Pin-Up Outdoor Adverts

Lauren Rosewarne's article, Pin-ups in public space Sexist outdoor advertising as sexual harassment, she focuses on the sexist representations of women in outdoor advertising. She also discusses how the images that have strong similarities to pin-ups are allowed to be displayed outdoors in public space, where the people cannot avert their exposure, represents the double standard policy. Rosewarne's article considers the display of sexist outdoor advertising to be a public policy issue similar to the way pin-ups in the workplace are acknowledge. Rosewarne suggests that there are various ways that sexist advertising and pinp-ups can be related through, "the commercial and popular culture nature of both helps to distance both products from being

Dr. Lauren Rosewarne is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Melbourne. Her Article Pin-ups in Public Space is an academic piece about the double standard of the allowance of sexist advertisements but outlawing of pin-ups in the workplace. In this essay, I will explain how Rosewarne used rhetoric and evaluate whether she was successful in doing so. She shows the clear similarities both visually of these images but also both of their effects on those whom have them exist in their presence. Rosewarne successfully argues her point due to her excellent use of Ethos and Logos in her argument.

What is the difference between art and advertisement? Where is the line between Pin-ups and pornography? What is and is not considered sexual harassment? Not all of the questions asked have a clear, black and white, answer. Although, Lauren Rosewarne, a senior lecturer at the University of Melbourne and a popular author who often discusses topics such as: gender, sexuality, and public policy, argues that there are clear answers/differences. In one of her journal articles, “Pin-ups in public space: Sexist outdoor advertising as sexual harassment” she claims that outdoor advertisements are too similar to pin-ups and how that is not art but rather more in the realm of sexual harassment. As a graphic design major who has a background in art and advertisement, I have different opinions and disagree with some of the points Rosewarne made. I want to explore the definition of art, advertisement, and sexual harassment in order to discuss why outdoor advertisements are not sexual harassment.

The use of sexualization also reinforces a pattern of gender roles that are currently circulating throughout advertisements. More often than not, women who are used as ploys in ads are seen doing household chores like vacuuming, changing the toilet paper, or making coffee. Females are rarely ever seen in a work place, and definitely not in a powerful position. In fact, the directors of most of these ads place women below or behind the man to show who has the power in actuality. Women are seen as skinny, fragile, and immobile in high heels, while men are strong and powerful. By setting up such a strong binary between the two different groups, it is obvious that the majority of the American society will not be able to fit into these roles, and it leaves a sense of rejection for the average person. This rejection, accepted by the viewers, manifests

Sexist ads show that society is dominated by the same masculine values that have controlled the image of women in the media for years. Sexist advertisement reinforces gender stereotypes and roles, or uses sex appeal to sell products, which degrades the overall public perception of women. The idea that sexism is such a rampant problem comes from the stereotypes that are so deeply embedded into today’s society that they almost seem to be socially acceptable, although they are nowhere near politically correct. Images that objectify women seem to be almost a staple in media and advertising: attractive women are plastered all over ads. The images perpetuate an image of the modern woman, a gender stereotype that is reinforced time and time again by the media. These images are accepted as “okay” in advertising, to depict a particular product as sexy or attractive. And if the product is sexy, so shall be the consumer. In the 1970s, groups of women initially took issue with the objectification of women in advertisements and with the limited roles in which these ads showed women. If they weren’t pin-ups, they were delicate

In an article written by Saskia De Melkar states that in the 1960’s 11 percent of men and 44 percent of women were sexually objectified while in the 2000’s only 17 percent of men and an alarming increase of up to 83 percent of women were sexually objectified in ads. The Borgata Hotel displays a subtle hint of gender roles and the eroticization of a culture. In the ad, the woman on the left poses in front of a bamboo plant as she wears a traditional Chinese dress while an oil paper umbrella peeks behind a curtain. It may seem like paying homage to a culture however a slit on her dress reveals fishnet tights and high heels. The overall photo shows the common idealization of women that we see one too many times in the media; the tall and slender models who often are digitally altered. According to Mik Moore, only 5%

What do you see when you look in the mirror? Do you like what you see? In Jean Kilbourne’s article, “Two Ways a Woman Can Hurt,” she discusses the sexualization of women in advertising and how it plays a role in violence against women. Elline Lipkin discusses the causes and effects of negative body images in her article, “Girls’ Bodies, Girls’ Selves.” Although I agree with Kilbourne that advertising and violence can be related, it is important to consider Lipkin’s argument about how advertising shapes body image in a negative way because while a lot of women experience violence, everyone experiences the effects that advertisements have on body image.

