Regenerating Hymens and Bloody Sheets: What’s Really Going On Down There?

HymenFilm

By Therese Shechter

A still from a 1947 sex ed film that says hymens have nothing to do with virginity

A few months ago at a dinner party, the topic of hymens came up (don’t all your dinner parties go like this?) and how on rare occasions the membrane is completely sealed and has to be surgically opened. One of the men there wondered how the condition could go unnoticed, seeing as it would block the passage of urine. It took me a while to realize that he thought women urinated from the opening that leads to the vagina. This from a twice-married father of 3 in his 60s.

Being female doesn’t guarantee we know the score either. We grow up with so many myths and get so little useful information about the female anatomy. Is it surprising that what we know about the hymen–its anatomy, its history, and its relationship to a woman’s sexual history–is flawed, incomplete, and yet totally ingrained in our collective consciousness?

For example, friends often tell me they didn’t bleed the first time they had intercourse because gymnastics or horseback riding broke their hymens. In fact, the bonk of a balance beam tends to get absorbed quite well by the vulva. Heather Corinna of Scarleteen points out that it’s more likely that, in the past, the threat of a broken hymen was used to discourage women from doing just these kinds physical activities.

As for me, during a long sexual dry spell, I’ve joked that my hymen must be growing back. Guess what? This can actually happen. In “Virgin: The Untouched History,” author Hanne Blank tells the story of a Taiwanese woman who had no less than three hymenotomies to unseal a relentlessly regenerating hymen. Even a sex ed film from 1947 tells us the hymen has nothing do with virginity, so why have the myths persisted?

Let’s take a journey into the misunderstood world of hymens and see what’s really going on down there.

The hymen is an inconsequential little bit of tissue: Or as Hanne Blank describes it: “A hymen is what’s left over when you make a hole.” The hymen can be thick or thin. It can change shape, grow, shrink, or disappear over time. It can have one hole, several holes or have no hole at all (this is the imperforate hymen, which gets noticed at puberty because it blocks the flow of menstrual blood). When penetrated, some women bleed a lot and some don’t at all–and that blood can come from any irritation on the vulva or vagina. It can happen the first time you have sex as well as the 23rd. Most importantly, hymens tell as accurate a story about a woman’s sexual history as the tip of a man’s penis tells about his. That is, no story at all.

There’s more than one useless way to check a woman’s virginity: Checking a woman’s hymen may be the gold standard these days, but it’s just one of a long line of attempts to prove the unprovable. Many ‘virginity tests’ were based on the idea that intercourse opened a channel between a woman’s vulva and throat. So, using this obvious faulty logic, the woman in question might be asked to smell a head of lettuce to see if it would cause urination. Or, she’d be seated on a cauldron to see if its smoke could be smelled on her breath. Yet another test used string to measure the ratio of a woman’s head to her throat (this one makes a fun party trick, see below for a link to a bonus video).

The hymen wasn’t even discovered until 1544: It started when the anatomist Andreas Vesalius went looking for a reason as to why some women bled during intercourse. He isolated a bit of tissue in two female cadavers he was studying, and because one was a nun and the other a hunchback, he decided neither had had intercourse with a man. The presence of this tissue sealed the deal, so to speak. Many other men followed his path of discovery and the magical hymen went from being a tiny anatomical body to the ne plus ultra of female virginity. You see, men really wanted and needed a medicalized definition of female virginity, one that smacked of scientific accuracy, as opposed to all those bits of string and lettuce leaves.

It all sounds ludicrous, but so were the tests to find witches and look where that got us. Lest you think present-day ‘virginity testing’ only happens in far-away countries where women are veiled, my own Manhattan gynecologist has told me stories of mothers bringing their daughters in to her to be verified as virgins. (She patiently explains to them the only way to know is by asking). And just a couple of months ago, a guy posted Facebook photos of what he claimed were his bloody honeymoon sheets, boasting to the world that his wife was a virgin. People were outraged, but I think mostly because they thought that all that lady blood looked gross.

There is a giant re-virginizing marketplace: Given the pressure on women to ‘perform virginity loss’ to the specifications of the misinformed masses, there is much money to be made selling products that recreate signs of virginity that have nothing whatsoever to do with virginity. Here’s my own consumer rundown:

Creams like China Shrink Cream, Liquid Virgin, and Like a Virgin are applied to the vaginal walls in order to (allegedly) cause swelling and tighten the vagina. For under $10 they promise to make it feel, you know, like the very first time. One also claims to be an excellent disinfectant and deodorant. We asked an intern to try it on her lips but nothing happened.

