Does the quote that follows it have another meaning to it? The ad …show more content…
When there is a context of systemic and historical oppression, stereotypes and prejudice have different weight and meaning (433). My ad shows that against men, that men is the “eye candy” of the article instead of the women. Well Kilbourne’s thesis is mostly about women abuse. What about the men? They might be dominate in most aspects of life, but they also get dehumanized as well. They are expected to have a body with a chiseled chest and bulging biceps. That’s not an ideal image of a man, nor a plumber. When you think of a plumber what do you see? A man bending over the sink, with his butt crack hanging out. Missing a tooth or two, talking to you with a redneck accent. I disagree with Kilbourne in many ways. Women degrades men, just as well as men would a women. Especially in ads promoting items to sell. You wouldn’t buy a item with an ugly male or female promoting it would you? Not unless its make-up and it shows you how you can transform from a beast into a beauty. In my point of view, women are the ones that usually publishes magazines. They design the articles. So why would they make women and men so vulnerable? If it was up to a man everything they would design would be about beer and sex. Everything is misleading to a naked eye. It also has a double meaning, She says “ Indeed if a women does whistle at a man or touches his body or even makes direct contact, it is still she is at risk and the man who has power” (435). That’s honestly stupid because the women shouldn’t be making a pass at the man if she doesn’t want to get noticed. She needs to back up a few steps and see if that has him making the pass she wouldn’t like that. Men have power true, but women has just as much as power. It’s all how they let it control their life. Kilbourne makes excellent points, but the ad that stood out to me was about a man getting in the spot light. A