Glamour photography, fine art nude photography, lingerie photography, swimwear photography — all of the above involve nudity. Sex sells — no explanation needed here. Or, at the very least, it will get you more likes on your page or your Instagram account. Is the sexiness in itself a problem? This is a recurrent debate. The #WomenNotObjects campaign, launched by Advertising Executive Madonna Badger, is calling on the advertising industry to put a stop to objectifying women for marketing purposes. As photographers, do we have a responsibility in this controversy?
Badger, co-founder and chief creative officer at New York advertising agency Badger & Winters, was inspired by a Google search and decided to raise awareness on the way women's bodies were used to sell pretty much anything. The loss of her children in a tragic house fire in 2011 made her see her industry in a different manner: "I want my life to have a purpose."
The video of the campaign has been released and it's going viral. UN Women tweeted about it and it got support from Ashton Kutcher, Alanis Morisette, and George Takei. Will it have an actual impact on the advertising industry? Unless Congress passes a bill to that effect, I doubt it. The goal of campaigns is not only to get results, but also to start a discussion. So, let's chat for a second here, because ignoring the problem is part of the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21vOSVojv8o
Sex is in every visual genre: conceptual art, film, and photography. It is not an underground current; it is in your face on a daily basis. The campaign focuses on the problem of using sexualized women's body parts in a commercial capacity. But what about the norm of sexualizing women in imagery in general? Why would we frown upon Burger King implying oral sex with a seven-inch sandwich and not frown upon the fact that when a woman gets into a bikini, we photograph her on her hands and knees looking up, whether it is for a swimwear catalog or a personal series? If we want to show respect to women, does that mean we should not shoot them in a sexy manner at all? Are men's bodies just not sexy enough to become objects? Or maybe retouching male hair on torsos, thighs, and calves is too big of a deal?
We might fully agree with the precept of equality, frown on sexism, and generally treat women with respect in our personal lives. And yet, when we are editing our last shoot, don't we choose the image of the girl with a slightly open mouth and a lascivious pose to post on social media?
It would be easy for me to point an accusing finger at all the male photographers out there. Yes, the photography industry is dominated by the male human species, and it is a common assumption that men think about sex every seven seconds, so adding the two together could lead me to heated arguments.
Yet I am just as guilty of using sex in my imagery in order to get more traction. Hey, I am a photographer that loves skin and curves. Sexualizing has become an industry standard to the point where I am anesthetized. When I see those billboard ads that are accused of objectifying women, they do not shock me, or even worse, they do not get me thinking of all the possible implications that they could have. In that sense, I might be more of a photographer than a woman.
What does that say about the standards we commonly accept in our industry and keep reproducing without even being aware of them? As image makers, don't we have a responsibility in the way we portray the world, even if it is for a commercial purpose?
It's not the way we see it, it's how the third wave feminists behave and act in public. I had one of those girls in my class for four years and she started by stating that "men are the root of evil" and that "evil exists solely because of men".
Later on she admitted she was wrong since the start and that those ideas pretty much only existed in her head. She was probably one of my favorite classmates despite our initial differences because of her critical thinking and self reflective abilities.
I don't deny that there are plenty of nice people who call themselves feminists who just want equality. But all you have to do is read a post by a feminist blogger and read the comments. Then tell me that all those people want is equality. Modern day (third wave) feminism is all about women having more rights than men. Like I said feminism isn't a synonym for equality.
You're simply wrong. I can't see how people like you seem to be such experts on such topics, having obviously considerable experience with sexual harassment, discrimination, lack of equal and just laws. It's simply appalling to me, that think that making laws equitable, which they are not at the moment, is deferred by saying that women want more rights than men.
Please refer me to the part in my reply where I inferred that I didn't support equality. I do support equal rights, but the difference is I think equal rights should be for everyone. Men and women alike. We are all human after all. I just don't support feminism and reject the myth that the movement is based on equality.
Then you simply have misconceptions of the definition of feminism.
If you can't see that a movement born out of pain and injustice can't be impartial then I think it is you who are the delusional one. Just look at what happened after apartheid was abolished. The victims wanted more than justice, they wanted vengeance. It took a leader like Mandela not to make a bad situation worse. He spoke of forgiveness and reconciliation as a necessary way forward. But even today racism continues partially due to the distrust sowed by apartheid. My boss who is of Indian descent grew up during apartheid and has some amazing stories to tell.
