Only once they do something associated with cleanliness and civilization, shaving, do they become “human.”

Furthermore, beside the non-human face is “8:00 AM” and the human face is “8:06 AM,” clearly implying a “before-after” positioning.

Second, often, not always, but often, the message received is more important than the message intended (see, for instance, the Obama sock monkey debacle).

Third, having a sense of humor is great. I LOL’d at the second pictures. Being aware that we’re being fed a stream of messages that reinforce, or challenge, our existing prejudices is also great. Being aware of how we’re digesting those messages is nice too.

Fourth, as a beard-wearing member of society, I guess I should be a little upset at this. But what I think is most important is that the cosmetic industry has made a gigantic fortune by convincing women they need to pluck, shave, wax, oil, cream, moisturize and paint every inch of their bodies. This is, in my opinion, just another foray into trying to sell the same idea to men, because that will double their incomes. Admittedly, that’s not very subtle, sociologically speaking, but that’s what I take away.

So in that sense, I guess we’re just left looking at what possible interpretations may be read from any given source, and what the potential implications of such a reading are.

And while individuals have their own personal interpretations, it might be that certain meanings are *more* prevalent in a given population.

And I would think a lot of meanings aren’t the kind that people would see and actively think about, but rather are the kind that a person would see, and simply register as being in line with, or converse to their expectations – and in that way reinforcing those expectations. Perhaps not everyone has the time to consider and discuss the meanings of these things! Luckily for me, I have other things to procrastinate from doing!

Isn’t that meaning left up to the interpretation of the recipient? I mean yes the creator may have had one code but mine might be entirely different. One viewere sees a representation of fetishizing biology.

I see a funny man that resembles a chimpanzee? The creator may have seen something else.

This might be what you meant by all prima facie coding with all kinds of meanings. But I haven’t had a chance to look up “prima facie” yet.

I suppose I did not state a point well. Rather than seeing one of those cases or not one of those cases, perhaps there is no message that is immune to the infusion of meaning from the circumstances/society surrounding its creation.

I would suggest that an image *cannot* be made that does *not* reflect the meanings already coded etc… It is simply for us to be alert to and critical of what those messages are. Or to state it positively, instead of double-negatively – every image/communication issued by a person is prima facie coded with all kinds of meaning.

I already stated that “cabal” was hyperbole. I know Lisa didn’t imply that. And I really agree with your statement that sometimes an ad just happens to reflect the meanings that are already coded etc…

I just don’t think this is one of those cases.

You see, the shape and facial features of the monkeys are similar to the men they are juxtaposed with. That’s the funny part. See the men are the monkeys after they have been shaved with the Braun razor.

Funny no?

Besides, what “fetishizing” biology even means? And evolutionary psychology, neurology and whatever are not an attempt to explain everything and anything, that is a simplistic vision of those things.

You know those very subtle analasys are sort of like a roscharch test. They tell more about the shrink than the patient.

There doesn’t need to be a secret cabal! The meanings are already coded in the dominant discourses of our culture.

Sometimes there is an evil cabal of marketers seizing upon that.

Other times somebody just comes up with an ad that happens to *reflect* and reproduce those meanings, without the intention to do so.

A person can still propagate stereotypes and prejudices without meaning to or being aware of the fact they are.

Have you ever heard of a “strawwoman”?

Ha-just kidding- you are right though about the “strawman”. I knew it when I wrote it. Let’s call it hyperbole. I really do enjoy this blog and it often points out trends I would have missed in my casual observations.

I just don’t think this is one of them. I think this is just a silly ad with nice glossy graphics.

Like Freud said: “Sometimes a gorilla shaving with a Braun electric razor is just a gorilla shaving with a Braun electric razor”

BTW we are only all apes if you are not a “maverick” from Alaska.

I do want to point out that humans are all apes anyhow though. Ha.

Maybe this is just a silly ad comparing different facial expressions to monkeys and gorillas. Maybe there aren’t any hidden sociological meanings at all

Maybe there is no secret cabal of sexist ad executives trying to push a misogynistic agenda here.

I don’t know, maybe.