This is sad but true; though I do think that there is a healthy objectification of men bubbling in the corners; I'd like to think it is on the rise, but then I think about Magnum PI's chest being on TV all the time in the...whenever that show was on, & I start thinking we are still par for the course, & I just see progress because I'm in the middle of it. Argh delusions of perspective!

By "sex," what's meant is "women's sexualized bodies." Women are the sex class. Our bodies are actually synonymous with "sex." Of course men are the subjects - the default human beings. The male gaze in action.

I'm sorry, but did she just *rip her SKIN* off in that Sports Illustrated ad? I can't get past that. :p

Since when is green for horny? What?

Green stands for envy. I've never heard of green being the color of arousal.

Shouldn't the M&Ms' arms and legs be brown, just like their chocolate insides? They show the Green M&M with her candy shell off, so I'm assuming that's supposed to be like her clothing, but then her arms and legs are white-beige and not brown?

I'm not surprised, sadly.

@KK Slider:

I think the "green M&M=horny" comes from an urban legend that says "Green M&Ms are an aphrodisiac".

See the Snopes link for more info:

http://www.snopes.com/risque/aphrodisiacs/mandms.asp

I'm with KK - this has to be some weird cultural thing. Green for horny?
Frankly, I believe you could come up for a reason why this is sexualization for any colour they'd choose. It's another case of first assuming that there's a certain intention, and then hunting for proof.

Also, don't forget to throw in homophobia. I think it's critical in understanding why men are absent from such sexualizing contexts: I don't want to be thought of as gay (or question my own heterosexuality), so I don't want to be caught looking at a scantly clad man.

The Green M&M Premiums commercials freak me out. She's seductively eating M&Ms. Never has cannibalism been so sexy!

The question that comes to my mind is "does a sexualized image of a womon sell equally well to men and women both?"

I seem to recall reading at once point that the reason 'public announcement' sort of recordings (i.e airplane demos and automated answering systems) are typically done with female voices is because there is a larger positive response of both sexes to a female voice. (Yes, that's nearly pure anecdote, but I cannot in the slightest recall where I picked up that information.)

@Sara At the same time I have heard that radio hosts are so often men because deeper (read: men's) voices resonate with people and aren't "grating." Let's hear one for gendered social construction of voices!!!

Women's sexualised bodies are sold to women as well as men, because women are taught out whole lives that women are the sex class. Despite recent attempts to imagine the sexualised male body [aka the diet coke man], we don't really know what this is, what it should look like or how to sell it. Even if you are a heterosexual women, you buy into the sexualised women's body as something desirable, attractive- as something you want. These adverts are not really exclusively selling male desire- they are selling desire, which in our culture is personified in the female body. Female desire of men is culturally irrelevant to women as well as men, and it is so because the ability to desire is a powerful action, denoting ownership and possession. Men cannot be desired in this way as it removes their subjectivity and makes them objects.

Great point, fem. avatar and even in the rare circumstances where men are sexually objectified it's hardly a true turning-of-the tables.

Because in reality a stripped down male is not as sexually vulnerable as a stripped down woman. He doesn't need to fear sexual assault, harassment, rape. Lack of respect/dignity. Not being taken seriously. Being battered as a domestic object. Men just don't have as much to fear from objectification. So their complaints that "men are treated like sex objects too" in the minority of cases in which it occurs rings pretty hollow.

And why would women want to go down that road? As if all we can do is imitate instead of innovate. When women have been "permitted" or encouraged to express their desire we're offered up a pale imitation of male sexuality (Chippendale "dancers," "Playgirl" (a huge flop) as if we don't have our own unique sexuality.

I honestly think those were ideas some clueless men came up with as a way to get our sex industry dollar. Or justify what they were doing by throwing us a non-threatening crumb they knew didn't really offer a comparable turn-on. Will there ever come a day when "sex" doesn't have to include the "objectification" of either gender?

Until then we'll be surrounded with images intended to remind us constantly of this: that men are entitled to visual and physical access to the bodies and sexuality of others. Whenever they're horny, lonely, bored, angry, whatever.

And as long as that "right" is unchallenged and handed down to another generation of boys (and girls) we'll never put a dent in the societal and individual tragedies resulting from its acting out in sexual assaults, abuse, prostitution and human trafficking.

Images

As a woman it is easy to feel trapped into this society that sees only our sexual image, but I choose to not be objectified. I consciously choose to dress and act in a way that encourages respect for me as a person.

