Jennie Thunder's feminist adventures in Windsor

I was invited to speak at the University of Windsor as part of their International Women's Day events this year. It was a real honour to be invited to share my knowledge about the representation of women in advertising, plus my experiences as a feminist radio program host and blogger.

Me (left) with Nicole and Meghan, hosts of Milk & Vodka

One of the coolest experiences was being a guest on another radio program. The University of Windsor has a campus radio station much like our beloved CJSW in Calgary. CJAM is smaller, but they do have a feminist radio program - Milk and Vodka. I was interviewed by the fabulous hosts Nicole and Meghan.

It was really fun to be the guest rather than the host, and it was awesome to meet other feminist radio program hosts! We share a lot of similarities regarding our goals and hopes for strengthening the feminist communities in our respective cities.

I gave three presentations while in Windsor, all of which involved ad-busting - my specialty! I taught students how to identify things like sexism and racism in ads, and showed them how advertisements work by making us feel ugly, wrinkly, fat and generally inadequate. The shittier we feel about ourselves, the more we'll spend on products that supposedly make us thinner, more beautiful, less hairy, less wrinkly, and so on. Below is a typical example of what my ad-busting looks like. I've been doing this for about 6 years now and it's so much fun. I like challenging the mainstream messages in advertisements and inserting my own message of empowerment (or maybe just something funny that makes people think twice about the images they're seeing). 

My whole experience at Windsor was thanks to a group of women's studies students who were asked to find a presenter for Women's Day. They wanted a young feminist who was active in her community, and they found me via this blog. As I mentioned, I felt very honoured to be asked to present. Spending time with the students who organized the events was a real treat. They reminded me of myself six years ago - a keener student (I mean that in the most affectionate way!) with a passion for women's issues and a desire to make a difference. 

The students who organized the event: Sapphire, Marianne, Alexis, me and Laura

On my final night in Windsor I attended a button-making event at a local cafe. Tons of students from all faculties showed up to make buttons. I made a few myself - pictured here. This was actually my first time making buttons - hard to believe since that's practically a right of passage for feminists!

Well, that's my trip to Windsor in a nut shell. The best aspects of the whole experience were spending time with other young feminists and hearing feedback from my presentations like, "I learned a lot" and "That was really interesting." I have returned to Calgary with renewed feminist spirit and I'm ready to keep on rockin'!

Ad-busting L'Oréal's Roller Foundation

Just some good ol' fashioned ad-busting

I used to do a lot of ad-busting when I was in university. I even taught ad-busting workshops to teens and university students. I haven't done any in a while and I kinda miss it, so I thought I'd post a few of my favourite busted ads and maybe it'll help inspire me to do more!

American Apparel had their chance to be cool, and blew it

In August 2011, American Apparel (AA) launched a plus size model search called The Next BIG Thing. Women were asked to submit their photos and the public would vote for the new face of their plus size division.

It all sounded pretty cool to begin with. I was excited... AA is finally branching out to plus size women? Hooray! But then I read the call for models. As you might expect from AA, the call made use of predictable and somewhat demeaning language.

Calling curvy ladies everywhere! Our best-selling Disco Pant (and around 10 other sexy styles) are now available in size XL, for those of us who need a little extra wiggle room where it counts. We’re looking for fresh faces (and curvaceous bods) to fill these babies out. If you think you’ve got what it takes to be the next XLent model, send us photos of you and your junk to back it up.

A couple of problems with their call out:

1. Wait - they’re only making 10 styles in size XL? That’s not very many. Also, what exactly is “XL”? According to the AA size chart, XL is a size 12/14, also known as the AVERAGE size of American women.
2. Your language is ridiculous. Extra wiggle room? Curvaceous bods? Your junk? Why does everything related to plus size women need to come packaged in stupid language like “booty-licious”? 

