Feminism can be defined as the belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes and the movement organized
around this belief. But are women really treated as equals in our society? Or are we still living in a world where women are viewed as sex objects? Are women still expected to wash dishes, change diapers, watch soap operas, worry about cellulite and their appearance, while men earn the money, fatten happily, and determine when to have sex when they return from their important job in the real world? “There is a male-dominant system of power in place, and feminists call it patriarchy.” (Barry Brummett, Rhetoric in Popular Culture 124).
It is clear that women are still viewed as sex objects, especially in advertisements. The particular
advertisement I chose to critique includes a picture of one male and one female model on a
motorcycle / sport bike, modeling clothing for Brioni, Phat Farm, D&G, and Giuseppe Zanotti. The man is leaning against the bike, while the woman is behind him holding onto his shoulder. Wearing a sultry facial expression, the woman has her left leg posed over the bike, and it is apparent the woman is meant to be viewed as a sexual object. Her hair is long and glamorous, and she is wearing a very short dress. Evidently, the advertisement’s aim is to draw the eye toward her leg on the motorcycle. Wearing high black boots almost to the knee, which women in our society call hooker boots, most men and women would certainly view her as a sexy, beautiful woman. The man in the advertisement is wearing a dress shirt, nice slacks, a black leather jacket, long scarf, and sunglasses, and his hand is placed on her thigh.
Irving Goffman’s gender analysis criteria include seven subconcepts within still photograph ads which are designed to sell a product for an advertiser. In the category of relative size, the male in the advertisement is subtly taller than the woman by perhaps one inch. Male dominance is apparent because the gentleman’s hand looks large grasping the woman’s tiny leg. Moreover, his grasp is firm, whereas her light, feminine touch is delicate as her arm is wrapped around him very lightly, and her fingers are shown barely touching him gently on his left side.
Regarding function, it is apparent the male in the advertisement is more dominant because the indexical meaning of the dark sunglasses he is wearing implies he is most likely the driver of the motorcycle, hence putting the female in a submissive position. Furthermore, the woman, by default, is not wearing sunglasses, which adds iconic meaning, as well as dominance, suggesting the male is, perhaps, the “cooler” of the two.
In the ritualization of subordination, the configurations of canting postures can be blatantly read as an acceptance of subordination, an expression of ingratiation, submissiveness, and appeasement. In this photograph, the male has a casual stance, but the female is behind him, leaning against his body, with her head in a slightly tilted direction toward him.
The licensed withdrawal is quite typical in this photograph, as he has a determined look on his face, whereas her expression is sexy and submissive, yet subtly innocent. The body display and positioning are stereotypical as well, as there is much skin shown on the female, yet none shown on the man. He is wearing a scarf around his neck and his shirt is unbuttoned at the top. The motorcycle obstructs the view of the bottom of her dress which allows her bare leg to be exposed. The dress she is wearing appears to be a halter-type dress, revealing her bare shoulders, back, and arms, exposing much of her skin. Her hair cascades down her back but bears a lot of skin nonetheless. Bare skin and limited clothing indicate she is to be perceived as a sex object, which implies symbolic meaning.
Overall, the appearance of this print advertisement is blatantly male-dominated from a feminist point of view and contains a plethora of examples of iconic, indexical, and symbolic meaning. The female model is not only being objectified at first glance, but looking more closely, she also looks timid and reserved. A feminist would certainly agree there is no apparent equality of the sexes based solely on the woman’s positioning, which is behind the man, indicating he is, perhaps, her protector. This ad could not possibly be any more sexist. A scantily-clad woman, her facial expression, and the man’s motorcycle alone establish the tone of the ad. Moreover, the tight grasping of the man’s hand on the woman’s leg, implying an “I have you” attitude might send even the most liberal feminist screaming, “Inequality! Discrimination!”