"And why would women want to go down that road? As if all we can do is imitate instead of innovate. When women have been “permitted” or encouraged to express their desire we’re offered up a pale imitation of male sexuality (Chippendale “dancers,” “Playgirl” (a huge flop) as if we don’t have our own unique sexuality.

Of course, it's not necessarily the content of stuff like Playgirl photos, but the context in which those images arrive. (eg "ideas some clueless men came up with as a way to get our sex industry dollar. Or justify what they were doing") After all, lots of people assume that the differences between male and female sexuality is emotional content versus explicit physicality, but why not assume that the difference is between the perceived authenticity of the images as female-created images or that the images remind female audiences of sexism's invulnerability too much to successfully arouse them?

@Crystal T: It really makes you notice the blanket skin color being white, doesn't it? That was really a mistake -- either an M&M's skin is really chocolate-colored and their limbs shouldn't be peachy, or they are white, and the second ad is seriously HER SKIN RIPPED OFF.

Yum!

ok

The tango ad really infuriated me--it's perpetuating the notion that partner dance = a chance to feel a girl up. No, thank you. And again, it places the onus of sexual responsibility and flagrancy on the woman!

As a dancer, I already have to deal with enough of this shit during classes; and seriously, "Dance lessons. See where it gets you"?!? Not far if you're my partner, buddy--try that with me, and you'll get Capezio-ed in the crotch.

Oh god do I hate those M&M ads. Since when did pieces of candy become sexual beings?

was fur ein kack

Hi,
Is there a chance that i can get the original from the red m&m "the redolution is now"?

My best friend birthday is coming up, and she is loves this poster!!
Please let me know asap!
Thank you!

ami gusta m&m"s y mi tin ne nami cas y mi ta comendo e y e ta dushi mare tur dia mi por tin nan paso mi a bisa caba cu e ta dushi ok?? y tambe mi no kier pa nan no bay nuca bon ayo

The hearing aid ads are a set of four - the 2 that you posted and 2 more with men on them. One is of a man's face and the other is a shirtless male model (it's right outside my house). I can't remember the slogan on it but I'd say it's basically as sexed up as the ones with women on them. So yes, they may be sleazy but I think they're supposed to be aimed at both sexes.

"These ads for hearing aids are apparently aimed at men only:"

Well, those two may be, but the ad campaign also include two equally sexy ads featuring male models. This is an error I'm noticing a lot on this site. I'm going to presume that it's through lack of time rather than willful selection.

Interestingly, perhaps, one of the male ads carries the text "Men never listen. Still, it's nice to know they can." which, as well as being fairly obvious copy for a hearing aid product, does perpetuate a stereotype.

Yes, one of the male model ads is a close-up head shot (the other being a front-on naked torso, low slung pants) but I would suggest that

a) the advertisers believe that their female customers find faces sexy to a greater degree than their male customers and, more importantly,

b) the 'below the surface' message of the ads is that all the models are wearing the product - a hearing aid - which is barely visible, even in a headshot.

The intention, beyond the surface attention-grabbing sexuality, is to argue that hearing aids are no longer big beige boxes worn only by the elderly. Hearing problems are affecting people younger and younger (thanks, rock n roll!) and rather than suffer through it due to vanity, the ads suggest that the vain amongst us (who are people too) can address their medical issue while still appearing young, sexy, edgy etc etc.

I think that, when we're going to dig beneath the surface of 'sex sells' to look at socio-political issues raised, we'd be wise to also look beneath the surface to see if sex is in fact an intrinsic and legitimate part of an advertisers message, rather than just gift-wrapping, as in some of the other ads.

And the problem is what?

Okay so I'm this male marketing student that just needed to do a report that summarizes a marketing related article. I search "sex sells" because that's where my synapses road pointed me prior to my morning cupful. Now I'm as confused as ever because of all the perforations this comment section has added to my appreciation of the advertising business. Granted M&M eating kids should not be bothered by the sexuality of the chocolate they eat but if I had to decide if sex had a place in non-sex related sales and marketing I'd still vote yes as long as ..... subtle ..... good taste... ...Thanks for helping me work that out.

In my experience... the tango ad is more attractive to women if the man has his clothes on. The women I've known find the image of a successful, dashing man in a well-cut suit much more attractive than a guy with no pants on - it's part of the whole image of what is attractive about going dancing. Men don't wear suits or tuxes to a night out because *we* like them (by and large).

I didn't read the tire ad as his plans for her at all. I read the "you" and "your" as being plural, speaking to the couple on a romantic beach vacation.

If sex sells then sell baby sell. Http://Koolagan.com

green means horny??