In the modern era, it’s common knowledge that sex sells. As we are regularly bombarded with NSFW ads, we have to ask ourselves what we, as a society, actually think about these images. Vv Magazine’s Philip Mak gives his opinion…
As the buzz from Alexander Wang’s recently-released, highly-controversial denim ads fill the zeitgeist, it comes that perennial time of the year when we, as a society, must question how far is “too far.” There are few tropes more readily recycled in modern advertising than “sex sells,” and rightfully so.
ADVERTISEMENT |
A popular study by Tom Reichert, a professor and the head of advertising and public relations at the University of Georgia, notes that the amount of advertisements featuring sex has risen from 15 percent in 1983 to 27 percent in 2003. That said, by 2003, 78% of women in ads in men’s magazines were dressed suggestively – whatever that means. Marketing is a science like any other – while there is a large creative, cultural aspect to it, it is also driven by empirical results. Positive results, or a good “return on investment,” can be measured by media exposure, product sales, and various types of buzz. If sex didn’t sell, we would’ve abandoned it as a tool decades ago instead of increasing its use.
“Sure, the mothers and Mormons will be decrying the death of our culture on Fox News and whatever other platform will give them a podium to deliver their sermon but really – does anybody actually listen?”
The study by Reichert, however, examines a time period before social media. In the era of Instagram, Twitter, and Tumbler (the latter two having very lax restrictions on nudity in content), a sexually explicit ad or magazine cover can go viral overnight. A recent example, of course, is Kim Kardashian’s Paper Magazine cover, which claimed to #BreakTheInternet.
Sure, the mothers and Mormons will be decrying the death of our culture on Fox News and whatever other platform will give them a podium to deliver their sermon but really – does anybody actually listen? People have been screaming from the rooftops about the sexually suggestive nature of media since its inception. Apparently, the first use of sex in advertising was Pearl Tobacco in 1871, featuring a naked maiden on the brand’s package covers. Doubtlessly, many packages were uncovered at the sight of it. (Click here to view gallery.)
On the other side of the spectrum, feminists (yes, I did just use Time‘s “f” word of 2014) have been claiming that the use of sex in advertising objectifies women, promoting sexism, and patriarchal values in our society. In turn, this male gaze — largely reinforced by those pesky straight white men — subordinates women, dehumanizes them, commoditizes their bodies, and marginalizes communities like homosexuals and transsexuals. Interestingly, the more modern inclusion of explicit male nudity and focus on the male physique in non-sports media has also led to many of these issues becoming relevant to men.
ADVERTISEMENT |
So the question now becomes: are we okay with these images? Entire university theses have been built on how they are reinforcing values that both conservatives and liberals would find repugnant — from hypersexual exposure to children, to unapologetic misogyny. Like it or not, you have to look at it realistically. Our society is driven by capitalist market forces and, as previously discussed, sex really does sell. As illustrated by Kardashian, it really is all about the “bottom” line. Accept it — because it’s not going anywhere. (Click here to view gallery.)
“Think of it as the post-modern birds and the bees.”
To add to this discussion as consumers, what we can’t lose is our critical eye. Examine these NSFW ads for what they are, and don’t just allow them to flash by subliminally. Is that ad sexually aggressive? Does it subordinate women? What does it mean to only show females on their backs with barely any clothing on? Is showing this kind of imagery affecting boys and how they treat women as men? This last question is of particular importance in the online era. Where once sexually-explicit content was limited to the interiors of magazines or television after 11pm, now can be readily accessed by any child with a laptop or an iPhone a.k.a. every child. If you decided to procreate, it’s something worth talking to your kids about; not in a sensationalist, “Oh my god, boobies are going to make the world combust!” kind of way, but rather that they should understand that the models in photographs are people too. That images are not necessarily depicting reality; sometimes they’re kind of fucked up, and women aren’t any less than men, even if we see more of their skin more often. Think of it as the post-modern birds and the bees.
These are the critical questions you must ask yourself. Don’t hide from it, rather, cautiously embrace it. If you don’t like it, don’t buy the magazine or the product. Quite frankly, it’s just that simple. It’s time to get off the soap box and look beyond the exposed skin, bronzer, and Photoshop so that we can further the dialogue.
Click here to view gallery.
ADVERTISEMENT |
What are your thoughts on these NSFW Ads? Let Vv Magazine know your thoughts on “The Sexiest & Raciest NSFW Ads Of All Time” in the comments below or tweet us @ViewTheVibe.