Well, their call for models didn’t just seem awkward and offensive to me. It caught the attention of Nancy Upton, a size 12 gal from Dallas, Texas. She entered the contest as a protest, submitting pictures of herself in alluring poses while eating chicken, chocolate, pie and even bathing in a tub of ranch dressing. Her submission simply said, “I’m a size 12. I just can’t stop eating.”

The public loved Nancy. When the contest was over, she won the popular vote by far. But American Apparel didn’t like that the winner was mocking their contest. So AA’s Creative Director, Iris Alonzo, wrote a letter to Nancy which included the following ridiculous sentences:

It’s a shame that your project attempts to discredit the positive intentions of our challenge based on your personal distaste for our use of light-hearted language, and that “bootylicous” was too much for you to handle.  

Oh — and regarding winning the contest, while you were clearly the popular choice, we have decided to award the prizes to other contestants that we feel truly exemplify the idea of beauty inside and out, and whom we will be proud to have representing our company.

Hot damn! We love Nancy!

So Nancy was shot down by American Apparel. Big surprise. But then something interesting happened. Nancy posted the harsh letter from Iris onto her blog and it went viral. American Apparel was suddenly swimming in bad press and Iris had some serious back-pedaling to do to.

Iris apologized to Nancy and offered to fly her and a friend out to LA to tour the company headquarters and discuss how AA could better market to plus size women. Once again, I had a glimmer of hope that maybe AA could be kinda cool.

Nancy and her friend met with the creative team who organized The Next BIG Thing contest and had an interesting discussion about marketing to plus size women. American Apparel exec’s fed the girls cream puffs (the irony of which was not lost on Nancy), and Iris even took Nancy and her friend out drinking. Things were looking up. “I had a REALLY good feeling about where the company would go after my trip,” wrote Nancy on her blog.

Over the next few days, Nancy and Iris exchanged a few more emails, and then Iris fucked it all up again.

On October 4, Iris wrote:

Marsha and I were trying to remember what we even talked about, and amidst all of the late night fun and cream puffs (compounded by the fact that we couldn’t re-watch the video of the meeting), we can hardly remember what was said at all.

I think Nancy summarizes my feelings about that email pretty well. On her blog she wrote:

This company spent thousands of dollars flying Shannon and I to LA, to meet with their team and they can’t even remember what we discussed. Nor do they care to. They want me to write something happy go-lucky about how positive our meeting was for women everywhere, and then they want to sign off on it, you know, in case I forget anything.

As it stands today, this whole debacle is SO TOTALLY OVER to Nancy. She is done with AA, writing “[Those] three sentences of that email tell more truth about what went on in this bizarro adventure than anything I saw in that factory or those offices.”

So, American Apparel had numerous chances to do something cool here, and they blew it every time. They insulted plus size women in their call to models, they shunned the popular winner of their contest and then insulted her in an email, tried to make it up to her only to flub it all again.

American Apparel, you clearly need advice, so I’m going to offer you a suggestion: Don’t be afraid of change. Or fat girls.

AA: Don't fear fat girls with chicken!

Your stocks are in the crapper, your CEO is dealing with multiple sexual harassment lawsuits, nobody likes your ugly hipster clothes anymore, and everyone’s sick of your sexist advertisements. Clearly, your company is in need of a shake-up. SOMETHING needs to change and I’m not going to pretend I know what that is, but maybe this whole thing with Nancy could have been exactly the change you need.

When your company is already down pretty low, you have nothing to lose by trying something new. Who knows, maybe you could have captured the hearts of North American women sized 12 and up, opening your store to millions of new customers. Two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese, and other stores like Forever 21 and Target have already realized that the “fattening of America is a big business opportunity.”

In light of this whole debacle with Nancy, I fear that American Apparel’s destiny is to fade away as soon as hipster style falls out of fashion. But I’m OK with that, because time and time again AA has proved themselves to be a company that only cares about making clothing for slim, young, beautiful hipster women. Good luck making a profit each year with such a tiny demographic.

