Ideals have changed through time. Today we are obsessed with a skinny figure in our culture, while it is pretty ugly to be skinny in some cultures. These are ideals, historically dependent. Here’s an interesting ad I came across today:
1920-1950 advertising for ideal body
They had to be NOT skinny to attract males and feel attractive. Now that would be unthinkable to a person brainwashed by today’s society here. Another important feature in these ads is the amount of detail and information given. If you go even further back in time the ads would only have writing. Wow, they had time to read and process information! Also they weren’t bombarded with so many products that are only slightly different from each other or so many ads for that matter.
So we have moved to a visual culture where image means so much personally and in turn carries lots of power. Today, we use image to not only sell products but also ideas and ideologies. We’d rather be affected quickly through the power of image rather than take time to consider facts. If you were thinking that we aren’t easily influenced then think again!
Each ad if you consider carefully promotes ideals to the audience who are the society. There are also ads that promote directly an ideal, rather than a commercial product. Let’s consider some interesting ones that objectify women in order to promote a worthy (depending on your personal standards) cause:
- Ever since I saw this ad, I have wanted to share it on the blog:
This ad is objectifying the woman’s body at several levels: the body is used as a canvas, the painting is itself another objectification of a woman’s behind, the body is shown as a part instead of a whole, and they have made an effort to highlight the nipples in order to add the sexual appeal. You would have agreed that this is sexual objectification, unless you knew it was an ad promoting breast cancer awareness with the slogan “are you obsessed with the right things?” The slogan itself reveals what they’ve tried to do in the ad, to grab the attention with a sexualized body in the hope that the person would stop to read the tiny message in a corner of the ad. Almost like this one: 
- Peta! People for ethical treatment of animals. Now that sounds like another good cause. They often have created ads presenting the human body (specially of females, wonder why.. ) as equal to the animal body. Whether we classify it as objectification would depend on whether we perceive animals as “things” or “beings”. Aha! Now I see a connection: females are often represented as “things” in our culture, just like the animals. However, they have also created ads that objectify and degrade women in most obvious ways:
Tell me again, why is it the women? I mean if women are animals, men are too.. right?
- Become an organ donor:
Have we degraded to the point when we need to use an attractive woman who has posed to imply sexual readiness, to promote such a worthy cause as promoting organ donation? The text reads: “Becoming a donor is your only chance to get inside her”. Okay, so are we supposed to donate an organ because we aren’t sexy enough to have sex with her? Does this also mean that the sexy ideal is more worthy of an organ donation? Nice playing – with our minds!
What happened to those good old ads that promoted ideas with BIG BOLD LETTERS AND INFORMATION?
Image Sources
1. “Vintage Weight Gain Ads Discourage Skinny Body” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/29/vintage-weight-gain-ads_n_1119044.html
2. http://pinkribbonblues.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/BCF-Body-paint.jpeg
3. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PXd4PwMOno8/T0vkF1qXGqI/AAAAAAACExU/DXYy4HZ2u6Y/s1600/Renuzit_Wo
4. http://veganfeministnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/PETA-Woman.jpg
5. http://media.tumblr.com/28507c8fd046850dec5f3dd8602c3c7c/tumblr_inline_mfa84cha8p1rag3fs.png
6. http://feministcupcake.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/anderson-peta-gal3.jpg
7. “Organ Donor Foundation – Only Chance to get inside.. – print, Belgium” http://adland.tv/ooh/organ-donor-foundation-only-chance-get-inside-print-belgium
She Is Not A Thing 