The ‘artificial hymen’ is actually a small piece of plastic embedded with red dye that’s inserted into the vagina before sex. It sells for about $30 online and those in the know recommend the Japanese brand over the Chinese because it won’t cause as many infections. Despite ordering the Japanese model for myself, I couldn’t convince my husband to try it out. It sounds like a joke but in 2010, Egyptian clerics demanded that anyone caught using one of these rather icky devices should be put to death by the state.

More hymen myths and some of the revirginizing products on the market.

At the most drastic end of the spectrum are the different varieties of hymen reconstruction. Many women, even those who have never had intercourse, go to clinics all over the world, including the US, to get a stitch or two put into their labia (the hymen is usually too fragile). This is to ensure bleeding on wedding-night penetration. Hymen reconstruction is a common practice in Europe, the Middle East, and South America, but carries a real stigma for doctors and very few actually admit to doing it. In contrast, US clinics advertise hymen reconstruction all over the internet, right alongside ‘vaginal rejuvenation’ surgery.

As for me, I never bled my first time, and I know it wasn’t because of gymnastics, which I did my best to avoid. I think the event was just so anti-climatic, my hymen remained as unmoved as the rest of me.

Bonus video link: Watch Hanne Blank demonstrate the string virginity test on Therese Shechter.

* * *

Therese Shechter is a filmmaker in the final stages of the new documentary “How to Lose Your Virginity.” You can join the conversation right now by answering the question “what’s the biggest myth about virginity you ever learned?” and by submitting your own virginity story to the crowd-sourced First Person project.

Donate today to support the final edit of “How to Lose Virginity.” You can watch the new trailer here. Therese’s first documentary “I Was A Teenage Feminist” is probably showing at a Women’s Studies class near you. You can follow her @trixiefilms.

 

Post to Twitter

PETA and Porn: Exploit Women, Not Animals

PETA ad featuring Pamela Anderson that was banned by the city of Montreal in 2010 for being sexist.

PETA ad featuring Pamela Anderson that was banned by the city of Montreal in 2010 for being sexist.

By Ashley-Michelle Papon

Just in time for the chill of the holidays, the marketing wizards at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have come up with a new way to keep converts to animal welfarism warm. Within the next month, PETA will capitalize on their previously raunchy skin campaigns with a companion porn site. The porn site, PETA.XXX, will showcase plenty of celebrities willing to bare all, but according to Lindsay Rajt, PETA’s associate director of campaigns, the site will also feature displays of what PETA considers animal abuse. “We’re hoping to reach a whole new audience of people, some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn’t anticipate seeing when they went to the PETA triple-X site,” Rajt said.

From billboards preying on insecurities about swimsuit season as a method of somehow saving whales to advertisements suggesting your real concern during airport body scans should be how hot your vegetarian body looks, the idea that PETA could still manage to shock anyone is worthy of a laugh. Or two. Though the artwork from ad to ad differs, the message is overwhelmingly the same: learn to respect the welfare of animals, while disrespecting that of people.

In other words, a porn site featuring juxtapositions of animal abuse images isn’t a new low; it’s exactly the type of half-baked tasteless trafficking that we should be expecting from PETA. As a countless number of galleries–including this one by Time magazine–highlight, PETA’s co-founder Ingrid Newkirk long ago made the conscientious choice that the best way to sell her message would be through exploiting women, and she does it because it works, sticking to her philosophy that PETA is obligated to serve as “press sluts” to bring attention to their cause.

And stick to it, she does. Newkirk is, after all, the same woman who famously wrote to Yasser Arafat, urging him to keep animals out of conflicts with Israel after a donkey died during a suicide bombing. No such request for the then-prime minister to condemn “honor killings” such as bride burning and female infanticide, which accounted for a full two-thirds of all killings within Palestine territories at the time, reflecting PETA’s less charitable view of women’s expendability in general.

