For the past couple of weeks, Kate Upton's name has been everywhere because of her latest Sports Illustrated magazine cover. As with most of that particular magazine's covers, she is flaunting her assets. In this case, it involves her posing topless under a large winter coat with white bikini bottoms.
(Source: www.justjared.com)
This definitely ties in with the class discussions about sexism in advertising. There's no disputing what demographic is being targeted with this magazine cover. It shouldn't even be considered "advertising"; she's simply being objectified. A quote from certainly seems to be heading in that direction:
In one sexy snapshot, the blonde beauty is seen flaunting her signature cleavage wearing little more than a trenchcoat, a low-cut top and a pair of Edelman’s metallic heels..."We chose Kate because she isn’t stick thin. She’s beautiful and all-American," [David] Lipman tells Women’s Wear Daily.(Source: http://www.celebuzz.com/2013-02-21/where-else-can-you-see-kate-uptons-curves/)
Signature cleavage? All-American?
Of course, all women should be proud of their bodies. There's certainly nothing wrong with that. But it's upsetting to see the reference to "signature cleavage", as if that's all Kate's known for. The "All-American" description is confusing as well. What exactly does it mean when a woman is "All-American"? Is Lipman implying that women who don't look like Kate aren't the American standard? Think back to all of those teen magazines that only seemed to want to encourage their readers to lose weight, flatten their stomachs, and just generally change everything about their bodies.
Then one has to wonder: Are all of these comments justified if some of Kate's comments have suggested that she doesn't mind her photos being admired by men?
But playing up her assets is all part of the job, according to Upton. Last summer, the blonde bombshell told GQ that she knows exactly how to use her curves. "I grew up in Florida riding horses, so for the majority of my life I was either in boots and jeans or a bathing suit. … I understand why my male followers like me," she said. "It’s like any job," Upton continued. "You find your strengths and play them up."(Source: http://www.celebuzz.com/2013-01-22/kate-upton-gets-wet-and-wild-well-sort-of-video/)
Models are being admired in "swimsuit issues", in lingerie and clothing advertisements, and on runways. It should always be considered sexism and objectification...even when the models seem to enjoy the attention.
Right?
This is a really great post. I recently read a brief article titled "Where Have all the Swimsuits Gone?", that was about the drastic changes Sports Illustrated has gone through over the years. I completely agree with you that the phrase "signature cleavage" is sexist. I find that it is also degrading; intead of her "signature" being something unique about her personality or even style, people know her best because of her cleavage. I understand that everybody wants to play their strengths and that models are expected to flaunt their bodies but I still find it sad that her breasts are her best selling point. It especially doesn't say anything positive to young girls, but rather encourages them to get breast augmentation in the hopes of finding fame and/or popularity.
ReplyDeleteIt is when I see things such as this that I do wonder how far society has really progress in terms of equal representation. While I do believe women should appreciate their physical aspects, this Sports Illustrated article reminds me that this value that we want to empower women with usually comes with a fine print. This fine print being that you should be happy with the body that you have, as long as it fits this particular criteria that we are highlighting.
ReplyDeleteThough no matter how much time passes, I think females being represented in this manner will not disappear. The media constantly portrays whatever is the most attractive and can sell the most magazine units. I honestly believe the best thing that can be done is just teach women when they are young that their body is special no matter they see in the world or what others tell them. A strong will can trump any majority opinion.
I don't think that Sports Illustrated is trying to hide the fact that their annual swimsuit issue objectifies young women. Oddly enough, Kate Upton is only wearing one piece of a two piece swimsuit in freezing Arctic temperatures. However, I don't entirely agree with the sentiment that it should always be considered sexism even if the model enjoys the attention. Kate Upton rose to fame solely because of her body on last year's issue of Sports Illustrated. She chose a profession that focuses mainly on her physical appearance, not really her personality or intellect. People choose to express their sexuality in different ways, and some women might find that putting their bodies on display is empowering. This reminds me a lot of "slut shaming," which is when women are guilt-tripped for engaging in behavior that violates gender norms. In the case of Sports Illustrated, Kate Upton's cover might be considered indecent because some people believe that women should be covered up. On the other hand, Kate Upton is probably proud of the fact that she is only the second model in the history of Sports Illustrated to be featured on back-to-back covers. I think the real issue about this cover is that Kate Upton was expected to pose nearly nude in freezing cold temperatures. The modelling industry tends to put its models in excruciating conditions and dangerous situations for the sake of the perfect photo. I believe that women should have the right to expose their bodies in any way they want to without judgement, but those who profit off of these young women's bodies need to drastically change its standards for what a model is expected to endure to be recognized.