It'll be the same way with feminism. There will be distrust (and rightfully so) and the ability to remain impartial as a victim will be next to impossible. It's human nature. It's blatantly obvious. Just as it's obvious that a movement called feminism is going to focus on women. Unless the feminist movement can be run by people who can place their emotions to the side, it will never be as simple as fighting for equality. Equality is a fight that must be pursued by everyone, feminism is not. And all of this is off track from the original post.
I don't want to wade into this aspect of the debate because there are many different competing "brands" of feminism, but to argue about the definition of feminism is an intentionality fallacy. It doesn't matter what it was defined as by the originators, what matters is how it works today. I would argue that not a single person reading this blog thinks that women should have fewer rights than men, and too regress to the definition of feminism is to return to a time when women couldn't vote. If there's a misogynist saying that woman shouldn't be allowed to vote, then we can chat about this.
You can't just throw the entire population of feminists in the whole wide world into a bucket and make a blanket statement about them. We all know that there are some that just stand out because they're the most annoying and loud ones. I know one of those obnoxious ones in real life and she fits every criteria (overweight, bizarre clothing and hair color). Strangely though, aside from that she's a nice person.
I think a big problem of modern feminism is that it acts as if men and women are completely the same. That's just not true, men will always be stronger and they'll never be able to bear children. And all of that should be acknowledged.
For me the ideal feminism would be to replace it with a new movement. Something that factors in these differences and is honest about certain things, and also SANE. Like, stop with all the blanket statements about men! No feminist should EVER say that all men are potential rapists or violent. This is so toxic and doesn't help anyone. And I understand how enraging this can be for a man. All of this should stop.
And let's celebrate differences. It's completely natural for men to look at beautiful women. Hell, I like to be considered attractive, I admit it. Let's celebrate those differences and acknowledge sexual attraction. It's good and it's nothing to be ashamed of!
It should be something that empowers every individual to do the things that he or she wants and to not discriminate anyone. Equal rights for everyone, no more burden on anyone, no unfair advantages. Empower women to be able to get pregnant and care for their own children without having to rely on the money of a man. Give men the opportunity and right to see their children after a divorce and not make them bankrupt after said divorce. No one should think twice if a father wants to have maternity leave. Give a good quality of life to everyone. But also give rights to lesbians and gays.
I think that doesn't sound too insane, does it?
I agree, my statement was certainly a blanket one and certainly does not and can not apply in all circumstances. I would also like to note that I completely agree that we should acknowledge that men and women are different and that's ok. Different doesn't have to equal better/worse, it's just different. In fact, diversity is a great thing. I agree with everything you said. I oppose feminism as I believe it to be an entirely different beast to what people want it to be, but I also agree that we should strive to obtain quality of life for everyone. It's a completely impossible goal however that doesn't render it trite. It is indeed a noble pursuit.
I think you missed all the nuance of Don Draper.
That's why I mentioned the 1958 one and not the 1970s one. He clearly changes alot during this series.
Which direction to go, remove all sexiness from imagery or raise humans that are better at seeing that people can be multifaceted? I really honestly don't know.
I do sometimes feel the urge to do a purely sexy photo shoot because I know it'd get more people all worked up about it, but when I do I am never happy with what I end up creating.
And as far as the men part, come on, it totally happens. Just look at the Ryan Reynolds Hyundai Superbowl ad. No, it isn't as pervaisive, bu yes, its happens like 1 time for 1000 times with women, but it does happen.
It's funny, as I'm reading this article in a radiology office I see this next to me...
You hit the nail on the head.
Not only men consume a lot of sexualized imagery of women, but women don't react when they are used to sell them beauty products and other frivolities that men don't understand (day AND night cream... go figure).
When women stop buying product marketed for the only purpose of being pretty in the eye of their mate, maybe the industry will realize that they need another approach.
Don't hold you breath for it though...
well, it is ad for procedure for legs that is targeted at women(if I can decipher it correctly), so... I would call it justified choice of picture ;)
Oh I agree it's targeted towards women, I just found it strange that their legs were up in the air with no hint of clothing on. I wouldn't say it's a sexual image by any means but it's also not a position any woman would be in very often either....it sort of mirrored the sex position images that are referenced throughout this article and comment thread.
I am a Muslim and my religion agrees with what you are saying. Islam respect women and respect that we should not treat them as just a sexual object. But people don't want that, majority of people they want to see the sexy nude body of women every where because they love it. So for the same reason people hate religion, theyll hate your post.
