Zeynep P. sent in a commercial for Teleflora, a company that delivers flowers, that, as Zeynep points out, combines objectification with the explicit message that women exchange sexual favors for gifts from men:
The ad normalizes the idea that women would manipulate men with sex, and that men would expect that doing things for women (especially spending money on them) should result in sex. It’s a winner all around.
Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.
Comments 15
Guest — February 13, 2012
I saw this ad for Peoples Jewellers last night and it has pretty much the same meaning - it's even called "To The Bedroom" and uses the tagline "The Do Not Disturb Store" http://www.peoplesjewellers.com/category/index.jsp?categoryId=12649141
The show Family Guy summarizes it all pretty well - "Diamonds. She'll pretty much have to". The clip is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe-UqiLqu2s&feature=related - sorry, I couldn't find a better quality clip.
emily — February 13, 2012
Until seeing these blatant sex-for-jewelry or sex-for-flowers ads, I hadn't considered the iconic "Every kiss begins with Kay" Kay jewelers ads in this light. But now I'm seeing them as an extension of the same thing. Thoughts?
Catherine — February 13, 2012
At first I chuckled at this when my husband and I saw it, but then I started thinking about the disturbing message behind it. It's sad really. I'm tired of women being portrayed as money and gift-grubbers. It's so pervasive it almost doesn't even get a reaction from people.
Ama — February 13, 2012
All I can say is it's so pervasive and makes me sick. Couple this thinking with the dehumanization and intense shaming of prostitutes and I almost feel like the message is that, as a woman, I am expected to trade gifts/money for sex as long as I play coy about it and don't make enough money to actually support my self independently. One second I'm being told how to snag a millionaire and the next listening to women be called gold-digger and whore for dating rich men. The whole thing is so sick and twisted and I suspect the message boils down to male ownership of women. YUCK
Anonymous — February 13, 2012
When I first saw the title of the post and the image, I started wondering if you were reading way too much into the image. Then I watched the video. There's *nothing* subtle about that video.
Susan Richardson — February 14, 2012
From Family Guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c82z_bxy60E&feature=related
NavyLaini — February 14, 2012
Believe it or not, there's an even more disturbing example: The latest commercial for Twilight on DVD featuring the teenage main character suggestively making her bed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZJDqn3HJU0
Hey teenage guys, if you buy your girlfriend Twilight, Happy Valentine's Day to You!
Ann — February 14, 2012
Good girls don't like sex. Only sluts like sex. Duh. Slut shaming from this site? Say it ain't so.
Ms. Sunlight — February 15, 2012
What if I just want to trade sex for, you know, orgasms? I have a paying job and can buy myself stuff already. I'd be very disappointed to get flowers instead!
amanda — March 3, 2012
I'm currently taking a gender & sexuality course, and we just read a book about the history behind this idea (and what is basically now known as 'dating'), called _Love for Sale_ by Elizabeth Clement. Known as treating, some working women would use their measly wages on clothes and makeup, then go out and exchange sex (or sometimes just companionship) for men to pay for groceries, bills, etc. Because of income inequality, this was one of the few ways that working class women could afford to live 'independently.'
Jclarke — March 14, 2012
Women should be subservient to men. If you expect dinner, drinks, gifts, we expect sex. That's the way it should be. Now get back in the kitchen.
Anonymous — March 14, 2019
hi