ReplyDeleteI definitely see your point. Women should be allowed to express themselves any way they choose, but in a society where girls are so easily influenced, I don't feel like the situation is very clear cut. It's a hard one.
DeleteI am confused about your critique when you say that "in a society where girls are so easily influenced, I don't feel like the situation is very clear cut." In what way are young girls being influenced by this cover?
DeleteI think influenced is the wrong word here. I don't think young girls are being influenced, I feel as though it's more succumbing to societal pressures of what makes a girl a girl.
DeleteIn response to the original comment, I couldn't agree more. Models don't have to be ashamed of what they're wearing and how they're posing because someone deems it sexist. She's obviously comfortable with her job and the clothes she's put in. The responses to it are sexist - referring to body-image issues and making a point to say they picked her because "she isn't stick-thin" when she's clearly still very thin and pointing out just how little she's wearing. I mean c'mon, signature cleavage? Because she has nothing else going for her?
Upton is making money the best way she knows how in today's world. She's a voluptuous woman, comfortable enough with her sexuality to pose a certain way, in certain clothing because she knows what the public wants to see. The problem isn't what Upton's showing, the problem is what the public wants her to show.
Is she empowering women? Eh... she may not be helping the cause against objectifying women - but if she wants to wear a tiny two-piece, whose to say she can't? My question is, in reference to "It’s like any job... You find your strengths and play them up", besides her assets, what are Upton's other strengths? Maybe we should write an article about that instead.
I think that the statement "she may not be helping the cause against objectifying women" is problematic. Do women objectify themselves when they wear bikinis or tan topless on the beach? Or does the fact that a photo was taken and published on a magazine cover make it a different issue? What about the photos we might post of ourselves in swimsuits that are available to the public on Facebook and Twitter--are we objectifying ourselves? I think the reaction to a man posing shirtless on a magazine cover would be way less controversial. As a brown-skinned American girl, I do agree that headlines describing Kate Upton as "All-American" are ignorant. But I think that society as a whole should re-examine how we react to female nudity in comparison to male nudity.
DeleteYou bring up an interesting point of view. However, I don't think the opinion or even the intention of the person being objectified has anything to do with whether objectification is happening. Kate has become an "object" in the minds of the (mostly male) observers of her body, and the essence of objectification is that her personality and intent have been rendered moot. So, to answer your questions about women wearing bikinis on the beach or posting swimsuit photos on Facebook and Twitter: no, I don't think anyone can "objectify" him/herself. The objectification happens in the minds of onlookers. I'm in total agreement about the fact that our society could do more to avoid fetishizing our taboos to such an extent that simple nudity (or near-nudity) results almost invariably in objectification. But the simple fact is that, in our current society, it doesn't matter how personally empowered Kate Upton felt during this photo shoot, nor how nonchalantly she waves off responsibility by claiming it's just her job; the resulting image still has a negative effect on how our society views women.
DeleteI may have sounded a bit contradicting with my above statement regarding the fight against objectifying women. I did not mean to imply that women are setting themselves up when they dress a certain way - either walking down the street or publishing it for the public.
DeletePerhaps it was wrong of me to suggest Upton isn't helping the cause against objectification, let me rephrase that - Sports Illustrated isn't helping the cause against objectification with their portrayal of women. Putting pictures aside, their statements regarding Upton's body and her profession are what pose an issue. Their readers are obviously predominately males and the message their publishing, concerning women, is faulty.
ThroughTheDin and Melinda G.- your responses to my comments were eloquently put, and I have a better understanding of your points of view. Your arguments raise some questions: how can society prevent the objectification of women (or men) from occurring if personal empowerment that is expressed provocatively remains separate? Is it up to the men who are viewing women this way to change society's perception?
DeleteGiven that most advertisements, tv shows/movies, video games, etc. that objectify women are targeted toward male audiences, I do believe it's up to men to change their perception of women by altering their responses to these images. Literally, buying into the public's perception of women enables them to continue churning out images of women scantly clad selling beer and cars.
DeleteFor instance when a woman walks down the street and a man responds to her presence by accosting her with catcalls and demeaning nicknames, where did that behavior come from? why does that man think his behavior is appropriate? It's learned, largely from other male figures in his life as he was growing up or the media. He's told that when a woman wears a short skirt, she's asking for it and if those values and ideas continue to be passed down, it creates a vicious cycle.
A few weeks ago I read an essay by Emily Heist Moss titled "A Letter To The Guy Who Harassed Me Outside The Bar". She discusses the interactions she has with random males on the street throughout her day. Many of the scenarios she details hit close to home, the most significant one being the constant fear of your inevitable rape. I really do believe in order for any progress to occur in the fight against objectifying women, men need to take a step back and ask themselves, "do I really want to be that guy?"
