Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Sweet My Ass

Excellent. Just what an opinionated, confidant, and “no holds barred” kind of woman wants; the opportunity to analyze some of the most tasteless, tactless, and unimaginative advertising I have ever seen. Eat your heart out ladies and gentlemen; it’s disgusting, infuriating and I have no intention of holding my tongue-like I ever do.

Our contender is an advertisement taken from Esquire magazine. Now Esquire is considered the “magazine for the man’s man.” What the hell does that mean? Seriously. Man’s man. I can think of some terrible euphemisms here but no…clearly it’s meant to be more tasteful than that, right? It would be terrible for some men to be confused for man’s best friend, rather than a man’s man. Although, depending on how you look at it, either way might be laugh-worthy. Sorry. Moving on.

Apparently Esquire as a whole is also what defines a man at his best, in case you didn’t already know or were ill defined before. Those of you whom were in the latter category-run to your nearest newsstand, buy Esquire, and refuse to be wrongfully defined or heaven forbid-not defined by anything at all! How terrible!

First of all, I want to help properly define the word esquire. Yes, yes I know..esquire does the defining here, not me. But humor me will you? Esquire is a noun dated from the 15th century, derived from late Middle English. Other than the obviously slightly more current definition as a title appended to a lawyer’s surname, it is also a polite, did you get that..POLITE title appended to a man’s name when no other title is used-typically in the address of a letter. Here’s the best part…a little history for ya’ll: historically speaking an esquire is a young nobleman who, in training for knighthood, acted as an attendant to a knight, or an officer in the service of a king or nobleman. There.

Keeping the previous things in mind-take a look at this:




Oh shit, I totally forgot the part about it being a DOLCE & GABBANA ad too! My mistake. And direct from Dolce & Gabbana my friends, “Dolce & Gabbana is the Dream: a luxury brand of unapproachable desirability distinguished by its high sartorial content and original styling of the apparel.” Are you kidding?? Does this not simply reek of irony, hypocrisy? A luxury brand? Brand of what? Surely they’re not advertising prostitution? No. They’re selling clothes, right? WHAT CLOTHES?? WHERE ARE THE CLOTHES? And why are all of these people so oily?? Take a shower.

Unapproachable desirability?? No. That was Paul Newman. You’re damn right this is unapproachable. The National Organization for Women (Now) calls this particular ad a “scene evoking a gang rape and reeking of violence against women.” End of story really. Gang rape and violence is not desirable to any women I know, nor is it any kind of dream, with the exception of a damn nightmare! “Distinguished by” bla bla bla doesn’t even matter and I don’t buy it anyhow. And all of this in a magazine for noble men.

With that said, clearly the intended audience is men; the ad is in a men’s magazine, and clearly the ad is supposed to appeal to them as well (disgusting). NOW Foundation President Kim Gandy said, "It's in Esquire, so they probably don't think a stylized gang rape will sell clothes to women, but what is more likely is that they think it will get them publicity. It's a provocative ad but it is provoking things that really are not what we want to have provoked. We don't need any more violence." Seriously? It’s okay to completely degrade women, and depict such raw violence against them-so long as it gets us noticed. Buy this shirt!

I can’t even tell what they are “trying” to represent with an image like this. Truly. Clearly they have taken “sex sells” to an entirely different level and it’s disturbing. We see this more than half naked woman, pinned down by sargeant slick, with his heinously dressed troop behind him. The expression on her face is ambiguous, hard to read…maybe she was drugged? And the troop? They look like vultures.

Esquire and Dolce & Gabbana have it all wrong.

Thirsty? Check this one out.

The next advertisement I looked at was for beer. Of course it's for beer. It's for St. Pauli Girl. At least it's a decent beer. I would be even more appalled if this were an ad for say Bud Light or something equally terrible. Well seriously people, look at it. Look Mom, I’m a beer! Really? A beerwoman? Lady McBooze. When I grow up I want to be a light German beer (ha)? Look at my gorgeous foam hair. How is this attractive? Again, clearly not aimed at women. I’m sorry, is she wearing a beer mini dress? Brrrr. This takes “beer girl” to another level.




A woman showcased as a human beer bottle. Yes, for men indeed. “Drop Dead Refreshing,” says the ad. First of all, beer…really isn’t the drink if you are going for refreshing. All those damn bubbles and whatnot. Second of all, what is this..a step up from being seen as a piece of meat or property? Now I’m a beer? I should ask whether or not I’ll be recycled after you’re done consuming me but clearly that has other implications-as much as one’s consumption of another. The representation of women as consumable and discardable is more nauseating than it is refreshing. Truly people, are we this uncreative? Or is it desperation? Either way, it looks like you’re drinkin’. May I recommend a Guinness?

1 comment:

Swiss Pop Culture said...

Erin, well, Sweet My Ass is a good title for this post in all dimension and both ads. Yikes: the first is surely the worst, don't you think; the second more like garden variety sexism, idiocy.

Both stink. And you call both out on useful personal and critical terms, Erin.