Post a Comment