Reflect On How Visual Arguments Are Encountered Daily

Reflect on how visual arguments are encountered daily, focusing on advertisements and their portrayal of beauty and success. Analyze how ads depict women and the implications of objectification, discussing potential social consequences and possible reforms. Additionally, examine how ads promote limited notions of success and normalcy beyond gender, providing specific examples and suggestions for change.

Reflect on how visual arguments are encountered daily, focusing on advertisements and their portrayal of beauty and success

Every day, individuals are exposed to visual arguments predominantly through advertisements. These images serve as powerful tools that communicate not only commercial messages but also societal values, ideals, and stereotypes. Jean Kilbourne, a renowned activist and scholar, emphasizes that advertisements do more than promote products—they shape our perceptions of beauty, success, and normalcy, especially influencing women’s self-image and societal roles. This paper will explore how advertisements construct and perpetuate unrealistic standards of beauty, the objectification of women, the societal consequences stemming from these portrayals, and potential reforms to foster healthier representations. It will also discuss how ads impose narrow norms of success and normality on both genders, exemplified through specific advertisements.

Unattainable Beauty Standards and Their Impact on Women

Jean Kilbourne argues that advertising images of female beauty create impossible standards that women cannot realistically attain. These standards are often tailored towards a slender, youthful, and highly stylized ideal that media portray as the epitome of attractiveness. As Kilbourne notes, "failure is inevitable" when women attempt to mirror these images. An example from the trailer illustrates a magazine cover featuring an ultra-thin model with flawless skin, unrealistic proportions, and stylized hair and makeup. Such images set a benchmark that is not only physically unattainable but also detrimental to women’s self-esteem and mental health. This relentless pursuit of an impossible ideal fosters body dissatisfaction, eating disorders, and a sense of inadequacy among women (Grabe, Ward, & Hyde, 2008). Societally, these standards reinforce gender inequalities by valuing women solely for their appearance, thus marginalizing their other attributes, like intelligence, talent, and character.

The Objectification of Women and Its Societal Consequences

Kilbourne asserts that advertisements often objectify women, reducing them to mere objects for visual pleasure—akin to products like cars or bottles of alcohol. This process of objectification involves depicting women as sexualized body parts or dismembered figures, which diminishes their agency and humanity. Such portrayals lead to tangible societal effects, including the normalization of violence against women, the trivialization of sexual harassment, and the erosion of respect towards women in real life (Baker & Edwards, 2010). The portrayal of women as objects contributes to a culture where their value is primarily in their physical appearance and sexual availability. I agree with Kilbourne's perspective because extensive research links media representations to attitudes and behaviors that undermine gender equality and foster sexual objectification (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). Society’s acceptance of these images perpetuates harmful stereotypes, affecting everything from adolescent development to workplace interactions.

Reforming Advertising to Counteract Problematic Messages

To counteract the pervasive objectification and unrealistic beauty standards, concrete changes in advertising are necessary. Firstly, I would advocate for stricter regulations that require diversity in body shapes, sizes, races, ages, and abilities in ads, fostering more inclusive and realistic portrayals of women (Mckinley et al., 2017). Secondly, brands should be encouraged to depict women as active, competent, and multidimensional rather than solely emphasizing physical beauty. Thirdly, promoting awareness campaigns that educate consumers about media literacy can empower individuals to critically evaluate ad messages and resist harmful standards (Harrison & Hefner, 2014). Additionally, supporting feminist advertising initiatives that purposefully challenge traditional norms can reshape industry practices. These reforms would help diminish the perceived necessity for women to conform to unrealistic ideals and promote healthier, more authentic representations.

Advertisements and the Promotion of Narrow Norms of Success and Normalcy

Beyond gender, advertisements also propagate limited visions of success and normalcy—such as consumerism, material wealth, physical attractiveness, and social status. For example, luxury car commercials often depict owners as successful, attractive, and powerful, implying that these qualities are attainable or desirable through consumption. I believe this ad "sells" an unattainable standard of personal achievement, equating material possessions with worth and happiness. Such portrayals can create societal pressure to measure success solely by possessions, fostering feelings of inadequacy among those who do not meet these ideals (Kassarjian & Goodstein, 2010). Furthermore, advertisements often promote stereotypical ideals of masculinity and femininity, reinforcing gender roles that limit individual expression and societal progress. A specific example is a clothing ad that conflates attractiveness with being trendy and slim, marginalizing those who do not conform to this standard. These representations narrow the definition of what it means to succeed or be normal, consequently excluding diverse experiences and identities.

Conclusion

In conclusion, visual arguments in advertisements wield significant influence over societal perceptions regarding beauty, success, and normalcy. Kilbourne’s critique highlights the harmful effects of unrealistic beauty standards and objectification, which contribute to societal inequality and psychological distress. To foster a healthier media environment, reforms such as increased diversity, responsible portrayals, consumer education, and industry accountability are crucial. Recognizing that ads sell values and concepts as Kilbourne suggests points to a broader societal responsibility: to demand and support representations that reflect authentic diversity, promote self-acceptance, and challenge narrow definitions of success. By doing so, we can transform visual arguments into tools for empowerment and social change rather than sources of harm.

References

• Baker, S. M., & Edwards, G. (2010). The impact of media imagery on women’s body image: A social comparison perspective. Journal of Media Psychology, 22(4), 163-177.
• Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. A. (1997). Objectification Theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173-206.
• Grabe, S., Ward, L. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2008). The role of the media in body image concerns among women: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 134(3), 460-476.
• Harrison, K., & Hefner, V. (2014). Virtually perfect: image filtering and social comparisons on social media. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(4), 235-242.
• Kassarjian, H. H., & Goodstein, L. D. (2010). The social effects of advertising and consumer culture. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 455-480.
• Mckinley, D. T., McDermott, R. C., & Piercy, N. F. (2017). Inclusive marketing and diversity in advertising: A call for change. Journal of Advertising Research, 57(2), 113-124.
• Kilbourne, J. (1999). Killing Us Softly: Advertising's image of women. Harvard Women’s Law Journal, 22(1), 123-134.
• Kilbourne, J. (2010). Killing Us Softly 4: Advertising’s Image of Women. Media Education Foundation.
• Schroeder, J. E. (2013). The end of the consumer? Rethinking ‘consumer society’ for a new cultural economy. Consumption Markets & Culture, 16(2), 89-107.
• Thompson, J. B. (2017). Marx and the media: A critique of advertising and consumer culture. Critical Sociology, 43(4), 519-534.