Not to mention PETA’s emphasis that a woman’s value is strictly in how her body looks. Fat-phobia has been PETA’s old trusty in the arsenal long before the “Save the Whales” campaign. Ideally, PETA shouldn’t care what a body looks like, provided that the body is simply sustained by a vegetarian diet and vegan living. In actuality, they know that if there is anything our patriarchal society reviles more than women in general, it’s women of size, and preying on those cultural prejudices has been a source of great media attention, which normalizes the violence visited on those same bodies.

Of course, this cavalier dismissal of violence against humans (specifically, women) is the real problem with PETA’s approach to activism. In 2002, PETA filmed a would-be Super Bowl commercial, which depicted a group of hooligans beating a woman to death with a baseball bat to the caption of, “What if you were killed for your coat?” Though the commercial was banned from airing, just last year PETA turned up the heat (and the fake blood) to launch their “Meat is Murder” basics, placing humans in life-sized deli counter meat packages and cellophane. The gag might have been somewhat educational, if the models hadn’t looked as though they’d just come out of Jeffrey Dahmer’s freezer.

That joke might seem to be in bad taste (no pun intended) until you consider that the serial killer’s cannibalism has been the fodder of more than one advertisement and celebrity-targeted criticism. No, seriously. But Dahmer’s crimes aren’t the only ones that PETA finds acceptable to dovetail into their agenda. In 2008, PETA created an ad identical to their 1991 Dahmer special in response to the Manitoba Greyhound bus beheading, asking people to imagine the terror of victim Tim McLean and use it as motivation to “leave violence off of their dinner plates.”

However, the argument here isn’t that the decision to launch a porn website is continuing PETA’s legacy of playing up violence to make a point. Although feminists often disagree as to how empowering or violent pornography inherently is, what makes this particular venture par for the course is PETA’s decision to include images of animal torture. It’s a veritable buffet of -isms for the organization, with the unintended consequence of eroticizing the torture of animals.

Part of what makes PETA’s performance so frustrating is that they should know better. Their website contains a lengthy explanation about the correlation between people who abuse animals and violent behavior towards other human beings, suggesting that on some level, somebody in that organization should understand the intersectionality of subjugation for women and the animal kingdom.

More to the point, promoting misogyny—often, violent—with the end result of animal liberation makes about as much sense as using racism to end class politics. You’ll capture some headlines, but you’ll probably alienate more people than you galvanize, especially since people likely to be more sympathetic to animal causes tend to also be against the idea of exploiting women.

It goes without saying that there are plenty of reasons to care about the treatment of animals in this country and elsewhere. Any enlightened, progressive individual has to acknowledge that our experience is largely shaped by what we consume, and that includes consuming the animal community. But responsibility goes both ways, especially when we’re talking about oppression of marginalized classes like animals. For real change to happen, PETA has got to stop objectifying women to nothing more than literal pieces of meat.

* * *

Read other Adios Barbie content related to the eroticized violence of women:

A Monster Success! (reports on our successful petition against the official release of Kanye West’s misogynistic “Monster” video)

Deconstructing Kanye’s “Monster”


Post to Twitter

Marie Claire’s “Love Your Body Issue” is a Big Fail

howoldwomen

By Elena Rossini

A couple of weeks ago I read that the November 2011 issue of Marie Claire South Africa featured several thought-provoking ad campaigns by major advertising agencies on the topic of “Love Your Body.” I thought it would be wonderful to showcase this in my documentary “The Illusionists.” Thanks to the fabulous Jill Greenberg, who’s a Facebook fan of the project based in South Africa, this past Saturday I received a copy of the special issue in the mail. And I have to say, I was in for a BIG surprise.

A more accurate title for this issue should have been: “Please hate your body and buy our advertisers’ products.” Yes, it’s that bad.

The person chosen for the cover of the special “Love Your Body Issue” is statuesque supermodel Candice Swanepoel, wearing a bikini.

To her left, you can see the following headlines:

  • 21 DAYS TO GET BIKINI READY
  • TSELANE TAMBO ON LIFE AFTER LIPO
  • WIN: FREEZE YOUR FAT OFF!

And finally, in huge bold letters: Special Issue. LOVE YOUR BODY. 6 TOP SA AD AGENCIES COMPETE TO SHOW YOU HOW.

The first thing that one notices while turning the pages of the magazine is that it looks just like any other issue of a major fashion magazine, full of ads for cosmetics and luxury brands, and showcasing young, extremely thin models – whose pictures are thoroughly airbrushed, even in “candid” photos.