In society, women are held to a very high social standard. The pressure to look as perfect as all the models in magazines have driven many girls to an impossible fixation. Not only is it seen as a social norm, but also people do not even realize the degrading images of women in our everyday surroundings. After watching “Killing Us Softly”, this ideal was brought to my attention more that almost every advertisement piece that involves women promotes sexualization, objectification, and reinforces the feminine gender roles in America.

Firstly, to explain the objectifications of women, within today’s society. Kilbourne’s article, “Two ways a women can get hurt,” expresses in many ways the different kinds of brutality men has towards women. For example, she says “Sex in advertising is pornographic because it dehumanizes and objectifies people, especially women…” (Kilbourne 271). The two words in the quote to amplify are “especially women.” Sure women get objectified in advertisement, although so do men. Men and women both have a side to the objectification of each one another. For every ad a man and his cologne attracting women, there is an ad for women perfume attracting men. Although evidently, it seems, men are going to pay attention to the ad with pornographic images of women, more than women having the attention of an ad with a pornographic photo of a man.

In an ideal world a woman can do whatever she wants with her body, but the reality we live in today is not ideal. Therefore educating the younger generation about how to respect a woman is much needed, and social media is being the main platform where images like this being shared, since companies like American Apparel is taking over the web world and putting out a continent that appeals to the younger minds as “cool” and trendy, and there we start to develop the problem. The ad I am discussing in this paper I first came across it on one of the many social media websites, people were

Scantily dressed women are like an opened box of cupcakes on the cafeteria table; difficult to cease thinking about. Are women, in today's society, mere sex objects and tools in the hands of advertisers, or is this a gross misrepresentation in the pursuit of profit? In the article, “Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt”, by Jean Kilbourne, an award-winning author and educator, the idea about women being utilized to attract profits are brought to light. Advertising agencies' motives are, in essence, to successfully market and sell a product by whatever means necessary. However, of a greater concern, is the sexual violence in our culture towards women and children as highlighted by Kilbourne. In addition, she states that sexual violence is encouraged through advertisements, by making it appear as though it is an acceptable circumstance. That this phenomenon is tolerated in our culture is, indeed, a troubling thought. Nonetheless, Kilbourne leaves a distinct impression that this toleration may, sadly, be true. These advertisements, the ideas, and images portrayed have an undeniably negative impact on our culture as they serve to highlight stereotypes, dehumanize women as a sexual object or tool and, with a constant bombardment of these types of adverts, results in an indifference leading to victimization and possible violence that becomes almost commonplace.

Everyday we expose ourselves to thousands of advertisements in a wide variety of environments where ever we go; yet, we fail to realize the influence of the implications being sold to us on these advertisements, particularly about women. Advertisements don’t just sell products; they sell this notion that women are less of humans and more of objects, particularly in the sexual sense. It is important to understand that the advertising worlds’ constant sexual objectification of women has led to a change in sexual pathology in our society, by creating a culture that strives to be the unobtainable image of beauty we see on the cover of magazines. Even more specifically it is important to study the multiple influences that advertisements have

The extent to which women were presented as sex objects was calculated using a coding system. Every woman in each of the randomly selected 30 magazines was interpreted using a system that was similar to the method that Blaha used. Some of the categories that were coded were the percentage of face shown, gaze, product, expression, body pose, body part focus, degree of clothing, type of clothing, and whether or not the ad was seen as respectful

Pin-up lingerie and Hollywood fashion and glamour had an impact on women’s fashion choices including the cone-shaped bra, and the spiral-stitched bullet bra. In the 1950s, the conical bra literally set the standard of what made a woman alluring. The bullet bra, also known as the “push up” bra of the 1950s, added a full cup size to their bust, fully covered the breasts and provided necessary support, whilst allowing the breasts to breathe. Women’s choice about what sort of brassiere to wear or whether to wear a bra at all were consciously and unconsciously based on the social opinions of the “perfect” shape of the female breast and the female figure reflecting her bust, waist, and hip measurements. (Burns-Ardolino, 2007). As Steele stated in

The Tiger Beer advertisement shown in the appendix is a clear example of the objectification of women in advertising. The Tiger Beer advert was made to appeal to men from the age of 20 to 60. The advert seeks to get a cheap laugh from the target audience with the image of the woman in a sexual pose and the picture of the beer. The ad promotes the idea that beer is the most