Adbusting at Market Collective

Last weekend, volunteers from Take Back the Night Calgary set up an ad-busting workshop at Market Collective. People were invited to flip through magazines and find advertisements, images and articles that they wanted to “bust.” Busted images were then plastered over the walls.



I organized this adbusting workshop, and I’ve been doing these for about 5 years now. I define adbusting as “Defacing images that are offensive because they portray unrealistic beauty standards, are sexist, classist, homophobic, racist, insulting or demeaning."

Here's what the adbusting workshop looked like:

The workshop drew large crowds and we received so much positive feedback. One woman came up to me and said, “Thank you so much. I really needed to see this.” I think that seeing busted ads helped to remind people that we shouldn’t passively accept images we see in media: we should be thinking about them, what they really mean, and what they’re really telling (and selling) us.



We received over 100 “busted ads” but I can’t post them all here, so below are some of my favourites.

Jennie's Picks: The Best Busted Ads from Market Collective

THIS is beautiful? But it's fake!

Who can compete with Photoshop?

I miss my Mommy

Did you see she has such pretty eyes?

There's more to life than being pretty

That's cool... I'll just wait over here

Women are food? Consume, dispose, repeat.

Remember what food tastes like?

One of the most offensive ads I've ever seen

Click ad to enlarge image

Shape Liquid & Powder ad from 1970

Thanks to Vintage Ads for posting this

If you're a regular reader of this blog, you probably know that advertising is one of my niche areas of interest within feminism. I spend a lot of time looking at advertisements - both vintage and current - trying to dissect the meaning of ads and figure out what the company is trying to tell us and sell us. I've seen some pretty horrific ads in my time - but this one is right up there with the worst. When an ad is this offensive, I've gotta get my rant on! Below are the three worst sentences/paragraphs from this ad, and why they piss me off.





“Beneath that floppy sweatshirt she’s a little overweight. You knew that. Because right now, you’re a little over weight, too. That’s bad. This year’s bathing suits hide nothing. Unless you start losing some, you may spend your summer in a sweatshirt, too. Face it, you’ve got to stop eating.”

• The girl in the shirt IS NOT OVERWEIGHT. Not even close. By stating that she is, the advertisers are planting a seed of doubt in every reader's mind that she too is overweight. If a young, slim girl like that is “a little over weight,” then almost every woman is.
• Being overweight is “bad”? And they've already implied that almost every woman is overweight… so now they’ve got 95% of the female readership feeling like bad people. This is a common advertising technique; advertisers make you feel insecure about something, then offer their product to fix your problem. In most cases, the “problem” is something completely natural, like grey hair, cellulite or winkles, but we’re made to feel so ugly/guilty/old/fat that we are desperate to fix it… and we’ll try any product that “guarantees” results.
  
  
• “Face it, you’ve got to stop eating.” Wow. Really? That's a pretty blatant promotion of eating disorders.
  
  

“… you can substitute Shape for one or two meals a day. Or, if you’re really serious, four Shape meals a day for a while. And no other food.”

• Are you fucking kidding me? This promotes unhealthy eating habits and essentially tells women who are “serious” about losing weight (and who wouldn’t be serious about it after you’ve already called us fat and told us that's bad?) that they shouldn’t eat.
  
  
• What the hell does "four Shape meals a day for a while" mean? That's a pretty unspecific amount of time. If I consumed Shape four times a day and ate nothing else, how long do you think it would take before I'd collapse from lack of energy or some other ailment? Not to mention it would fuck with my digestive system.
  
  
  
  

“If we made Shape taste any better, you might start sneaking it now and then, and you would get fat on it.”

• WTF. Terrible copywriting, just terrible. If you’re advertising a product that’s supposed to make women slim, why would you then state that having too much of it will make you fat? This sentence is just bizarre to me, and confirms the fact that the people who developed this ad were complete fucking idiots.

