Sexualized images are not always blatantly obvious, but are often subtly placed. Take, for example, the advertisement in the middle of the collage for a new 8 blade razor. Wait, what’s that? It’s not for a razor, but for beer? Who knew. The intended main attraction of this ad is without a doubt the man who is shaving and pulling a glass of beer with his razor. On the mans chest and going onto his arm is a string of circles, detailing what each blade can do, such as incision, serration, mulching, exfoliating, and waxing. It is obvious that these descriptions are fake and are meant to attract the male consumer by employing masculine concepts to the product, such as using the term “mulching” to relate the razor to a lawn mower. As stated by Kirkham and Weller, “the names of the male products…incorporate more rough, tough, and vigorous qualities, in an attempt to validate the products within a range of masculinities acceptable to the type of purchaser (male and female) the firm wishes to attract” (272). This advertisement also takes it a step further, using the terms “exfoliating” and “waxing”. Correct me if I’m wrong, but these terms are not being used to state the function of the product, but to poke fun at female products. But then again, when you finally get past the sexual imagery and insinuating text in this ad, you find out that the company is advertising beer, not razors. The ad states: “Smooth, like no other”.
Haha. Very witty.
Breazeale, Kenon. “In Spite of Women.” Signs 20.1 (1994): 1-22. Rpt. in Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A Text-Reader. Ed. Gail Dines and Jean M Humez. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2003. 230-243.
Kirkham, Pat, and Alex Weller. “Cosmetics: A Clinique Case Study.” The Gendered Object. Mahchester, UK: Manchester UP, 1996. Rpt. in Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A Text-Reader. Ed. Gail Dines and Jean M Humez. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2003. 268-273.