How Do Ads Objectify and Dehumanize Women?

In today's society, there are many ads throughout the media that suggest the objectification and dehumanization of women. Not only, are women objectified, but men are as well.  Women are pictured in especially ads for men as objects. In some ads for beer and even food women are seen as the object being advertised. In an advert for a type of beer the woman was pictured with her body from the chest to the waist as the beer bottle being held by a man's hand. This picture is shown at the right. This is showing the empowerment that men supposedly have over women. Showing woman as objects leaves them looking powerless in the first place but to have a man holding the "object" in his hand shows much less representation for women. Like in the picture below, the women has a picture of a car over her face. This is dehumanizing her and objectifying her. The picture has the words the ultimate attraction written over it using the women as the supposed attraction but as the BMW. Showing women this way tells men that it is okay to treat women like objects. When I showed my boyfriend the picture of the beer shaped as a womens body, he thought it was funny. Most people do think these ads are comical or a "good catch". Why would we objectify the women when women are already very much so objectified in everyday life?

Women are shown in many fashion ads as being dismantled or using violence. A lot of different types of ads also do this. The picture to the left shows a fashion ad with a woman dismantled in multiple pieces. As always she has the jewelry, the makeup, and the high heels on in the ad to prove the femininity.

Yes, men are still objectified in ads. Honestly, how often do you see men objectified or dehumanized in ads? I came across one interesting ad that pictured a women leash walking two naked men.

(Pictured below). For both genders we do not see their faces, we just see their bodies which is what the media mostly focuses on. The woman is shown with heels and tight clothing to show her femininity and figure. The men are naked and show the muscles they both acquire. This picture could be taken in two different ways. Yes, this is sort of showing empowerment for women but it also shows empowerment for men. Although these men are on leashes it looks as though they are slightly pulling the woman along. They still have dominance in this picture even though they are being represented as dogs.

 

I could go on forever about each ad that is shown throghout the media, but that would take an awful long time. The question I always wonder is, who actually started this whole trend to objectify and dehumanize a human being in the first place? How does that make someone want to buy a product? We all know why they objectify women during men's ads, in order to gain their attention and have them focus on the "important" body parts of a woman. According to these ads, men only need to pay attention to women's bodies, their breasts, their butt, and especially their figure. What can we do about his objectification and dehumanization? We are human beings. We are not objects. We are not animals. So why refer to us as one? For the proof of empowerment? I'm sure that can be shown with less violent ads and more postive ones. Today's society has began to these ads in the media as "normal" so most people don't think anything of it.

Gays and Lesbians Throughout the Media

Is there an equal representation of gays and lesbians throughout the media? I feel as though we see many more lesbians within the media rather than gays. Why is that? Considering the media tries to get as much audience as it can, lesbians would be expected to be seen more throughout the media. Straight men watch TV shows that include lesbians because that is seen to be acceptable seeing as men who look at pornography are just seen as your typical man. In society, it is not necessarily looked down upon if a man looks at pornography. The pornography almost always includes woman on woman action shots or interactions. So, the audience that looks at things throughout the media pertaining to lesbians are mainly straight men, lesbians, gays, and some straight women may watch TV shows with characters who are lesbians. Who would be the audience for gays? Gay men, lesbians, and maybe some straight women may watch TV shows about gays or even read things dealing with gays in society. There is not much of an audience compared to the audience for anything pertaining to lesbians since more people have been shown to pay attention to the media about lesbians. As said in the movie we viewed in class today, if you are not represented in the media then "you don't exist". There needs to be an improvement with the visibility of lesbians and gays throughout the media. Increasing visibility will help to normalize gays and lesbians in society. In today's society, many stereotypes are made of gays and lesbians. Most TV shows today show gays as being more feminine than your ideal man while lesbians are shown more masculine than your ideal woman. Even if there is a character who is gay or lesbian is portrayed as the ideal masculine man, their partner is almost always the opposite. When we see a gay couple anywhere there is usually one of the partners who look more masculine while the other partner looks more feminine.
An article I read from The Columbian Dispatch, TV's Gay Characters Equally Men, Women, which said that "Gay characters featured in leading or recurring roles on new shows this year include the Fox police comedy Brooklyn Nine-Nine, the NBC sitcom Sean Saves the World and the CBS thriller Under the Dome. ABC and Fox were the only prime-time networks to increase the percentage of gay roles on shows." This article proved how gays are more likely to be seen on television now with more equity of men and women. This doesn't mean that they are completely 50, 50; there is yet an improvement in showing each couples more on television. It used to be that gay couples were made fun of on television, whereas now they are being more normalized as not to be poked fun at. Society is becoming more accepting of gay communities. Personally, I feel the more we see it, the more we will begin to normalize it.
During the reading of GTLB on TV, I noticed a varity of opinions on the matter. Dan Savage felt as though gay pride was only once a cure and is now toxic to society and the gay community. He suggested the idea of being "quietly gay". Another indivual, James, said that people should conform to a more normal standard of gender identity while retaining non-normative sexual identities. Lastly, the individual Xaphan said that there is a need for repeated "treatments" seeing as it has not been completely cured. He expressed his idea that "Pride is the treatment". He said pride is the continuation of the homophobia chemotherapy reffering to Dan Savage's comparison of gay pride to cancer and chemo therapy. If you put all of these ideas together it still shows that we need to see it miore to believe it. As I have seen, gay communities are thankfully being more represented throughout the media which helps society to conform to these "new" ideas and styles of living.

Are Women's Shows Ever Going to Be Less Genderedized?