I'll touch on this since I doubt many people dare touch on it.
Islam doesn't respect woman, and dressing them up as a towel doesn't qualify as "not treating women as a sexual object".
How can you say that Islam respects women if they are being stoned when the man finds out she's not a virgin by the time of marriage? Hell, women even get stoned when they are raped by men.
How can you say that Islam respects women when they are not allowed to dress as they desire?
How can you say that Islam respects women when they are not permitted to obtain a drivers license?
I'm grateful you don't take your religion seriously :)
I think leon you fundamentally don't understand religion.
First, Religion being taken seriously is totally up to the individual. If you, a christian, "took it seriously" as you suggest, you would be just as sexist,disrespectful of women, and treat them as objects.
Second, Islam does not require Hajibs or you disrespectful "towel" comment, and it is overwhelmingly a cultural thing/choice by the women. You, are taking examples from certain places such as Saudi Arabia, and placing that judgement onto 1.6 billion Muslims.
You should climb out of your hole of ignorance and actually do some research before making such disrespectful comments.
As for your first point being the Christian reference, you'd be correct... Those people too do not take their religion seriously and you should be thankful. Luckily they have gone through an enlightenment and reformed the old testament into the new testament. I'm really hoping you weren't stating that I am a Christian and that you merely stated it as an example.
I'd happily disagree that my towel comment, your second point, is not disrespectful but hateful instead. Women that wear a burka don't do it because of their own choice, they do it because they will be beaten otherwise. Or have you forgotten about Cologne already? Note that I'm not blaming the women, but the hateful religion instead.
And guess what... Those certain places your talking about are literally living according to the written words of the Quran, and every Muslim keeps that book and what is reads in power. So yes, I can judge 1.6 billion people by the ideas in that book that they empower. They promote dishonesty, every single one of them.
I think I can speak from experience when I talk about religion, as the EU, and therefore my country, is currently being flooded with Muslims and Islamists... I have a pretty good grasp of what religion is, what it does to people and how it poisons ones mind.
Religion makes smart people do dumb things and nice people do bad things. I don't have to climb out of my hole of ignorance, all I have to do is step out my front door and live what you're reading about.
My girlfriend is a teacher in a major city in the west of my country and she encounters these things every day, even though she was oblivious to it at first her eyes are now slowly opening.
Judging by your name I'm guessing you are nowhere near the so called heat in the kitchen that we call the immigration crisis. I can tell you from my own experience it's not a pretty sight. The research, both anecdotal and academic, is evident and it doesn't swing in your favour.
1. Most women do wear a hajib on their own choice. Some do not, being in repressive countries such as Suadi Arabia.
2. That's stupid to think that 1.6 billion people follow every word of the Quran. A few do, Many Don't. It's influential to their lives such as the bible is to many Christians. I am appalled that you describe the religon as hateful too, without any form of basis.
3. I know the EU has lots of immigrants who are Muslim and Muslims, much higher than here in the US, but I know that your judgements, are biased and blanketed.
4. Religion does not make people do stupid things. It's what people do with religion.
5. Your "experience" can now cover your judgment of millions of people. That's what you call prejudice.
I'll keep this in your presented format for the sake of reading:
1. They have been taught at a very young age that this is the way they should dress, and the Quran says they should do so. Going against the teaching of the Quran is unwise and will have consequences.
2. That was my point, I clearly and plainly stated that not all Muslims follow every word of the Quran. Therefore they don't take the religion seriously. If warmonger Mohammed and his violent spreading of Islam by the sword isn't proof enough that it is hateful, harmful and intolerant towards others I'd suggest you read into the penalty for apostasy. Ooh and don't forget to read past my earlier remarks where I state that the Quran specifically calls for the stoning of women when they are raped and all... I know it's hard to confront the truth and see things for what they are, but you know... That's life I guess!?
3.. How are my judgements biased and blanketed exactly? Please enlighten me of how you of all people know my everyday encounters and confrontations with Muslims? No really, please do... I'd love to read how a stranger writes exactly what my day to day life looks like!
4. Religion doesn't do shit, religion is words written in a book. It's called an ideology because it comes from an idea. It is therefore not physical and you cannot harm anyone with religion itself. And yes, it does give people excuses to do horrible things as long as they can point out the written text in whatever holy book, because God said so and therefore you can do no wrong. ISIS members don't see the immoral thing in beheading another human being because the Quran calls for and justifies the act. So yes, religion makes otherwise good people do incredibly horrible things.