Here's the link to the essay if you're interested...
http://www.rolereboot.org/culture-and-politics/details/2012-12-a-letter-to-the-guy-who-harrassed-me-outside-the-bar
This front cover magazine definitely ties into the topic of other revealing front cover magazines we had discussed in class. I'm actually still very amazed by this topic of sexism in advertising because perhaps I never took the time to realize it or look at these front cover magazines in that perspective. Yet, I do suppose that Kate Upton just as many other famous models do these kind of photoshoots as an easy way into the industry. Perhaps if we had better female examples to follow through the media we would set a better example for many other females.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, there aren't many or if I must say any magazines where a female isn't half way dressed. This is where the lack of respect towards females is not present in many other areas besides a workplace. By taking a look at the past advertisement ads from the 1950's in class and this present front cover magazine there isn't much or nearly any change towards women. This is where I believe females should take a closer look at the past and the present in order to open a better future towards females.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this post is a prime example of what we discussed in class about sexism in advertisements. This Sports Illustrated magazine cover is clearly unrealistic. You will never find a woman in a bikini bottom with an open coat on with heels in freezing weather. However, the cover is an eye catcher that will catch the readers attention. Sex sells so they're going to make the most appealing cover to make sure people buy that magazine issue. David Lipman tried to justify why Kate Upton was used for the cover. However, their is no justification because whether she was stick thin, average weight or heavy set,the ad is still exposing her. She doesn't mind showing off her signature cleavage because its going to help her career which ties to how and why women are discriminated in the work place. I never realized how much sexism was used in ads until we discussed it in class, I'll definitely pay more attention to this ongoing issue now.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI found this post really interesting. I believe it is a clear example of sexism in advertisement. Through out time women have been depicted as sexual objects in television and ad campaigns. Women's bodies are objectified, they used as a whole, in parts just to be used to promote any kind of product. According to Jacobson and Mazur (1995) these sexist adds have given women an unrealistic notion as what they should look like. As mention in the post Kate Uptown is supposed to represent the "all american" woman., but are all american women like kate?. NO. There is no such thing as the "all american" or "typical american" woman. These negative messages that are spread by the media, are the ones that affect young girls which later may develop insecurities about their bodies.
ReplyDeleteAfter looking at this magazine cover and reading everyone's comments about sexism in ads, I can't help but think back to the beginning of the semester when Professor Pok discussed with us the glorification Anne Hatheway got for becoming so skinny for her role in "Les Miserables." In this ad Kate Upton is glorified for her cleavage. It makes me wonder what society's view about beauty really is. Clearly these two examples come from opposite sides of the spectrum. It seems to me that society follows what the media's idea of true beauty is. I was surprised to learn that Anne Hatheway criticized the media for calling her beautiful when she looked emaciated and made herself sick in the process. In my opinion, the definition of beauty in our society is based on what celebrities are most popular. For example, women with curves are more accepted and placed on a pedestal now due in big part to celebrities such as Beyonce and Kim Kardashian. Society has strayed away from the skinny model type and embraced the full figured type.
ReplyDeleteThis is obviously an example of sexism in media and the representations of women, however I have to agree with some of the points Shazzy Mac made. I have no idea if Kate Upton is a feminist, but a major tenant of feminism to me is to not judge other women. This is not to say im a fan of the Swimsuit issues. The very idea of them sends a very clear message to women who may want to read about sports, "Ladies, sports are for men, we are going to cater to men, deal with it."
ReplyDeleteBut I think we go down a slippery slope when we being to blame women for merely fulfilling the roles society has made for them. Especially when it comes to models or actresses. Can we really fault these women for having a particular genetic advantage, their looks, and using it to further themselves? The blame should fall at the feet of Sports Illustrated, of people who continue to care more about their profits and not whether what they are putting out into the world is harmful.
I do take issue with the comments about Kate having "all-American looks." As was stated above, there is no such thing as "all-American." When we continue to hold up blonde, blue eyed white women (and men) as the standard of "All-American" beauty, we are not only saying that other races and ethnicities don't meet that standard, but we are also making implications about what an "American" looks like/is. It's not a coincidence that minorities are constantly asked "Where are you from??," and then asked again, as if America/whatever state isn't a good enough answer.
I think Lipman is implying that women who do not look like Kate Upton do not fit the American standard. I find it very offensive that the media has created these standards for what beauty should look like because they choose to ignore the fact that everyday people come across different women who all have their own unique beauties. Yet, the media chooses to ignore this reality and they portray white, voluptuous, blonde, blue eyed women as the standard of beauty in this nation and as a consequence many young American girls grow up to hate their own body images because they want to look like the women in these magazines and television.