There is a new show that came out this season called Devious Maids. If no one has heard of it nor seen it, it is a show with four women who are maids in very wealthy households who usuallly have something up their sleeve every episode. In the episodes I began to notice a pattern. The men in this show were always the more wealthy or the couple, had the better job, and was always the dominant person within the relationship of the man and woman. The men in this show call the shots, they boss their wives around like they are just an object made to be there for show. In one episode one of the upper class, wealthy women is divorced by her husband and left with nothing. She didn't get any money from him and since she did not have a job, she couldn't provide for herself. Her solution was to find another husband who could help support her. The woman talks about how she has had about 6 husbands and the thing is they have all been just for her to depend on. I don't agree with how this show portrays some of the women. The women, especially the wealthy ones living with their husbands unhappily, are portrayed to be helpless, dependent, weak, and hopeless. This show portrays that without a man, a woman can't provide for herself or anyone else and is unhappy. As the woman finds a new husband she becomes much happier and feels as though she can breathe again since she will now have the money to keep everything she owns. Women don't need a man to be dependent on nor do they need a man to be happy. Women should be portrayed differently in today's society to send a different message to people. Don't get me wrong, I love watching this show but I recently realized how everything is depicted within it from gender to race. Below is a picture of the maids in this TV show. They all possess some gender roles of that of a woman. They are all using sexy poses, they show the attractiveness and sexyness a women is supposed to have. They are maids so they do the work that women are "supposed" to do according to tradition gender roles. They cook for the families, they clean, and they take care of them in almost every single way neede. One of the girls is not exactly your typical type of maid. The one on the left works for a single gay man which is more of a business job than a maid.

The maids of the show Devious Maids.

Going on a race based argument, there are distinctions in this show that can be made about race. All of the maids are latinas and all of the wealthy people are white. Although an exception to this is a black man who is also wealthy but he is not very often shown during the show. There is also some irony with one of the men in the show. He is a latin gay man who decides not to come out of the closet because he would lose his job. This show explains the difficulty in society even today where gays cannot be "themselves" necessarily because they know they will be treated differently. Even when someone had found out that he was gay, he had to make a huge decision, whether to marry the girl who works for him or to lose his job. Of course he chooses to marry the girl who works for him in order to keep his career. This depicts the impact society has on someone that they can't even be who they really are. Then again this show is good in a way that it shows he still has every feature of an "ideal man". Even though his sexuality is different he is still the attractive man that everyone would expect a man to be.
All of the men in this show have at least one characteristic of the "ideal man". The older men who are the wealthiest characters in the show are all dominant and rich. None of them are particularly strong. Although, when we look at the young wealthy men, we see more characteristics of an ideal man. We see muscular, strong, aggressive, not really emotional, and dominant men.
I could go on forever about how much this show depicts all of the stereotypes and gender roles we have in today's society. The media needs to change how we view the gender roles so that people can stop expecting the unrealisticity of each gender.

Why exactly was 16 and Pregnant introduced to MTV?

I'm sure everyone knows about the show 16 and Pregnant. In the beginning the show was trying to teach everyone that having a child at 16 is not going to give you an easy life, friends, nor will it give you a good education. They are still trying to portray it as something to prevent teen pregnancy but I don't see it that way. This article, Why I Created MTV's "16 and Pregnant", gives the other side's opinion of how this show affects society. Seeing as there have been so many seasons of 16 and Pregnant that goes to show the media is showing that it is okay to have a child at the age of 16 and they seem to glorify the fact. An article I read explains how others view this show, MTV's "16 and Pregnant" Glorifies Teen Pregnancy. One person said that they think the show promotes teen pregnancy, as do I.
Has anyone noticed about the characteristics of these 16 year olds? I've noticed a pattern, many of them have the guy in their life that they think is going to stick with them until the end not to mention most of them aren't capable of living on their own. How many of them actually do? 8 out of 10 of the episodes of 16 and Pregnant that I have watched have had the men (although I should be calling them boys since they are still "kids") leave them, abuse them verbally or even physically, or gone out of the picture completely. I know of one couple on that show that made the smart choice in giving up their child for adoption. I believe the girl's name was Catelynn. This couple had been together for awhile but they knew they weren't ready for a child in their life nor were they stable enough to take care of it. Of course giving up your child after it is born is hard, but wouldn't you want what is best for your child? My mom watches this show, so it dawned on me to write a post about it. I honestly can't stand to watch this show because it makes me angry based on the people's behaviors throughout the show. The girls always complain that they can't go out, but who made the decision to have a child? They did. For some of them though, I have to say they are strong teenage girls. Realizing that yes they did stupidly pretty much put their lives on hold for a long time due to having a child but to the ones who stick it out without complaining and deal with the fact that their baby daddy or boyfriend had left them I will consider them strong for going through everything even though their parents are there to help them. There was a change in this seasons 16 and Pregnant with one of the girls. Her mother was different than all of the other parents. She tried to convince her not to have her child and get an abortion. She told her that if she had the child then she would eventually have to move out since she did not like what her daughter was doing. I have not watched anything after that episode but if that mother sticks with it then I give props to her.

This is the couple that gave their baby up for adoption and still got to see her. This couple did the right thing for themselves and their child.

I believe that if you have a stable life, if you have someone you know for sure will stick beside you, if you can provide for yourself and a baby and you're ready for one; then have the child.
Going on a gender based view, the teenage girls and even mothers follow the type of gender role of that of a woman. They care for the children and their house. Yet, they also take on a part of the man's role. Instead of depending on the man, most of the girls, at least the ones who are smart enough, are independent. They find their own jobs, still try to educate themselves, AND take care of their child. To the teenage girls who actually do all of those things, I don't think I could nor would I want to do that so I feel as though I should give them some appreciation because of their hard work.
In my opinion, young girls such as ages 16 should not have a child. I apologize if I offend anyone. I'm not meaning to. All of this is just an opinion.