The Non-Changing Gender Roles

I don't think advertising has changed. Gender stereotypes are present in so many ads, and although the denotation of some ads doesn't always seem as strong as ads from the past, the connotation of the ads are extremely bold and suggestive. When both a man and a woman are present in an ad the woman is assigned the position subordinate to the man. The men are always given more power and sometimes a higher status than the woman. I think that ads like these have become more aggressive than ads in the past.


This ad for Sky Vodka is extremely suggestive! There is a woman laying out sun bathing, in a really revealing swim suit. She was obviously disturbed since she just recently took of her shades. Standing above her is a man fully dressed in a nice suit. He is not standing beside her, but directly over her. It is as if he came to this position without the woman's consent or even knowledge that he was there. He is in a dominating position where she has to look up at him. I think the fact that the man's face is not in the ad shares that he is confident, and it almost says that it doesn't even matter what you look like; 'If you have sky vodka you are like a glamorous man in a nice suit and can grab any woman you want'


This ad is simply advertising Valentino Clothing. I find the idea of the man having such a tight grasp around the woman's neck to be completely useless in selling the clothing.The woman has blonde hair. Blond hair, as many woman have in ads commonly represents innocence, purity, or femininity. The man, who is taller, has dark hair which in most cases is dominant and shows some type of authority. The couple is wearing sun glasses, so despite the height difference and color of hair/attire, we as an audience would see them pretty much as equals. What makes this ad so stereotypical is the fact that the man has a a tight grip on the woman's neck, and she seems to be totally submissive towards it. This ad is telling society that men are dominant in relationships and that woman should openly accept it. The ad suggests that woman should be compliant with anything the man wishes to do. Woman should allow men complete control.



These two ads are what I think advertising has done to try and stop gender stereotyping. I don't think they are ethically effective in undoing stereotypes. These two ads the gender roles are reversed. In the ZU ad the woman is more dominant than the men. Although the woman is now the subject of dominance the subordinate subject is highly exaggerated. It is not only one man that is subordinate to her, but tons of men. Men are piled on top of each other leaving a trail following closely behind the woman. ZU is a brand of shoes, so the men symbolize the trail of destruction. This, like most a lot of imagery in ads, has nothing to do with the shoes. By putting the woman in the position of power the advertisers are selling the idea of power along with the shoes. In the Doritos commercial, gender roles are reversed but again exaggerated. The ad creators go against the roles society has placed and has a man playing dress up with the little girl. When the group of men enter the shot they are dressed in their own clothes ready to play football. They look like a manly group of men, one of them even has a long beard. The next shot after they see that the little girl has Doritos they are dressed in long pink puffy dresses with boas and veils. The also have an abundance of make up on their face. It is an extreme exaggeration of what girls do in society.
Advertising has come a little way since the past, but gender stereotyping is still present. It is difficult to fully erase suggestions of gender roles in advertisements. It is not impossible, but it is difficult to stray away from the idea of gender roles, especially when society contributes to them so much.