Despite multiple leaps and bounds on the front of gender equality over the past 3 decades, an instance in which this hasn’t been the case is on the front of the roles of men and women as depicted in advertisements. As we have learned in class and in the textbook, deviance, or what is considered to be deviant varies by society and is socially constructed.
According to the text, “…a person can be a deviant without violating any rule or doing something that rubs others the wrong way.” “…individuals who are affected with some unfortunate condition for which they cannot be held responsible are deviant” (Thio, Calhoun, & Conyers, 1). This brings me to another important aspect of deviance: Who decides what and how deviance is classified? According to the text, “The key reason is that the powerful, either by themselves or through influencing public opinion or both, hold more power for labeling others’ behavior as deviant” (Thio, Calhoun, & Conyers, 2). This point by our text’s authors is critical when discussing advertising strategies by elite fortune 500 corporations, who have a great deal of influence on the media, since they are able to reach millions of viewers due to their vast amount of resources to advertise.
Throughout this post though, I want to demonstrate how companies advertise their products by appealing to one sex and alienating the other; as well as perpetuating stereotypes about masculinity, manliness, femininity, and orientation. As you read this and look at the advertisement clips, observe how blatant and explicit the advertisements are to the kinds of people that should buy their product, and as a byproduct, how consumers of their products will become more like the ideal, non-deviant member of society.
Take this first advertisement video as an example, the title “Man’s Last Stand” is fitting when you watch the commercial. In the video, men are essentially saying that women may get to run most of their lives, but not to the extent that they choose what car they drive. By the end of the advertisement the advertiser—Dodge—is implicitly saying, that men who don’t buy this car are letting women dominate their life and decisions to an over-controlling degree. In turn, it tells the male viewer that it is an attack on his masculinity if he is not able to or chooses not to buy the car—since obviously if he doesn’t buy it then it wasn’t his decision. Also, non-masculine men are certainly considered deviant in this society, and realistically, in almost every society. With the revving of the engine of the Charger at the end, it also reasserts the notion that in order for men to be considered legitimate, masculine beings, their car must have an excess amount of horsepower. After all, you can’t be considered a man if you drive a hybrid.
Another example of this phenomenon in advertising is demonstrated in the new Dr. Pepper 10 commercial. Though it doesn’t have nearly the number of assumptions behind it as the Charger commercial, it is still an example of how advertisers make everyone in society deviant—except for the people that buy their products. At the end of this advertisement the message is simple “DR PEPPER 10—Not For Women!” I believe the reason for this advertising angle is because diet soda products are largely consumed by women, and have no sugar, the Dr. Pepper 10 also has no sugar, but supposedly has more full taste like the regular Dr. Pepper (Similar to how Pepsi Max and Coke Zero) and would therefore be more enjoyed by men. However this advertisement is also implicitly stating that if you are a man and drink diet, you should switch or be seen as deviant due to your feminine tastes.
This Old Spice Commercial is likewise picking and prodding at men that aren’t to the standard of masculine that society accepts. The buff, masculine, black man that is promoting old spice takes a pick at ladies watching the advertisement by saying “Women, look at your man, now look at me. Does he look like me? Sadly no, but he could smell like me.” This dialogue is already promoting masculine men and ostracizing feminine men. He also takes a crack at men using “women” body wash. This once again sends the message to men and women of: real men need to use Old Spice body wash to be a legitimate man.
The last example I am choosing to use for this first deviance post is called “Clean Your Balls” by Axe. In this advertisement they have two gorgeous women at the front doing demonstrations of Axe’s ball washing scrub tool for the shower. In this ad they make deviant everyone who doesn’t have clean balls. While they use sports balls to demonstrate, the ad is clearly insinuating: If you want to hook up with women like this, your balls better be clean. This once again forces the male viewer into appearing deviant and self conscious if he doesn’t have the ball scrubber by axe.
Through all these examples, there is one constant, advertisers will often create representations and images of people that are not deviant at the same time as they insinuate that those that don’t buy their products are deviant. They are able to do this because they have the resources and power to actually directly influence public opinion, and they do so to promote and sell their products.
Thio, Alex, and Thomas C. Calhoun. Readings in Deviant Behavior. 6th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2001. Print.
Note: all other sources used for this blog post were from Youtube, a public domain and therefore not required to be cited.
