Lips, Neck, Breasts – all logical body parts to be shown in advertisements for cologne, right? Sadly, in today’s society, the answer is yes. We are bombarded on a daily basis with thousands of advertisements. They are impossible to avoid and even more impossible to ignore. Whether consciously or unconsciously what we see in these advertisements affects us as a culture. In many of these advertisements women’s bodies are dehumanized. In Jean Kilbourne’s article, “Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt,” she argues, “ads affect us in far more profound and potentially damaging ways. The way that ads portray bodies – especially women’s bodies – as objects conditions us to seeing each other in dehumanizing ways, thus “normalizing” attitudes that can lead
This ad makes her portray characteristics such as vulnerability, while he looks powerful and strong standing behind her. It makes it seem okay that women are inferior to men and that women should feel inferior to men. The fact that his hand is placed on her neck and he is looking at her in such an aggressive way is the epitome of how advertisements victimize women. This ad makes the woman look weak and small compared to the man. Tom Ford is essentially promoting his cologne, while promoting violence towards women.
It is shocking to think that the media of advertisements takes such an incredible toll on our society. The fact that Tom Ford displays images that are so suggestive towards violence against women is truly sickening. As a community we must begin to acknowledge these images as being responsible for such violence towards women in culture today. In Caroline Heldman’s essay, “Out-of-Body Image”, she recognizes that self-objectification is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with. When discussion options to fight against advertisers who portray women as objects she says, “Mass media, the primary peddler of female bodies, can be assailed with millions of little consumer swords. We can boycott companies and engage in other forms of consumer activism, such as socially conscious investments and shareholder actions” (RDSJ 346). Heldman is on the right track in exploring