More Ass-vertising

More ass-vertising for shoes that will supposedly give you a miracle F-ing workout.



Previously in ass-vertising: Reebok's Ass-vertising Campaign

The Photoshop Effect

Do you know the extent to which photos in magazines are retouched? This video demonstrates how images are retouched and asks if our obsession with Photoshopped images is creating unattainable beauty standards for women.

Reebok's Ass-vertising Campaign

Reebok claims you can work out your legs and butt muscles just by wearing their EasyTone shoes. Everyone’s looking for an easy way to a bikini body – whether that be through “skinny pills” or shoes that tone your butt and legs. There’s so much damn pressure to look good (i.e. skinny) and marketers know that people will buy almost anything if there’s a glimmer of hope that it will work. Despite the lack of proof that these shoes actually work, people are buying them up. Officials from Reebok say the EasyTone is the company’s most successful new product in at least five years.



So, how are these shoes supposed to work? While most athletic shoes offer support and cushioning, these “muscle-activating” shoes are engineered to create instability. “Balance pods” inside Reebok EasyTone’s are said to force the wearer to engage stabilizing muscles further, resulting in more toned leg and buttock muscles.



An article from the New York times basically states that Reebok’s claims are bullshit. “To support the claims, the shoemakers each offer company-financed exercise studies suggesting that the shoes produce a higher level of muscle engagement, at least in a controlled research setting. But the studies don’t show whether more engagement leads to meaningful changes in muscle tone or appearance over time. Nor is it clear whether the high level of engagement continues once the walker becomes accustomed to the shoe.”



I think what disturbs me the most about these EasyTone shoes is their advertising campaign. Erm, make that assvertising campaign, cos asses are about the only thing you see. I’ve included two of their print ads, and you can also watch their obnoxious television ads on YouTube, but I warn you that watching these ads may lead to lower self esteem and feelings that your body isn't good enough. (Thanks, Reebok!)



The print ads are frustrating because they’re so obviously fake. The legs have been Photoshopped to such an extreme degree that they look like plastic Barbie legs. Real people’s legs don’t look like plastic, they have veins and different colours/tones on the skin. Caucasian skin is not a peachy-plastic colour: it has tones of red, purple, green, and blue within it. The only conclusion I can come to is that these legs must belong to some new race of humans with impossibly flawless skin!



Also what’s up with the see-through panties? It’s bad enough that they throw these fake skinny legs in our face, and now we have to look at ass-cracks too? It’s just a bunch of anonymous Barbie legs and asses being thrown into our faces, and we’re meant to believe that we can actually achieve this look? Let me save you the $150 on the shoes and some of your dignity by telling you now that even the fittest most athletic women in the world don’t have legs and asses that look like this because these are computer-generated bodies. Refuse to compare yourself to a Photoshopped body. Refuse to believe their bullshit lies that you too can look like this - all it takes is walking in these shoes!



No, Reebok. All it takes is a greedy advertiser and a soulless Photoshop editor who’s willing to air brush all the veins, colour, personality and individuality out of your legs until they look like two sticks of peach-coloured plastic.



So Reebok, I have a request for you. If you shoes ACTUALLY work, then have the balls/eggs to show us REAL women’s legs after they’ve walked around in these shoes. Until then, I’ll continue to believe that the only woman capable of legs like that is a computer-generated woman.

It's 2010 and advertisers are STILL using gang rape to sell clothing?

When will designer brands learn that it’s not cool to use gang rape to advertise clothing?

In 2007 Dolce & Gabanna put out this charming ad, which was banned in Italy, Australia and Spain, and caused controversy world-wide.



Now, Calvin Klein has basically done exactly the same thing. This new ad, starring Dutch model Lara Stone, has also been banned in Australia for being “suggestive of violence and rape.” Australia's ad watchdog said the image "was demeaning to women by suggesting that she is a plaything of these men. It also demeans men by implying sexualized violence against women."

