Gruen Transfer debates the exploitation and objectification of women in advertising
Over 1.4 million people watched The Gruen Transfer on ABC1 last night, however the show continues online with The Gruen Sessions. Wil Anderson, Todd Sampson, Russel Howcroft, Jane Caro are joined by author, commentator and Advocate for Women, Melinda Tankard Reist in a discussion about the exploitation and objectification of women in advertising.
Russel Howcroft admits that despite the fact that 80 per cent of buyingdecisions are made by women, the advertising industry is seriouslyunder-represented by women, particularly in the creative departments. Creative departments in most agencies are still predominately male. According to some reports, the imbalance is as high as 94 per cent male and 6 per cent female.
One of the greatest problems in the advertising industry, according to Caro is getting ‘the blokes that write the ads to look from the inside out, rather than from the outside in’.
“Women are always being seen in a way they reflect on blokes, instead of what it feels like to be a woman,” Caro says.
Tankard-Reist suggests that the increased ‘pornification’ of society, which advertising plays a significant part gives a false sense of empowerment to women.
“It is socialising boys to view women as service stations and pleasure providers …. and that research has proven that the sexual objectivity of women leads to negative mental and physical health outcomes, such as depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, eating disorders and self-harm.”
Sampson believes it is a wider community issue that needs to be discussed. As a father of two young girls, Sampson doesn’t believe that we should look to advertising to educate children about sexual role models.
“I think the advertising industry should be taking on some of the responsibility, but I don’t think we should be passing on all the ills and woes of the world and the sexualisation of women on advertising alone … There are a lot of people in advertising that have their heart in the right place …. and they don’t go to work every day thinking let’s see how we can f@#k women up.”
17 Comments
I might be interested in watching this if it wasn’t for that knobend host.
As a few of you may know, there’s a sizeable account up for graps at the moment and all the client wants is a tv ad with a ‘hot chick’ in it. Can’t wait to see that one.
Are you serious or delirious? Wil Anderson always gets in the best, most insightful lines. Like on last night’s show when it was revealed that some filo pastry bought at (sponsor) Coles on MasterChef was past its use-by date – quick as a flash Wil invoked Woolworths and their slogan ‘The fresh food people.’ Sorry, 2:16, but you’re the knob.
Sorry, 3:20 PM.
It’s called television. There are writers, editors, floor managers and a bunch of other tricks to make the host look super quick and spontaneous.
Anderson is OK as a Triple J radio host doing dick jokes for the under 12s. But he is woeful on this show, always going for the lame gag. I’m so clever.
Imagine how much better it would have been with an Andrew Denton or an Adam Spencer.
Yes, that joke was decent. There are also days when Julia Gillard looks half attractive, too.
Will Anderson is quick and says funny things, but so does a toddler on MDMA.
Quick as a flash hey 3:20. You need a tour of the magical land called edit suite.
Not even writing script lines well before recording the episode can help him deliver a funny line.
Wil Anderson is the kid in the group that proclaimed ‘I want to be the funny guy!’ as opposed to the one who simply was the funny guy.
I couldn’t agree more.
For too long, men have been exploited and objectified in advertising. From the Diet Coke hunks to the boy-candy for the Philly Cougar, men are often shown as little more than sexual playthings.
But it doesn’t end there. I’ve lost count of the number of times men are portrayed as absolutely clueless dolts… incapable of doing anything any more complex than opening a twist top on their beer.
So yeah, I’m with Melinda Tankard-Reist all the way on this one.
What’s that? Oh…. WOmen. Not men. Sorry. Yeah, it’s bad when advertisers do it to women, too.
If a man doesn’t go for a woman because her boobs are small (to be frank, we don’t really care) he’s a chauvinist pig that deserves the righteous indignation of the ‘free’ press and to lose his post at David Jones.
If a girl doesn’t go for a guy because he has a small pecker, that’s completely acceptable to mention publicly on radio, TV and feature it on the front cover of magazines.
“He had a small cock – how I dodged a bullet” (Cosmopolitan).
Yeah, not buying it misandronists. You’ll have to suck my cock another time.
It shocks me that throughout the whole debate, every ad they talked about, jeans ads, deodorant ads, ad nauseum, there is a male equivalent for each and every one of them.
And I’m a bit peeved Todd and Russell didn’t stand up to it. For example in regards to the jeans ad, the Mark Whalberg ad for Calvin Klein stopped traffic in Times Square NYC and caused a hell of a lot of hoopla.
So should we cast ‘real men’ in our next fashion campaign?
Why is there a double standard for men being objectified?
Oh that’s right. Men don’t have feelings, that’s a woman thing.
Please.
@ No, No No No. You aren’t Wil Andersons family or Agent by any chance?
The guy is a tool and about as funny as the shit I did this morning. Which strangely enough had an english accent and was quite rude to me before I flushed it.
If it was hosted by ANYONE else I’d watch it but I’m over his Prepubescent comedy and I’m pretty sure most people will say the same thing.
Debate’s like these are pretty stupid.