Like this one for instance:

The models’ legs have a plastic quality. They look like Barbie dolls.

After 40-something pages of advertising and galleries showing the latest beauty products and fashion accessories, the special “Love Your Body” section debuts, with various thought-provoking ad campaigns by South Africa’s top ad agencies.

TBWA shows the painting of Botticelli’s Birth of Venus. Underneath it, the headline: “Why change a masterpiece, you’re beautiful the way you are.

Next, an ad by Saatchi and Saatchi, showing the corpse of an older woman on a metal table. The headline: “When will you stop worrying about your appearance? Love the body you live in.”

Case in point:

Left: the ad by Canvas Lifestyle, showing a Barbie doll with several markings on her body. “Add cellulite from favorite heavenly chocolate brownies” … “Add caesarian scar from your first-born son” … “Add laugh lines from girls’ night out” …

Right: An ad for the Burberry fragrance “BODY” with a model who looks like a real life Barbie doll. Which is kind of contradictory, no?

Next ad:

Left: a simple message by TBWA. “IMPERFECT. I’M PERFECT. Start seeing things the way you really are.

Right: an ad for the Dolce & Gabbana fragrance “Light Blue” – with flawless looking models whose bodies are thoroughly airbrushed.

Next:

Left: a collage of photos by Kristina Stojilokovic that says, “Which part of your body would the people who love you change?” with close-up images of women’s bodies: a woman’s freckles, a big scar, knees, a belly button, a mole.

Right: an ad for L’Oréal Revitalift. With the big headline “FIGHT THE 10 SIGNS OF AGEING, IN A SINGLE GESTURE.

Less wrinkles
Smoother skin
Firmer skin
Rehydrated skin
More flexible skin
Suppler skin
Even skin tone
Radiant skin
Refined pores
Defined facial countours

The rest of the magazine doesn’t fare so well.

There are articles like: “I GREW HAIR ON MY CHIN” – “LIFE AFTER LIPO” and “HOW OLD ARE THESE WOMEN?” which asks readers to guess the ages of six women.

Then: “4 Ways to Get Beach Body” Ready

The final verdict: I would give this special issue a “FAIL” grade – on all fronts. The only diversity it showcases is racial: thankfully there are many African models represented. Problem is: they all have the same age and body type. ALL OF THEM. Every photo is thoroughly airbrushed, giving women a plastic / Barbie-doll-like quality. Including most of the “love your body” ads. This issue is the equivalent of the Big Bad Wolf disguised as Little Red Riding Hood’s grandmother. And this is quite sad, considering the opportunity Marie Claire had to promote positive body image.

To read more on the topic, check out my April 2010 review of Marie Claire France: “100% Without Airbrushing.

Originally published at The Illusionists. Cross-posted with permission.

Post to Twitter

When Did My Tampon Become a Fortune Cookie?

Fortune Cookie Tampons

By Sayantani DasGupta

Apparently, when I wasn’t looking, some corporate geniuses decided that tampons should come packaged with perky self-help style advice. I can see the business meeting now: “Hey, I know what a menstruating girl or woman might need at ‘that time of the month’ alongside product absorbency! How about some inspiration!”

And so, this morning’s plastic tampon wrapper (I know, I know, I should be using a non-plastic brand, or a diva cup but go with me here) nearly shouted at me with the rah-rah force of a pom-pom wielding cheerleader:

“Don’t Stress!” “Play to Win!” and, worst of all, “You’re a take-charge kind of girl!” it shrieked.

I don’t know about you, but I’m willing to take pseudo-Eastern sounding mysticism from the tag of my tea bag, but I draw the line at inspiring tampon covers.

So, I guess my real question is this: When did girl power go amok?

I just came back from the National Women’s Studies Association conference, where there were lots of interesting panels on girl’s movements and girlhood related politics. Some panel names were:

  • Hey Shorty! Young Women of Color Take Research Out of the Academy
  • The Sexualization of Girls Across Time, Space and Cultural Mediums
  • Today, Not Someday When We’re Grown: How Girls ‘Do’ Activism
  • Representing Girlhood and Girls of Color, From Hip-Hop to Health

Awesome, right? (I wish I could have attended them all!)

