Ad Campaigns for "Real Women." Are they Wrong?

Recently, there has been some amount of push to stop the media representing body image in a way that objectifies wo/men and sets ridiculously high standards for them. A woman, in order to be attractive, must have a thin waist and abdomen, but also much have a big round (practically buoyant) ass and giant boobs (and trust me when I say most women find giant boobs a monumental inconvenience). We also must have no organs so our abdomens will be completely flat, but we must have just enough fat/muscle so that we aren't "skeletal." A man, in order to be attractive, must be straight-bodied but well-muscled, have a strong jaw and piercing eyes. He must be more or less intimidating and seem territorial.

Fortunately for those of us who aren't perfect specimens, activists critique the media that creates this aesthetic. It's told, basically, REAL WO/MEN OR GTFO!

Here is where I'm going to turn the focus on images of women. What drew the attentions of most of social media is the Dove "Real Beauty Sketches" ad and the Dove ads with "Real Women". I, personally, thought this was an admirable effort on the part of Dove...somewhat...

 

Despite the models actually having bodies and not being sticks, this ad doesn't seem like a very fantastic representation. Only 3 out of the 11 models are non-white (an issue for a different day), and none of them lack that classical hourglass figure that is seen as traditionally attractive. Dove wants to speak out and make a statement, but they also want to be safe. They are obviously such a small company that an actual risk would drop their sales to a point where they would notice. Dove's ideal sizes range from size 6 to size 14 in the above photo. How is a woman supposed to feel about her "beauty" if she's a size 16 and her figure isn't classically curvy? Like it isn't real? All of those women can be seen as conventionally attractive, which is why I feel that Dove may have played it a little safe. Look at all those stretch marks and lines that NONE of those women have!

Enough about Dove, though. There are a lot of blog articles critiquing Dove on the internet. I would just be rehashing the same.

Look at this photo I found today:

 See blog who discussed it first here.

Forever Young hired Elly Mayday for their Lingerie. She has ovarian cancer, and they kept her anyway. As much as this probably gets them more sales, LOOK at how not-"perfect" her body is. This ad oozes empowerment, and while her face is classically pretty, her body is not but it is still fabulous! This ad represents the types of invisible illnesses people can have, and sends the message that these illnesses do not lessen them as people. By not firing her, Forever Young have made a powerful statement to women who don't see themselves as "ideal."

Let's go heteronormative for a second (because the US media is pretty heteronormative), and discuss the above two ads in terms of "real women". Despite the latter ad's empowerment to women with invisible illnesses (I am not criticizing it at all, you understand), it still leaves us with a very narrow view of "beauty." While Ms. Mayday is less generically perfect than the other women, she is still curvy and "model-esque." I prefer to not think of these ads as portraying "real women" but rather "women that men want realistically" (I know...too verbose...).

This article from the telegraph (UK) states that according to research, men from all cultures generally prefer an hourglass. That is, a high waist-to-hip ratio. Literature and classic movies have featured women who are curvy with small waists and broad hips. This is seen, even by women, as associated with health and beauty.  Why? The shape is associated with Estrogen! The article asserts that the idea is evolutionary: men are attracted to these women because high Estrogen levels imply high fertility rates. It also briefly discusses that even open-minded men would tend toward women who are not fat because big bellies imply a higher risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes II, to name a couple health concerns.

The question then is: why would the media paint a picture that in reality men don't want?

Dat scowl.

These are Victoria Secret models. I personally love Victoria Secret bras, and they're coming out with more bras to fit more body shapes, but they're not really coming out with more models to fit more body shapes. These models, obviously, are more geared toward women: you should buy our bras and underwear if you want to be as attractive as we are! Look at them: small butt, small hips, fairly straight down the sides (even if they strike poses to make themselves look more curvy). The point here isn't to criticize women who are shaped like this (I would absolutely LOVE the ab muscles of the woman in the yellow...time to go to the gym...*snuggles under covers*), but rather to criticize that this is mostly what models are. Never mind the fact that they're airbrushed for the ad; look at how they totally negate everything I just said about what men are naturally inclined to be attracted to. So here we are: not only is the media dishing out false ideals of beauty to women, but they are also telling them that men are attracted to this (which they are srsly not when looking for a mate) and women are jealous of this (which they might be, but that's a circle jerk that is totally the media's fault). Should we feel good about ourselves if we look like this? Sure! Should we feel badly about ourselves if we don't look like this? Absolutely not.

I just google image searched "beautiful women" and I had to scroll down 9 rows of pictures to find a picture of a woman who isn't slender and young and trying to seduce a man. Well, I guess I found a picture of two women, but still. LOOK at the, non-conventional beauty! And less than 10 rows down! Woo!

Oh, and most beautiful women are apparently brown-eyed brunettes or blue-eyed blondes. They are young and they are very slender. Woo! (I also often forget that sarcasm is lost on the internet, so if you get offended because you missed my sarcasm at any point I apologize.)

You have this discrimination not only in the modelling industry, but also in TV and film. A skinny actress can just be there, but a bigger actress must have a defining personality trait because she can never survive on her looks alone. Quick! Name all the non-thin actresses you can think of! Now name all the non-thin actors!

To help you, I've found a slideshow from 1999 entitled "50 Fat Celebrities." Some of the people on that list I'm not sure where the authors got "fat" from, but I'm guessing they were put in there as trolls...or something...

ANYWAY, bigger people always need to be doing SOMEthing besides being bigger people. They need to be witty, bitter, or both, and if they are awesome they must be sidekicks. With a few notable exceptions, skinny wo/men generally take lead roles. Fat people must have talent, and they must be willing to make fun of themselves. Skinny women (as evidenced by Paris Hilton) do not need any talent at all, and they do not need to be particularly witty or goofy or dim, because they are attractive and that is why they are cast to begin with. You are not beautiful, so therefore you must exude interesting character traits...or something...I dunno...

I'm of a mind that all characters should have interesting traits, but I guess that's just me.

There are SO MANY THINGS I could still say, but I'm going to shut up for now and go to bed.


I will tack on a little postscript: while I promote loving all forms of beauty, and not insisting that a person must fit any stereotype no matter what they look like, I also promote health. I absolutely encourage all people reading this to adopt a healthy lifestyle. I will always encourage you to exercise and eat healthy. Both of these things raise your self-esteem and will prevent future illness from occurring.

Look for future blog posts about this and related topics! :)