It’s not like agencies are saying to themselves “We’ve gotta hire just men”, maybe there are no women that fill the candidate rolls? Or maybe advertising as a whole just doesn’t appeal to women, there are many factors in this, it should not be a “there’s predominantly one group of people here, so lets force it to be equal”.
I think as a society if we are not careful we could end up in a situation where every work place has to be 50% male, 50% female, then divided again 10% caucasian, 10% asian, 10% black, 10% hispanic etc etc, divided again with 33% of people who grew up in the CBD, 33% of people in outer suburbs and 33% of people from the country and so on.
Which really defeat’s the point of, if you work hard, are talented and have a good folio, you will get a job in advertising regardless of your sex, colour or suburban zone you grew up in.
No, no no, 9:44, I’m none of those things. I just happen to find Wil quick, witty and funny. Like all the comments here, that’s just an opinion. Which I’m entitled to, just like you are.
1:01 AM There’s something inherently wrong in assuming that men and women have the same sort of response to sex and the way sex is portrayed. We’re different creatures and in case you’ve never noticed men are normally the predators and women the hunted.
12:10 PM The language of most communication is a male language: simple with a gag or two. Women don’t generally think like that, we’re more emotive; we learn the male way of communicating but it’s harder to get a book of addy-ad ideas together when your mind really works in a different way. When I studied creative advertising at uni we were 50/50 male/female, but now in the industry I’m surrounded by male creatives (generally selling stuff to women). Debates like this aren’t stupid, they’re important.
From,
A chick creative
Wil is really the only comedy relief of the show and his angle really isnt as immature as some of you seem to think,
I dont think the show would be this popular without him, thus all this debate. it would otherwise be to serious for what it should be and hosted by some depressed ABC reject !
3:08PM
You have just highlighted my point entirely though, you’re comment stating “Women don’t generally think like that, we’re more emotive” is about the same as me saying “Men are tougher than women just because”, there are men out there that are very emotive and there are them who are less characterised by emotion, the same principal would be applied to your gender.
You’re generalisation of men “male language: simple with a gag or two” is the same as suggesting that people of Indian descent would be perfect to work on Indian curry briefs.
In order to push for equality you cannot focus on debating the specific general ‘advantages’ between the two parties in question.
I’m all for feminism, as it was famously quoted “How can I hate woman? My mums one”, but a brief is a brief, a creative is a creative, the best creative for that brief will be placed on it. Period.
For fuck’s sake, will you kiddies please note that the letter ‘s’ at the end of a word does not require an apostrophe every time. Plurals (any word that means more than one) don’t need one. I’m looking at you, 12:10. Were you staring out of the window for your entire 6 years of primary school?
How can you expect your argument to have any credibility if you have the grammar skills of a 5 year-old?
Dear July 2, 2010 3:08 PM
“There’s something inherently wrong in assuming that men and women have the same sort of response to sex and the way sex is portrayed. We’re different creatures and in case you’ve never noticed men are normally the predators and women the hunted.”
Calling men ‘the predators’ and women ‘the hunted’ makes me feel you’re not the most insightful person in the creative department, so I’ll try my best not to come across as a patronising, hairy, masculine lumberjack who’s just come back from killing a wilderbeast and would like “simple with a gag or two” communication with my house-cleaner-wife before I assume the predator position on my bearskin rug.
Have you noticed the “recent trend” for women to be the initiator in relationships?
All the female school teachers that have been given lax sentences for initiating relationships with 15 year old boys? Shows like ‘Cougar-town’ and magazines like Cosmo? National news saying there is a ‘man drought’ of attractive men who earn over $60k? Every girl I’ve been with has picked me up, not the other way around. And I like it, I don’t want to chase somebody and be made to feel they don’t appreciate it. I find the word ‘predator’ the most disgusting and degrading way to describe the male population, and you should feel some shame in that. We don’t do the same to women.
You can’t get us to bake the cake so you can eat it as well. The trend in feminism is going too far and it will eventually become a null argument when we all realise it’s filled with hypocrisy. Every bloke I know wants equality, but double standards are where it all falls apart. And blaming your position in life because you are female, ethnic, poor etc just doesn’t cut it in 2010.
Finally, lumping everyone together in to different ‘species’… Please… you’re in a position of influence in our society, whether you like it or not. Please, please, open your mind a little more so we don’t keep perpetuating ignorance on both sides of the fence. We have a chance to shape the future with what we do, millions of people see your ads. Don’t waste it.
Finally, the comment you made about “The language of most communication is a male language: simple with a gag or two. Women don’t generally think like that, we’re more emotive” and “your mind really works in a different way.” – I’d like to see the science behind the second remark, but I was taught by two very good women how to do creative. One of them was Jane Caro. And I can still hear her voice in the back of my head when I write an ad. ‘Keep it simple, don’t confuse people, keep it simple, clear and single minded.’
I don’t think it’s a male thing to write simple, great ads. It’s a great thing to write simple, great ads.
We have a lot more in common than what separates us.