Girl’s activism is a real and formidable force in the U.S. and around the world. But in broader culture, “girl power” has become heavily usurped–a snazzy marketing ploy by corporate forces who want to appeal to women and girl’s pocketbooks, not our politics. I know there’s been a lot of attention to steering women and girls away from passive “pink” marketing like books from Packaging Girlhood: Rescuing Our Daughters from Marketers Schemes to Cinderella Ate My Daughter: Dispatches from the Front Lines of New Girlie-Girl Culture. But what about the taking over of “girl power” for marketing ends?

Consider the controversial Gardasil “One Less” commercials, featuring seemingly empowered, soccer playing girls also choosing to get vaccinated against HPV. (So… all girls who are empowered will get the HPV vaccine? Or alternately, get the HPV vaccine and become empowered?) Or, how about the Dove Clinical Protection deodorant ads in which a young woman cuts her own bangs with nail scissors (ooh, rebellious!) before deciding she will “Carpe Diem” today. Or, even the “Be Unstoppable” ads for Playtex Sports Tampons, which seem to shout (at least in my head), “Wear our tampons! Become a champion surfer!”

As opposed to the “F” word (feminism), which involves real-live grown-up women with real-live grown-up political agendas, “girl power” somehow goes down easier in mainstream culture. Girl’s activism becomes somehow read as feminism “lite.” Girls–even bang-cutting, soccer-playing, surfing girls–are cute and perky, right? Not bra-burning, hair-on-legs, speaking-their-minds or, erm, any other formulation of ADULT women?

I find that attitude pretty problematic–both for what it says about girls and girls’ activism, and for how it separates girls’ and women’s political actions and our common goals. (Not to mention how problematic it is to wake up one unsuspecting morning and find my tampon calling me, an adult woman with growing children of my own, a girl.) 

So marketers, lay off using girl power to support sales of your products. We don’t need your deodorant to be rebellious, or your tampons to help us win the big game. We just need them to do what they’re supposed to, and the rest we’ll manage on our own, thank you very much.

Girls’ activism, like women’s activism, is feminist activism, people. Girls’ bodies are not cutesy marketing tools, or a way to get girls and women to buy more junk we don’t need.

How about you keep your plucky advice on tea bags and in fortune cookies, and out of our bodies?

 

 

Post to Twitter

In the Name of Girls: The AMA Calls for Magazine Ads to End Photoshopping Bodies

In 2001, two media literate students produced this image  to raise awareness on the media and body image.

By Pia Guerrero, Co-Founder/Editor

When we first launched the Adios Barbie website 12 years ago, I had to explain what the term ‘body image’ meant to friends and family when they asked what I was up to. I was leading a lot of media literacy workshops at the time where I often had to prove to skeptical teachers and students that the media affects our perceptions and self-esteem.  Many didn’t believe they were impacted. But eyes and minds opened when they saw examples of body after body in magazine ads that had been digitally altered. “It’s impossible to look like that!” they’d finally exclaim. And I’d smirk, in a self-congratulatory way, thinking that my work was done.

In 2001, two media literate students produced this image to raise awareness on the media and body image.

 

Today, a lot of awareness has been raised around the digital and plastic manipulation of models and actresses in magazines. The likes of Kim Kardashian no longer hide the work they’ve had done and instead flaunt their new bodies on anything they can plaster their image across. Regardless, thousands of girls and women continue to hate what they look like and strive for the impossible–to look like women that don’t actually exist.

The primary message that most ads send to girls is that above all else their most valuable quality is their body and appearance. The most prominent image girls see of women and teens in the media is one that is hyper-sexualized and centers on an unrealistic ideal of beauty and size. As a result, studies show that mass media consumption is linked to obesity, eating disorders, and poor body image. According to the National Eating Disorders Association, 42 percent of girls in first through third grade want to be thinner, 81 percent of 10-year-olds are afraid of being fat, and 51 percent of 9 and 10-year-old girls feel better about themselves if they are on a diet.

The good news is that the American Medical Association (AMA) announced they’ve adopted a policy against what I’d call false advertising.

The AMA adopted a new policy to encourage advertising associations to work with public and private sector organizations concerned with child and adolescent health to develop guidelines for advertisements, especially those appearing in teen-oriented publications, that would discourage the altering of photographs in a manner that could promote unrealistic expectations of appropriate body image.