5. I have no idea why you quoted my experience as if it isn't credible or legitimate. There are millions of people that know about the shit Islam is pulling, most of them are afraid to speak up because of being called a bigot, racist, xenophobe, receiving death threats or for example said penalty for apostasy for those who are unlucky enough to be born into the Muslim community. But hey, keep discrediting their "experiences" because you're pretty certain that these "experiences" are just figments of our imagination right? Islam is a religion of peace and that's why they are one big happy undivided community where every sunni, shia and shiit are friends of one another :)
About the hijab: Would they still wear it voluntarily if they didn't grow up in a muslim friendly environment?
Because we're all just a result of the culture that we've grown up in. And my culture sure as hell would never force any women to cover herself. And most women would never dream of wearing a hijab. Because we haven't been indoctrinated since birth that we should. Therefore we'd never cover ourselves that way.
Your culture decides that these women aren't making the decisions for themselves.
Demand and supply. If black and silver car sell more you don't make brown and orange cars. It is that simple.
If this is a real issue, women should do something about this. Men are discriminated against women in this industry.
I'm not crying for these women.....unless they are being held at gun point, it is THEIR choice...and they are making pretty decent BANK as well....and Women are preferred over men in this industry ...so ask me again if I'm crying a river
Generally this is not what "exploitation" means—and even if they aren't, that doesn't preclude them from objectified, as well. "Exploitation" does not mean someone is forced to do aomething against their will; people everywhere "freely" apply for a job somewhere, and then work.
They nonetheless are 'exploited' by virtue of their labour-power serving someone else's profit motive. This does not mean they were coerced into it, but it remains, by definition, exploitation. When we say, from the other perspective, that one exploits another, are we to mean that they are coercing or enslaving them? Clearly not.
Just like slaves. Supply and demand.
They are not forced to do it, they get paid. You have no idea what slavery is.
It was an analogy, to clarify your understanding. Women are pretty vocal about this, but it takes the entire industry to acknowledge that it's wrong to make change.
Are we guilty of objectifying women? Yes, although I wouldn't call it guilty... Men are being objectified too. How is that any different (taking equality into account)? A few examples: https://www.google.nl/search?q=sexy+male&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0...
People are being objectified everywhere, it's human nature. People will be offended, that's human nature too.
And please don't say stuff like this: "[....] and it is a common assumption that men think about sex every seven seconds, so adding the two together could lead me to heated arguments."
That is what I would describe as a generalisation and could be found offensive, yet is doesn't serve any point in the discussion.
As a man I'm offended by what you've linked... I look nowhere near how those "sexy male" humans look and it makes me insecure. Could you please delete the link so I can be comfortable with how I am and how I look?
See... When a man does it, it doesn't make any sense and it cannot be taken serious. Equality works both ways! By the way, nice to see some common sense from a fellow Nederlander ;)
When men is raped by a woman in movie, everybody see it's like a funny moment :) or a joke, how it could be that men didn't wanted
That's just not true. I can't imagine why anyone would find that funny. Rape is never funny, no matter who is being violated. I'm not sure why men on the internet get the idea that no one takes rape of males seriously. I live in a country where boys and teenagers have been sexually assaulted and raped by catholic priests in several orphanages/schools and when the trtuth came out there it was a huge scandal. People were completely disgusted and there were consequences.
When I first found reddit I read everywhere about rape of males. I educated myself, read some accounts and now I know more about it. And I spread awareness for it if it's appropriate. But the truth is still that more women than men are raped and that's why it gets more attention.
Sure.
Now make a search for sexy OLD male and female.
You'll quickly realize that "old" means 2 different things. ;)
I'm not saying it,s wrong or right, I'm just saying that there IS a difference and acknowledging it.
Ignoring it or worst, denying it is just ridiculous.
I didn't know we were discussing the definition of the word "old", and I'm not saying there isn't a difference. All I am trying to show is dat the 'problem' is bigger than is being portrayed in this (rather one sided) article.
I'll happily keep lifting weights to make myself stronger (and more attractive). If people think of me as just some guy with a decent body, I don't really care - in fact I'd be flattered. The alternative is too not be thought of at all. You can't judge someone's personality by looking at them.
I do believe woman are being used in publicity to bring certain aspects to life, and promote the use of their bodies, like some men are for perfume, underwear, fashion etc. It is commercial, it is marketing, it is business. Corporations use what works to trigger our cortex in the way they need for us to be good sheep and consumers.
