Week 4: Pornographic mainstream Media

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/28/politics/main3655538.shtml

Mayor Rudy Giuliani credits himself for cleaning up Times Square in New York City. What used to be a “shady” area with porn shops, peep shows, is now a top tourist destination and they have managed to push the non-mainstream shops to the dimly lit ally ways. The city council claims that this is not all Giuliani’s doing, but long standing city planning. The fact of the matter is that by pushing the porn shops out of the spotlight the planners are sending mixed messages to the population. The massive billboard of Britney Spears wearing nothing but lingerie is posted boldly in the center or the square. As our society is used to such imagery it seems contradictory to push popular pornographic stores to the dark corners of the city, deeming them inappropriate or wrong, when obviously the display of the naked body is not one that is considered to offend on looking tourists.

Week #3 Sexual Imagery used as social critique or challenge

The artifacts posted below serve to illustrate societies infatuation with making everything not only aesthetically pleasing, but also sexually pleasing. From furniture design to architecture, designers have been taught that sexualized figures, ie. curvy, phallic, submissive appeal to popular culture and the majority of people. There is more then meets the eye in these popular designs. By shaping items to mirror the human form, we are objectifying the body itself. By turning the body into simply a form, or shape the complexity of the body is reduced, to form and function. The body is not as straight forward as its being portrayed and therefore feeds the ideology that sexuality takes only one form.

Our culture is a visual one and we learn through texts and images. Unlike the oral tradtions of ancient Africa, we rely on visual images to record history. Looking back on past designs it is the body that is used for inspiration. The female body is especially manipulated to attract attention.

Week #3 Post

A COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE DIRECTORS IN POPULAR PORNOGRAPHY: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WOMEN ARE AT THE HELM?

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bpl/pwqu/2008/00000032/00000003/art00009?crawler=true

Facebook: More Popular Than Porn

a Time magazine article

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1678586,00.html?xid=rss-topstories?iid=perma_share




In our design oriented society, we tend to appreciate the female form.

Week #2 Objectified Sexuality

http://www.furisdead.com/images/vanessab.jpg

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/08/05/amandabeard_rathergonake.jpg


The PETA's ad campaign is balancing on a fine line between the ethical treatment of animals and the moral decisions they make to go about reaching their goals. On one hand their main goal is to improve life overall by catering to the needs of mistreated animals and stressing vegetarianism. On the other hand they are objectifying women and rationalizing false ideals of how our culture views sexuality.

There is no doubt that our materialistic culture is driven by objects and instinctively buying things, but the way in which we are driven to support or buy a certain cause does not need to be based on negative ideals and stereotypes. If the naked human body is the one and only way of reaching a wide audience and capturing their attention, then it is a marketers dream and necessity to make use of this fact. But women's bodies do not necessarily need to be objectified, they can be positioned in a different light then we typically see in advertisements. The women can be empowered beings, who use their sexuality as they wish, not to dominate or be dominated, but to simply be. If the agency lies within the women's conciseness, then the body can be utilized without the negative connotations.

PETA's Sex Talk - video powered by Metacafe



This PETA video exemplifies the stereotypical parent daughter dialogue about sex, excluding the sarcastic manner in which the dialogue takes place. By creating a humorous conversation opposing a typical stance on teenage sexual activity, the ad rationalizes stereotypical teenage sexual behavior, and the pressures that rest on the youth. This video illustrates an important concept in our culture, that sexual desires are objectified to sell products. In this instance it is not the blatant use of a sexual body, but the use of our sexualized culture to bring attention to a matter.

PETA Ads

http://current.com/items/89205746/sex_or_gore_should_peta_abandon_their_shocking_ads_for_the_sexual_ones.htm


The use of mostly nude models in these PETA ads serves to objectify the women as bodies to persuade. The add could easily show a clothed, yet still beautiful model describing her passion for fake fur, and still use beauty to sell. This option is rarely enabled in modern media as the bar for grabbing mass attention has been raised. As more and more "risky" scantily clad women promote products, the less effective the more conventional, fully clothed body can sell.

The actual technique of using sexy bodies to draw attention to a topic can not be diminished down to males sexual desire to see a nude female, but is rather a complex ideology about how women are objectified in our culture. By dehumanizing the women in an add the general public is free to be attracted to the idea without the guilt of "inappropriate" fantasies. The woman's body is used as a commodity rather then what it is, therefore de-humanizing the erotic act. This is apparent in both adds above in that the women could not be mistaken for a women you know, (a mother, daughter, friend or parent) but instead of a nameless body speaking for its product on behalf of itself.

We all know that sex sells products, but can it sell an ethical choice?

http://www.businessethics.ca/blog/2008/03/using-sex-to-sell-vegetarianism.html

When people make the personal decision about what they will eat, it is usually based on ethical principles or dietary restrictions. The decision to omit certain foods from your diet has historically been a personal choice, and has not been at the mercy of persuasion. Recently the PETA, (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has began a series of ads which seek to persuade their audience that they should spare the animals. The moral message is clear, but the validity of the technique is unclear. By using sex as a vehicle to steer the public into ethical actions, is the PETA being hypocritical by using such a blatant stereotype that sex sells? Is this ethical behavior on the part of a non-profit organization?