An interactive graphic at Newsweek allows us to explore the amount of money women spend on beauty by their tweens, teens, 30s/40s, 50s, and, then, over the course of their lifetimes. Below is a screenshots of the summary, click here to visit the graphic, and visit here for details on the numbers.
Another example of hair removal and standards of female beauty. Not at all subtle encouragement for women in the new ad from Schick/Wilkinson Sword razors for women. Shaving apparently makes you happy enough to sing songs with obvious innuendo.
[youtube]https://youtu.be/rfed1DT1PGA[/youtube]
Here is an ad from the “Most Interesting Man in the World” ad campaign by Dos Equis:
This ad, which is a clear attempt to harken back to the halcyon days of unfettered masculinity, is a cautionary tale against the feminizing effect of men shaving their body hair. Contrast this message with that of the following ad for the Schick Quattro:
Since the razor is pink, we can safely assume that it’s intended for women to use when converting their spiky brambles into beautiful flowers.
So, men aren’t supposed to shave below the neck, but women are required to. Specifically, women are supposed to shave their “flowers” (in a nod to vulva-as-flower imagery?).
This may be helpful in discussions about social norms related to the removal of pubic hair. Of particular interest is whether the expectation of women’s pubic hair removal is objectively different from the expectation that they will remove other body hair. Although pubic hair is considered more “private,” it’s difficult to make the argument that the impact of removing it is more sexual than that of, say, removing armpit hair (given that women’s attractiveness is partially predicated on the illusion of hairlessness). Also, some men are beginning to remove their pubic hair (and the Most Interesting Man in the World be damned). Is this a positive shift, suggesting some parity in beauty standards, or is it a negative shift, in that superficial cosmetic norms now have the power to leapfrog over the traditional bastion of masculinity?
Anna sent in a link to Courage beer’s “take courage” ad campaign, in which men are shown in various situations where they are told to”take courage” in the face of a proctology exam, ugly sweater, and the following:
Both Anna and I are a little confused by this one. What’s he supposed to be needing courage for, exactly? Is it that his girlfriend is asking if her butt looks big? Or that she thinks she looks good and he’ll have to be seen with her dressed like that? When I first glanced at it I thought it was her thinking she looked good and him being grossed out, but when I looked closer, I think it’s the “does my butt look big?” scenario. Is he supposed to take courage and lie, or take courage and tell the truth?
Notice how the ad uses a not-super-skinny woman in it, but ridicules how she looks. Clearly the answer to “does my butt look big in this?” is supposed to be “yes,” and we’re supposed to find her laughable in that outfit. What I’m not quite sure about is whether she’s being presented as inherently laughable, or as a woman who is attractive and it’s only the dress that makes her unappealing. Thoughts?
Anna was also interested in how the ad portrays relationships between men and women. For some reason it reminds me a little of the last video in this post of Errol Morris Miller beer commercials, in which men clearly find women trivial and annoying.
UPDATE: In a comment, Christian suggests, “It’s about him drinking her beautiful. Get a Courage and you get over it (the butt) or her attitude “does my butt look big?”.”
And Trevira adds,
I think this ad directly refers to the ‘insecure woman’ character played by Arabella Weir in the popular UK tv sketch show ‘The Fast Show.’ The character’s catchphrase was ‘does my bum look big in this?’ (Weir even ended up writing a novel with the same title!).
So there may be a cultural reference here that escapes us non-Brits.
Singapore Airlines is known for its “Singapore girls.” Here is a video that shows lots of images of how pretty Asian women, there to serve others, have been used in their advertising (the creator of the video claims to be a Singapore girl):
Apparently the Singapore Girl is such a phenomenon, she’s a figure at Madame Tussaud’s:
I had no idea that when most people think of Singapore, they think of this “pretty, smiling…girl.”
Anyway, I think it’s an interesting example of the way non-White women are often portrayed as exotic (the Singapore girls have become a symbol of Singapore itself) and also of what sociologists refer to as emotion work. The Singapore girls aren’t there just to bring us drinks and make sure we’re buckled in; there’s there to make us feel pampered and to warm our hearts–to do the type of emotion work (constantly smiling, being extremely attentive, being at the passengers’ service and making it seem like a joy) that makes customers feel cared-for and special…and thus willing to pay high prices for those business seats. And clearly these women are part of the decor–pretty, polite, accommodating women for passengers to enjoy while they fly.
Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.
Pris S. sent in an ad that ran in the Collegiate Times, the Virginia Tech campus newspaper:
Of course, it’s a great example of advertising making people feel as though they aren’t sufficiently attractive so they’ll buy a product. But it’s also interesting because it’s an example of a cosmetic procedure that is increasingly marketed to men as well as women. Women do get laser hair removal, obviously, but so do men. Our standards of male attractiveness increasingly demand control of body hair. Hairy backs and shoulders are a source of ridicule. I have known several men who felt very self-conscious about their body hair, some of whom shaved or waxed some of it. Even chest hair is questionable; most images of shirtless men (in ads, pin-ups, calendars, etc.) show very little chest hair. The “man-0-lantern” chest-waxing scene in “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” of course used men’s concern about body hair for comedic effect.
The other thing that’s interesting here is the connection between having body hair (which, as far as I can tell from the ad, could include just about any type, including pubic hair) with being an “ape,” as though we should be ashamed of the fact that we are, in fact, mammals who have varying amounts of body hair. I suspect that it’s also part of the caveman stereotype–having lots of body hair is sort of associated with being less civilized, less fully human or modern. It’s also a beauty standard that is certainly going to be harder for some groups, those that tend to have more and/or darker body hair, to meet, which could bring up some interesting discussions about whose bodies are considered attractive, etc.
Thanks, Pris!
NEW: Andrea G. sent in a link to the line of Mangroomer products, which include electric shavers for back, nose/ear, and “private” hair:
These would be great for discussion new standards of male attractiveness–which increasingly pressure men to shave body and pubic hair, though not their legs or armpit hair, since that type of shaving is girly!–and also as an example of gendered marketing. Notice the very sciency-techy element to the website, with the graph-type lines in the background, the “swoosh” sounds, and so on.
Andrea also sent in this Nads commercial, in which we learn that the product saved a woman from a life of misery, since neighborhood children taunted her for having a beard:
It’s a great example of the social construction of bodies: we think it’s gross when women have beards, but at least in theory okay when men have them. Of course certain groups, such as Mormons, discourage men from growing beards, and in general full beards are relatively uncommon in the U.S. today and might be seen as unprofessional or otherwise inappropriate in some situations. But men usually won’t be openly mocked for growing hair on their faces (Joaquin Phoenix’s recent transformation aside), whereas for a woman, allowing hair to grow and be visible on her face would be socially unacceptable.
Thanks, Andrea!
Over at Ferris State University’s Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, I found a page about depictions of the Jezebel stereotype, which included a number of fascinating/horrifying images. The Jezebel was, of course, a sexually promiscuous African or African American woman, wanton and lustful. Here’s a topless grass-skirted Jezebel ashtray:
According to the website, this license plate with a pregnant Black woman came out after Lyndon B. Johnson won the 1964 Presidential election (he used the phrase “All the way with LBJ” in his campaign):
A Virgin Fishing Lucky Lure:
This is a set of swizzle sticks shaped like African women:
I found an image of a full set for sale at Go Antiques:
Note that the swizzle sticks supposedly show the woman at different ages; the age is in that cutout area in their butt. The text next to the figures:
Nifty at 15, Spiffy at 20, Sizzling at 25, Perky at 30, Declining at 35, Droopy at 40
If you look carefully you’ll see that their boobs and butts sag as they age. I wonder if this same aging scheme applies to White women? At 33, apparently I’m just about to leave the last decent stage of my life and enter my declining years. Of course, in modern America we have cosmetic surgery, so I guess I could stave off droopiness for at least a few years.
Anyway, they’re good examples of the way Black women’s bodies have often been sexualized, and how people were comfortable showing them naked even when the idea of women’s sexuality in general wasn’t considered appropriate for polite company. The Jezebel stereotype reemerged in a slightly different form in the 1980s with the idea of the “welfare queen,” a poor black woman (on public assistance, of course) who has lots of kids with various men just to get more welfare payments, an image President Reagan used to further reduce public support for the welfare state.
According to this JC Penney ad, “Today’s the day to be on display.” Okay, I get that. Sometimes it’s nice to show off, to look good, to shine.
If you look in the bottom right corner, though, JC Penney reminds us that “Every day matters.”
Sigh. Bein’ a chick is hard work.