Objectification is part of commercial work, good or bad, it is used, and will pursue being used for years, that's clearly a fact. Can we criticize, whilst promoting training and tutorials on swimwear ? can we be part of the solution whilst talking about boudoir ?
When having to ban or hide a nipple, even from famous paintings, not tolerating breast-feeding, jumping on people topless or naked, but letting people walk in the street with weapons, and allowing those videos to go off freely on social media... something is wrong (isn't it ironic as alanis morissette would say).
slightly off topic, although on topic, What i clearly see though is plagiarism from American Apparel who could face a lovely lawsuit for using and reproducing almost at the identical a TV poster from french actor Jean Dujardin in film "les infidels"
http://www.lexpress.fr/medias/1701/871142_jean-dujardin-est-un-des-infid...
Sexualization in the advertising world is so overused, everyone does it. The whole world is being bombarded with it. No one takes it serious anymore.
Yes, it is used and it will be used for years to come. But it's not enough to stand out anymore in an oversaturated market and deteriorating world economy. I wish there was more creativity in advertising and less naked women.
should nudity sell or not, that's for everyone to have their take on it IMHO. However what i do regret is the puritanism and censorship coming along for such a sake, when we see what is acceptable and what is censored online, over media, it is quite shocking. Now that does clearly depend on culture and the countries or geographical areas we all live in.
I wish we could come with major creativity in advertising, under whatever form, with or without nudity, but playing with what literature brings to the table. There is so much to play around with and try things, but advertising is so client and data driven nowadays, which will almost ensure a hit, that being daring is becoming rare.
Such a broad subject that probably someone could write hundreds of pages about it (and I suspect that someone did).
First of all women are equal with men, and there is no question about it. (I don't want anyone to misinterpret my opinion about the subject)
However people are people. There is a reason why we respond the way we do to these "triggers" (sexually charged images). Males are designed to be attracted to healthy young females.
On the other hand females are attracted to males that can provide what is needed to rise offsprings.
In big simplification: man likes the look; woman likes strength and status. It is fact that is very unpopular these days but it is a fact nonetheless. That's why we don't see shirtless man as much.
This attraction is used to manipulate us to behave certain way (usually to buy something).
Sexually charged image in advertising is not disrespecting to anyone other than to the target group. Especially that usually woman is presented as she has a power over the man.
In fact advertisement promises to increase men's desirability by buying advertised product.
Is female body overused in advertising? I definitely think so, and I believe that many of these advertisements are not more successful than those without half naked girl in it. It is just that so often people in charge of marketing don't understand the psychology behind it.
But let's not get all crazy and oversensitive about the subject. As far as advertisement goes, the market will straighten it up.
Your opinion sounds very sane and well thought out. In a way it's really an insult to men. That they would need for example Axe to get women interested in men. But that's just the way advertising is on the whole. It's very shallow and often the idea is just bad. There are a few pearls out there, but the majority of advertisements probably has been done by an uninspired and badly paid creatives department. Maybe in the future there will be more original spots of a good quality, let's hope so.
Some of the people commenting in this thread are exactly the problem when it comes to objectifying women. smh
Btw "girl with a slightly open mouth" - it's not about sexuality, but then woman face looks longer and more beautiful, not so oval. If you are photographer you should know that.
So a woman's face that is round, pointy or square jawed is not beautiful? HUH...let me think on that
But what is beauty? Is my interpretation of beauty more valid than yours? Are the same things and people equally beautiful to you and me?
According to some study I read some time ago people perceive longer faces to be more attractive over round faces. It was statistical study so there was no true explanation why.
Somewhere else I read that people, when judging attractiveness, subconsciously look for body features to be as close to symmetrical as possible, and for smooth skin with even tones, as representation of health and good gens.
Is a Honda Civic as beautiful as a Bugatti? They're both cars, after all.
Hah, i don't say they are not beautiful, i just wrote why it's been done like that.
And you do not consider at all that an open mouth implies extasy and sexual openness? Do you ask all your male models to open their mouths when they pose for you?
I usually have my male models smirk or flex their muscles. Making them look suave and strong makes for a better photo. Notice how models of both genders are always very attractive. Making them look more attractive by posing them in certain ways creates a more engaging image. No one wants to see a picture of a scowling bikini model or a guy with a beer gut.