I believe these companies know that what they're doing will spark controversy, and they're using the old "any press is good press" motto. So on the one hand I'm reluctant to even mention this because maybe that's exactly what they want... but on the other hand, it's really important that people understand WHY these images are unacceptable: Studies have shown that increased exposure to images of violence against women "normalizes it" and makes it less shocking and seemingly less wrong. If people start to think of rape and sexual assault as something normal, they will have less sympathy for victims, and more offenders will get away with their crimes.

What happened to Christina Hendrick's hips?

Christina Hendrick from Mad Men is a beautiful, curvy lady. But in this new ad for London Fog, they seem to have Photoshopped her hips right out of the picture. Below is a picture of what her hips actually look like.



Why would London Fog Photoshop her hips down so drastically? Christina's curvy body is part of what's made her loved by so many people and a role model for curvier women. Shame on you London Fog for fucking up what could have been a really beautiful advertisement.

Chevy's "nostalgic" (i.e. sexist) advertisement

'Remember when your cup holder sat next to you and wore a poodle skirt?'

Remember ladies, women should always sit in the passenger seat... never the driver's seat. And women should wear skirts, cos they're feminine and pretty. And women should hold the man's drink - since she's not gonna be driving, she might as well make herself useful.

I get that Chevy is playing on the whole nostalgia thing with this ad... but seriously, did they have to serve up their nostalgia with a side of sexism?

New Diesel ad looks an awful lot like American Apparel

Is this supposed to be, "if I wear hot jeans to the office my boss will sleep with me?" And what's up with the fact that their tag line is now "Be Stupid?" (bottom right). WTF.

Top 7 reasons why American Apparel sucks

1. Internal documents reveal that ugly people shouldn’t bother applying at AA.

2. The company's Guide to Grooming describes in detail how staff should look. No bangs! No gauge earrings! No liquid foundation! No goatees or mustaches! No Uggs, flip flogs, gladiator sandals, vans, converse or winter boots! (Oh, no, we’re not a dictatorship. Whatever would make you think that?)

3. AA won’t make some of their women’s clothing above a size 6.

4. They doesn’t want any of those “trashy Black girls” to work there. Only the ones with the nice hair.

5. Current employees must submit photos to be promoted or receive a raise. Cos, you know, we don't want any uglies being promoted.

6. AA has a Best Bottom Contest to find the sexiest ass. Well, I don’t know about the sexiest ass, but I know who the biggest ass is… Don Charney (CEO of American Apparel).

7. They pretend that they're really progressive cos they don't photoshop their ads and they use "real women" to model their clothes. I guess "real women" only come in a size 4 or smaller and look about 16. And guess what? Sleazy porno-style ads aren't progressive and edgy. It's the same old shit that Calvin Klein has been doing since the 80's. Just admit that your ads are as sleazy as every other shitty clothing company and stop trying to pretend that you're so original and cutting edge.

Well, there is a light at the end of the tunnel... apparently AA is in pretty serious financial trouble.

Monday's show: Disabled bodies ignored in mass media

On Monday July 26 we're talking about body ideals in advertisements and media. More specifically, we're discussing how disabled bodies are completely missing from mass media. The "invisibilizing" of disabled bodies serves to make the general public feel that disabled bodies are not or cannot be sexual or beautiful. So we're speaking to a gal who created a photography project that challenges the notion that disabled bodies are asexual or undesirable.



Holly Norris is a women's studies student and a photographer. She and her friend Jes Sache came up with the American Able project as a way to challenge our society's fears and misunderstanding about sexuality and disabilities:

"In a society where sexuality is created and performed over and over within popular culture, the invisibility of women with disabilities in many ways denies them the right to sexuality, particularly within a public context."

Check out Holly's website for more info on this amazing and inspiring project!



Another interesting website to check out is GenderAds.com.