ReplyDeleteI think this post on sports illustrated and Kate Upton ties in great with class. I think that the magazine itself is trying to get something that will catch the eye clearly by the amount of cleavage and the oxymoron of her wearing a bathing suit with bikini bottoms. This article describes Kate as having an curvy figure but I would have to say that is societies saying because to me she still seems just as thin as many other models. As said above the all american and signature cleavage is a bit much. Because all american there are so many different body types and shapes that I don't feel that it is right to say her body type is the most common .
ReplyDeleteIf this is supposed to be a swimsuit issue for Sports Illustarted, then where is the swimsuit? All i see is a half naked model wearing a coat and skimpy underwear. Lipman's statement questions what we consider to be beautiful in todays society. If Kate Upton is considered to be an all American women, then what are average sized women considered to be? Outcast in society? What this cover seems to bring is the exploitation of women, what we consider beautiful and the way women are used to target a certain demographic. Society and the way certain people view women has increasingly progressed to skimpy outfits and being very skinny and overly airbrushed to show women how they are supposed to look to attract a certain demographic. What is the worse part is that young girls look at this and strive to look at this harming themselves. I really liked this post because it really brings to the attention to how women are being objectified and need to present a certain image to attract attention.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Creative Dreamer, when you write that it seems that by the article saying her "signature cleavage" it implies that is all she is known for. I did not actually know who she was, but the past couple of weeks I have seen her on all the talks shows that I watch, just because she is on the cover of this magazine looking like this. I get that she is on the talk shows to advertise for the magazine, but I just think it might have been a bit much because she was literately on every show the last two weeks and for what? It is not as if she won something that is regarded in a high manner or not like she saved someone's life, she is just half-naked on a cover that men love to see. I think this cover and what you have said about the article about her adds to the pressure that girls in this society have to look like her.
ReplyDeleteThe funny thing about this magazine is that it deals with woman in sports and sport in general, yet this female is almost completely nude in this cover, it clearly does not even show her talent if she is in a sport. Just like many other female athletics who are forced to do similar poses in photos just because it is what sells. I remember last semester in psych of women when i saw a female athletic who was a basketball player and was completely nude holding a basketball showing her talent.. yet what was made for attention was her body not her talent in being a good basketball player.. i don't remember exactly who this athletic was but you guys can search it.. But society has fallen into a really bad path with woman and many woman are not as educated as we are to see the problem in this.
ReplyDeleteInteresting argument here. Anyone else find themselves being pulled in different directions when trying to respond? I do not condemn Upton, or anyone else, being photographed in such a way. If I'm being honest, the only reason this cover bothers me at all is because of my own insecurities. I don't look like that and never will, and that makes me upset. But that's not Kate Upton's fault so I don't see any reason to attack her for being nearly nude on a magazine cover.
ReplyDeleteI actually think I agree with you here, ANG. First of all, I would like to address Shazzy Mac. The backdrop of the photo is simply that-- a photoshopped scene behind the model. While models may be put in dangerous situations occasionally for the "perfect photo," it is not the case here. In other situations, a model has the freedom to refuse a shoot that she believes is hazardous to her life. The most dangerous aspect of this photo that I can see, is the effect that it has on Upton's diet and fitness routines, and therefore, a covert promotion of unhealthy dieting for young girls. However, Uptons photoshoot is completely voluntary and seemingly safe. The arctic scene in the back is the product of editing. The real danger to her, however, is the reputation that she is receiving for photoshoots like this one.
DeleteYes, sex should not sell, but it is her job and she obviously has no aversion to the public opinion of her. Yes, we can look at this photo and say that she is being reduced to a bikini bottom and some cleavage... but if she was not proud of her profession, she could have suggested to wear the entire bikini. Sports Illustrated is not the same as PlayBoy, which I've heard completely exposes the womans body. She is not trying to sell the bikini, after all. She is posing to sell the magazine. Like ANG said, the cover probably bothers most of us because we have insecurities about ourselves. Not saying that we are all insecure or should, by any means look like her, but why is it impossible for us to simply appreciate the beautiful woman on this magazine cover?
Men are going to degrade her, women are going to spit on her name because of personal insecurities... I really don't think this is an example of sexism. She is voluntarily making a living out of this, and we (the consumers) are buying these issues. We can't forget that men are put in the same position as women are when it comes to selling products, depending on the product, of course. Google search mens health magazine... there will be plenty of shirtless men on the covers. I cant agree that this cover of Kate Upton is the epitome of sexism, or the promotion of the objectification of women.
Wow! What a fantastic conversation! Nice work, everyone!
ReplyDelete