Taylor D. (of Thanks for Participating) sent in a link to The Assimilated Negro’s post of ads that use women’s ass-cracks prominently. Not safe for work, so after the jump:
Zero Jeans:
You can always count on American Apparel, of course:
Assimilated Negro got the images from Copyranter, where there are many more if you look around a while:
Also see Lisa’s post on the fetishization of non-White women’s butts and her posts on crotches.
See also our posts on subliminal-ish sex in advertising, not-at-all-subliminal sex in advertising, and ejaculation imagery.
And we’re way behind on reading emails and submissions, so bear with us!
Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.
Comments 11
Sociological Images » Using Crotches To Sell Stuff — May 28, 2009
[...] response to Gwen’s post on butts, I offer you crotches. We’re being super highbrow [...]
Maggie — May 28, 2009
Not surprised, but disgusted at the blatant objectification of women's bodies nonetheless.
Angela — May 28, 2009
I assume the general demographic they want to sell the Zero jeans to would be women, who would likely be presumed to be hetero. One would think that showing how the jeans look ON the butt would make more sense, considering in the ads all you can see is the jeans crumpled up, and its hard to get a clear picture of how they look next to al that ass.
Angela — May 28, 2009
Also the vintage Miss Levis ad made my butt hurt.
Trabb's Boy — May 28, 2009
Wow, American Apparel and whatever that last one was are ... I have no adequate words, although loathsome comes close. The first ones are just weird -- never did catch the brand name. I just noticed the crack then tried to figure out what the dent pictures were. Not exactly the purpose of advertising. On the other hand, the Levi's one is kind of cute and clever. It has a very recognizable symbol, and the nudity makes an actual point -- that the jeans show off your butt -- as opposed to all the others, where there's just some vague goal of equating the product with sexiness.
Cecil — May 28, 2009
Women are subject to the male gaze, and since maleness is the default, they also view things through the same male gaze. Women also realize that their appearance is their social capital, and if those jeans make them look at all sexy (in the hetero-objectification-way) then they would sure buy them!
And that is why using sexual images of women attracts female buyers, unfortunately.
pfctdayelise — May 28, 2009
Also Wrangler jeans. They have an ad (which I couldn't find online) very similar to the first photo posted, but you can also see the woman's blonde hair down her back. It's on the back cover of a fashion/craft magazine I buy, 'Frankie', and I really dislike it being so visible...
Original Will — May 29, 2009
What is that second American Apparel ad even supposed to be selling?
Inky — May 29, 2009
Finding American Apparel among the brand names on this list was hardly surprising- seeing as though the owner is a well-known perv.
Charles Emry — June 6, 2009
Frankly I find women's bodies sinful and shameful. They should be covered at all times. These ads might give women the false impression that their bodies might be sources of erotic power or that they shouldn't be ashamed of their feminine curves. In reality they are being 'objectified'. I'm sure what that means exactly except to say it's wrong, wrong, wrong. Women's butts are gross and I think we'd all be better off if their bodies were wrapped in black cloth from head to toe at all times.