This vintage ad is a great example of the intersection of sexism and racism. She’s there for YOU because YOU, white family, are “important”:
It’s not just the fact that she’s a multilingual, knowledgeable, helpful girl who, among other things, knows how to handle a family on the move. It’s the fact that to your JAL Ground Hostess, anywhere in the world, you’re her passengers.
We never forget how important you are.
JAPAN AIR LINES
(Source: Vintage Ads.)
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 28
Fernando — March 3, 2010
Why is it being framed as "white family" as important instead of "passengers" as important? Western passengers in an ad aimed at westerns from a japanese company
Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist — March 3, 2010
Not a girl. She's a WOMAN.
Kandeezie — March 3, 2010
Men don't have kids, women do! Then we go out and use our Western privilege to hire other women to take care of our children! YAY!
lenda — March 3, 2010
Alright, so the ad should have said "woman" instead of "girl." Now can someone explain to me what else is so glaringly wrong here? "We never forget how important you are?" I'm supposed to be offended by that?
Kats — March 3, 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_Please
I don't know if anyone else has seen the drama, but if it's based on any sliver of truth about JAL at all, I'm not really surprised by this ad!
Eve — March 3, 2010
I can't see the ad; do you have a link to it online somewhere?
Elena — March 3, 2010
FWIW, I think that, in any case, this ad shows Japanese values about the service industry.
Kookaburra — March 3, 2010
At least it's showing her helping out a traveling woman instead of being subservient to an old white dude in a business suit...and then is throws all that away by using "girl". Ugh.
Kate — March 3, 2010
Usually I think this blog is on point with its assertions, but I'm gonna have to agree with the rest of the commenters in the sense that this ad really isn't racist or sexist. I feel that my views on "girl" vs. "woman" word usage were already touched on in the earlier comments, so I won't even go there, but I will talk the "racism" in the ad.
To me, the way the company's ground hostess is being presented is in no way racist. She's not dressed as a Geisha or wearing a kimono or any of the other stereotypical Asian garb. She's just dressed like the other stewardesses of the time.
Is it racist because the model is of Japanese or Asian descent herself? Well, if that's the case, how would using a different model improve the ad? Basically, it just wouldn't make sense if the model were anything but Japanese given her employer. Presumably she resides in Japan since she has a job with Japanese Arilines. I'm really being analytical here, because I want to cover all bases: yes, people who are not of Japanese descent live in Japan. Yes, people of Japanese descent live in Japan.
The point I'm trying to make here is that doesn't it make sense to have Americans in American Airlines ads? Should this logic be changed when it comes to different cultures so as not to offend anyone?
If it's racist because the "hostess" is helping a white family, I just don't know what to say. People are employed all over to help every type of family, regardless of race, background, etc. This holds especially true in airports. As I said above, Japanese Airlines in this ad hired the hostess to help the traveling families, whites being no exception. In fact, I'm fairly certain that the advertisers' target audience for this ad was the American middle to upper-middle class family, and that demographic is clearly presented in the ad.
If anything, I think this vintage ad is a bit odd for its time in the sense that there isn't a father figure present. An independent woman traveling with her kids? That doesn't sound like a typical retro ad to me.
cb — March 3, 2010
So many commenters are saying "why does it matter that the family is white? You're reading too much into it!"
What you're missing is that it's almost ALWAYS a white family, or a white customer (especially in vintage ads like this one). We all know there are plenty of non-white westerners, but ads choose to portray the most "wholesome" or "all-American" looking people. You might say, "but the target audience of English speakers is mostly white, they want the viewer to relate to the ad!" First of all, over 1/3 of the US population is part of a minority group! More importantly, well, why can't I relate to an ad featuring someone with a different skin color or features from mine? This whole blog is about individual images that show the trends in society. "White people are the customers and 'ethnic' people serve them" is a big trend (and advertising trope), and this is just one more example.
And yes, the use of "girl" is a big problem too.
Lanelle — March 5, 2010
I"m Australian born Chinese and I went to Japan in 2008. I found there that women under 30 are generally referred to as girls - mainly because progeny don't leave the family home till around 30.
Elle Ellis — March 31, 2012
Having worked for JAL in the 80's and having lived in Japan for many years - I think there should be some consideration for the context of this ad in your analysis:
First of all based on the styles and fashion and my experiences in the 70s I would say this family is more likely to be British (or European) than American
Secondly - the best way to show 'exotic foreigner' is to portray a person with exactly the opposite characteristics of the host country - in this case Japan - so nothing screams 'foreigner' to Japanese like blonde Europeans
Thirdly - JAL had special 'family service' that other airlines did not at the time and have never made any apologies for being 'classist' - because people of lower socio-economic backgrounds didn't usually make regular transatlantic flights in those days
Fourthly - "girl" would have been the direct translation from the Japanese in this sentence - which has a closer meaning to 'female' and for Japanese the word 'woman' would have probably sounded too mature and using 'girl' is not considered degrading in Japanese or to Japanese women
Lastly - many of foreigners flying to Japan in the 70s were families of men stationed in Japan with foreign companies and since international schools or supermarkets were less prevalent the families were less enticed to live abroad for the usual 3-yr contract in those days
I would like to encourage people to look beyond the context of their own biases, like ethnocentrism or racism and consider this: for over 100 years the Japanese have been stereotyped in Anglo-American/European countries as misogynist - is it possible that that affects your view of this ad?
If this is/was not offensive to a Japanese women - would you still consider it offensive?