Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt

Jean Kilbourne uses statistics, emotional and rational apeals to convince us of her point of view. The issue of "sex" in advertizing has been a contriversial one for a very long time. Kilbourne blames advertisers and their adds for exploiting women and encouraging violence towards women. I agree with Kilbourne that some adds, including some she cited, go too far in implying or showing violence including condoning or encouraging rape. The problem is where to draw the line. It is easy to say we don't want to se that in an add, but very hard to draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not. For instance, if "violence" is banned in all advertisement it would negatively impact several industries. Examples would be mixed martial arts tournements, weapons manufacturers, movie companies, all olimpic sporting events that could be considered violent and many others. Also, who gets to define what constitutes "violence" in an add. Obviously pointing a gun at a woman, as in on of Kilbourne's examples, is bad and violent, but what about an add for a bow designed for deer hunting? Or an add showing a woman fending off an attacker with mace? The problem is once we start regulating things it is hard to stop and eventualy it could lead to bigger problems.

That being said, I was upset by some of the adds in Kilbourne's writing. I don't think it is something that the law or government needs to regulate except in extremely obvious cases. If a company steps to far out of bounds with their advertisements their products and brand will most likely suffer from the backlash. A lot of the examples Kilbourne used were adds for products that are, by nature, linked with sex and violent behavior. Provocative perfume, underware, and alcohol were the main sources of her advertizing examples. This does not, to me, represent a problem with the entire advertising world. I also don't believe that adds have the dramatic impact on peoples violent actions that Kilbourne does. I have been to countries that don't allow women to show their bodies or faces in public. They wear robes everywhere and hide their bodies to protect their chastity. Advertisements in these countries are not allowed to show women's bodies or faces either, yet there are very high rates of rape, murder, physical, mental, and emotional abuses against women. I think adds are a reflection of our popular culture not a driver. Sure they can help to usher in new fashions etc. But I wouldn't go as far as to say they incite people to violence who wouldn't have been violent anyway. The video game industry is one that has been attacked for encouraging violence. There have been several studdies, but I haven't yet seen one that proves violent video games lead kids to be more violent.