To drive the point home, Dr. McAneny of the AMA states, “We must stop exposing impressionable children and teenagers to advertisements portraying models with body types only attainable with the help of photo editing software.”

This institutional stand is definitely a cause for celebration, but don’t put on your party hat just yet. While the first step is always the most important, I hope AMA doesn’t end at only “encourag[ing] advertising associations” to stop their practices. Because it’s not just the advertisements in magazines that are the problem. It’s ads everywhere. In fact it’s other media like billboards, commercials, music videos, movies–even cartoons. I applaud the AMA for taking this first step. It’s powerful and important and will hopefully lead to great strides towards long-term change in how women and girls are portrayed everywhere.

 

Related Content:

Help Expose the Real Illusionists

Is Airbrushing On Its Way Out?

Putting “Proper” Clothes on Mariah Carey

Debenhams Breaks Fashion Protocol Again

Editor of Self Gets Her Photoshopped Ass Handed to Her

Warning Labels on Photoshopped Models? “Oui” Say the French

Kardashian’s Cellulite: A Complex Controversy

 

 

 

Post to Twitter

Ads Featuring “Average Joes” Just as Effective

Study finds that male consumers respond equally to ads featuring everyday guys OR male models. Photograph by: Photos.com, canada.com
Study finds that male consumers respond equally to ads featuring everyday guys OR male models. Photograph by: Photos.com, canada.com

Study finds that male consumers respond equally to ads featuring everyday guys OR male models. Photograph by: Photos.com, canada.com

A recent study in the Body Image journal reports that advertisements that feature everyday males are just as effective as those with super buff male model types. In fact, given the choice between the latter and no model at all, study participants chose no model. The ads were evaluated by both men and women, with consistent results across the board. The study does not mention females — and though there are notable standouts like Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty, it seems sadly unlikely that the result would be the same for ads with women. We’d love to know — what do you think? Are ads with “average” men — and women– just as effective as those with the Adonises and supermodels?

Read more at the Vancouver Sun.

Related content:

Men & Body Image

Adios, Superman?

Why Moms of Boys Need to Care About the Body Image of Girls

Deprivation and Dehydration Standard for Male Models

Dove: Redefining Male Beauty

Media Causing More Men to Pursue “Ideal” Body

Dove and Diversity: Not Just for Women

Post to Twitter

Debenhams Breaks Fashion Protocol Again

Debenhams shows that Photoshop is not necessary as is illustrated in the non-Photoshopped model on the left as compared to the Photoshopped model on the right.

Debenhams' campagin argues that Photoshop is unnecessary as is illustrated in the non-Photoshopped model on the left as compared to the Photoshopped model on the right.

By Sharon Haywood

In March of this year, we highlighted how the UK department store, Debenhams illustrated their commitment to diversity by launching an advertising campaign for a new fashion line featuring models of various shapes, backgrounds, and abilities. We’re thrilled to see Debenhams breaking fashion protocol again. This time, the department store will feature their models in all their natural beauty – without the use of Photoshop.

The campaign features the store’s latest swimwear line on photos of models sans airbrushing. To drive the message home, Debenhams will post digitally enhanced photos alongside the untouched ones with the message:

We’ve not messed with natural beauty; this image is unairbrushed. What do you think?

Here at Adios Barbie we think it’s long overdue and we’re not the only ones. Debenhams also has the support of Liberal-Democrat MP Jo Swinson, co-founder of the Campaign for Body Confidence:

More and more people are realising that airbrushing and other trickery are not necessary in order for women to look beautiful. I am sure that what this will demonstrate is that swimwear modelled by real women who have not been retouched can sell just as well as products advertised with extensive airbrushing, which has become the norm. Women can feel good about themselves knowing that beauty is not about achieving the unachievable.

Beginning this week, the department store features their real beauty (aka no airbrushing) campaign at their flagship store on Oxford Street. If consumers respond positively, we can expect to see all of their stores following suit. Be sure to let them know that they’ve got your support. Your voice can make a difference.

Read the full story at the Daily Mail here.

Related content featuring Debenhams:

Mannequins Make a Statement

Debenhams Department Store: Bona Fide Diversity

More related content on photoshopping:

Editor of Self Gets Her Photoshopping Ass Handed to Her

Kardashian’s Cellulite: A Complex Controversy

Is Airbrushing On Its Way Out?