As always, we're on-air from 8:00 to 9:00 pm (MST) on CJSW 90.9 fm in Calgary, but you can listen from anywhere in the world on cjsw.com. You can also download our podcast if you miss our live show!

The American Able project spoofs American Apparel ads





The original American Apparel ad

Hot! HOT! HOT!

I am totally loving this. For its June 2010 issue, French Marie Claire has gone curvy with editorials featuring plus-size models in lingerie and swimsuits! And just two months ago the magazine printed a totally non-airbrushed issue. I have a new found love for the French.



Aren't these pictures absolutely smokin' hot? The models look so healthy and beautiful!







Check out more hot pics from French Marie Claire here!



I would way rather see clothing, swim wear and lingerie modeled by the women above than this anorexic stick that's pictured below. (Image below is 19-year-old model Inna Pilipenko in clothing from Ashley and Mary-Kate Olsen's brand The Row. This image is extra-disturbing considering that Mary-Kate Olsen struggled with anorexia herself).

If this isn't skinny, I don't know what is

The feminist blog-o-sphere is up in arms about the new cover of Shape magazine. This month's cover girl is Kim Kardashian - looking smokin' hot (although probably highly photoshopped) in her purple bikini. So what's the problem? Well, read the words printed next to her left bicep: "I'll never be one of those skinny girls."



Hortense, a writer at Jezebel comments, "As if we're supposed to find this admission believable and heroic as it sits next to an airbrushed picture of, uh, a 'skinny girl' who is currently a spokeswoman for the Kardashian QuickTrim diet pill system, a program she claims, in commercials for the brand, will help you create the body you deserve... In celebrating and promoting Kardashian's statement that she'll "never be one of those skinny girls," even though she very clearly already is, the magazine is essentially telling its audience that Kardashian doesn't represent thinness, which is ridiculous."



Sociological Images also has some great comments about this magazine cover - be sure to check it out.

Disabled Model Spoofs American Apparel

The "spoof" ad photographed by Holly Norris, featuring model Jes Sachse

This is so awesome!



Holly Norris (a Canadian!) has created a project called "American Able" where she uses a disabled model to spoof American Apparel ads.



Here is a little bit about the project (taken from Holly's website):



'American Able' intends to, through spoof, reveal the ways in which women with disabilities are invisibilized in advertising and mass media. I chose American Apparel not just for their notable style, but also for their claims that many of their models are just ‘every day’ women who are employees, friends and fans of the company. However, these women fit particular body types. Their campaigns are highly sexualized and feature women who are generally thin, and who appear to be able-bodied. Women with disabilities go unrepresented, not only in American Apparel advertising, but also in most of popular culture. Rarely, if ever, are women with disabilities portrayed in anything other than an asexual manner, for ‘disabled’ bodies are largely perceived as ‘undesirable.’ In a society where sexuality is created and performed over and over within popular culture, the invisibility of women with disabilities in many ways denies them the right to sexuality, particularly within a public context.

The original "Pantytime" ad by American Apparel

Because only Mom's cook dinner...

Thanks to the awesome blog Sociological Images for initially posting this sexist ad.

Evian Takes our Obsession with Youth to the Next Level

Have you seen this commercial for Evian featuring the 'roller babies'?







Not only do I find the manipulated images of babies insanely creepy, this commercial also exemplifies our society's obsession with youth. Evian's new tag line is "Live Young," and the commercial claims that Evian "supports your body's youth." There's a bullshit marketing line if I ever heard one!



Anyhow, I suppose this post isn't particularly feminist... but I just felt the need to rant. This commercial seems fairly innocent and fun if you don't scrape past the surface, but I think Evian has really taken our obsession with youth to a new level here. Yes, I know it's just supposed to be silly and funny... but the message behind this is that drinking bottled water (which is an environmental atrocity) keeps us young. And in a society like ours that worships youth, a lot of people will believe anything advertisers say in their efforts to keep looking young.