Putting “Proper” Clothes on Mariah Carey

In the Name of Girls: The AMA Calls for Magazine Ads to End Photoshopping Bodies

Warning Labels on Photoshopped Models? “Oui” Say the French

Post to Twitter

Stand-up Comic Adam Hills’ Message to Women

Adam Hills

Australian comic Adam Hills is not one to mince his words:

“Don’t buy women’s magazines … They are designed to make you feel bad about yourself so that you buy the s*** that they advertise.”

Those were the opening lines of his nearly three-minute stand-up routine at the Melbourne Comedy Festival in 2005. Want more? Check out his cheeky yet on-point message about fashion magazines here:

Post to Twitter

Debenhams Department Store: Bona Fide Diversity

Debenhams Diversity

Debenhams Diversity

Debenhams for Diversity by Ben Barry at Any-Body

Last week, the UK department Debenhams launched an advertising campaign for their Principles fashion line that features models of a variety of sizes, backgrounds, and abilities. The print advert features a petite 5’4 model, a size 16 model, a size 10 model, and a wheel-chair using model. Debenhams is the first UK high street retailer to employ a model who uses a wheelchair in an advert.

Michael Sharp, Debenhams’ Deputy Chief Executive, said: “We cater for women of all shapes and sizes, young and old, non-disabled and disabled, so we wanted our windows to reflect this choice.”

Read more at Any-Body.

Related content featuring Debenhams:

Mannequins Make a Statement

Debenhams Breaks Fashion Protocol Again

 

Post to Twitter

Dove: Redefining Male Beauty

Dove Men ad

Dove Men ad

By Sharon Haywood

Is male beauty found in ripped abs and bulging biceps? Is a man deemed attractive by the car he drives? Or by how much money he earns? If you look at commercials geared toward men as an indicator, you would have to deduce that square jawlines, snazzy sport cars, and a thick wallet equate with masculine attractiveness. But one commercial that aired for the first time during Super Bowl XLIV presented a refreshing alternative.

Dove’s marketing team, Unilever didn’t use a buff model to promote its new skin care line, Men+Care. Instead, the spot (dubbed The Journey to Comfort), features a man that some male consumers can identify with: A thirty-something family guy who has successfully navigated gender-specific milestones to arrive at ‘being comfortable in his own skin.” According to Marketing Week online, Dove’s Men+Care’s brand manager, Paul Connell states:

Dove is proud of its pioneering approach to women and with this new campaign for Dove Men+Care we now have a fresh approach to men as well. We’re taking a light hearted approach and acknowledging the life events that help men become comfortable with who they are, without a cheesy grooming stereotype in sight.

Dove certainly has much to be proud of. Its Campaign for Real Beauty for women continues to be celebrated for stomping all over stereotypes by using women of various sizes, shapes, ages, and races in its ads. As far as the company’s advertising efforts for the men’s line goes, it’s off to a good start. But it could be better. According to Unilever’s own research, “three quarters of men feel misrepresented by way men are represented in ads.” The research involved over 7,000 men between the ages of 30 and 55 from Brazil, Canada, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. One can’t help but question why Dove did not include men of various races and ages in its debut commercial. As well, it’s probably safe to assume that lanky, pudgy, slight, and paunchy men constituted a good number of those polled by Unilever. But the ad didn’t include these types of men either.

Representatives at Dove and Unilever are hoping their current ad campaign will generate conversation about what truly encompasses male beauty. The Journey to Comfort is a solid first step. But initiating an honest and engaging dialogue surrounding the breadth of male beauty requires Dove to take similar sorts of risks it did with the woman’s campaign. Here’s hoping that future commercials for Men+Care take it to the next level and represent all shades and shapes of men. Wrinkles, flab, and baldness included.

Watch the commercial and check more about Men+Care at Dove’s website.

Related content:

Men & Body Image

Adios, Superman?

Why Moms of Boys Need to Care About the Body Image of Girls

Ads Featuring “Average Joes” Just as Effective

Deprivation and Dehydration Standard for Male Models

Media Causing More Men to Pursue “Ideal” Body

Dove and Diversity: Not Just for Women

Post to Twitter