I've updated the post below, but just so everyone knows about it I'm pasting it in here, too:
I've also just learned that there's been an ad on TV and in the cinemas. (I don't own a TV in London, and I rarely go to the movies, so I had no idea.)
This is still shocking, but for some reason it seems more successful to me--as in, it doesn't make me angry at the advert itself. Perhaps it's because it's depicting an actual assault, rather than co-opting the language of assault; because the imagery is more tasteful, while still very truthful; and because there's the perpetrator is also represented, instead of just the victim. It also seems to me that the TV ad shows how normal the situation can seem--sympathizing with the victim for not thinking about the risks--while the print ad treated me like a moron who'd have no one but herself to blame. Even the tagline in the TV ad-- "Know what you're getting into"--is better than the text of the print ad, because it focuses on informing us, addressing us as intelligent adults who have a right to know what risks are out there. It's unflinchingly honest, but it's not bullying.
Apparently there's been an annual ad campaign in London to dissuade women from taking unbooked minicabs, and it's been very successful--80% fewer women now do so, and, over the past six years, minicab assaults have halved. So you tell me--am I splitting hairs here? Are the two ads essentially the same, and I should focus on the results?
Tfl 'Know what you're getting into' advert [U Talk Marketing]
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Update To Previous Post
Raping Your Audience
Below, some camera-phone photos from an "advert" in the London underground:
If you can't read the text at the bottom, it says, "Whether you approach the driver, or they approach you, there's no record of the journey and you're putting yourself in danger. Text CAB to 60835 and we'll use GPS" to text your three nearest cab numbers."
If you can't tell from the photo, the woman is crying.
Now, Cab Finder is great, and I've used it on several occasions--because I agree with the ad that taking an unlicensed cab off the street is dangerous. (You either use black cabs, which are really expensive, or you call a "minicab" company, which dispatches drivers in regular cars, etc.) But this ad is upsetting on multiple levels.
The first is the most obvious, and also the most difficult to articulate, because it deals with a visceral, emotional reaction. I know that the ad is aiming for a visceral reaction, but the result was that I felt like the ad was trying to assault me. It almost seems to be mocking rape victims, and--though this is obviously not the intent--relishing the hypothetical violence being inflicted. Echoing the protestations of a rape victim in order to tell us, the viewers, to do something, is very hostile. It's attempting to scare us the same way a rapist would. It's saying, If you take an unbooked minicab, you will be raped, and this is what you will look like while it's happening, and this is what you will say in a futile attempt to stop it, and it will be your own fault for ignoring our warnings. Showing the victim rather than the perpetrator* puts the situation squarely and undeniably on the victim's shoulders. I don't know if that even fully explains my emotional reaction--perhaps you guys have something to add in the comments.
But perhaps more disturbingly is how laughably beside the point this message is given recent events IN LONDON. About a year ago John Worboys, a driver of a BLACK cab, was convicted of raping some of his passengers--and based on reports, he most likely raped HUNDREDS of women. The police arrested him in 2007, but ignored important toxicology test results and neglected to search his home or cab.** They released him, and he went on to commit at least 30 more assaults. To Scotland Yard's credit, they have referred their own investigation to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)--something they do very rarely indeed.
My point is: instead of trying to terrify women into not using minicabs--not warn, but terrify--the city of London needs to take responsibility for its own failings. England has the lowest rape conviction rate in Europe--at 5.7%, it's even worse than America's 13%. (I can't find what the arrest rates are.)***
The fact is that, in England, rape is all but legal. Remember, that 5.7% isn't of all rapists--it's of all the REPORTED rapes in which an ARREST is made and then actually go to TRIAL. Reported rapes in England are estimated at 10% of actual rapes--which isn't surprising, considering how traumatic and futile the reporting and prosecution of a rape can be--the arrest rate is presumably less than 100%, and many cases are dismissed even before going to trial.**** So it seems fairly pointless to shove down my throat that I'm creating rapes if I take an unbooked cab, when the entire legal culture says that rapists will go unpunished.
I know, I know: it's not necessarily victim-blaming to advise women on safety. I can tell you that it's dangerous to leave your drink unattended without blaming the women who were victimized that way*****. And 'minicab rape' happens. But the way those ads treat their audience--not as rational human beings who would respond to a warning, but as irrational girls who for their own good must empathetically experience actual rape--really pisses me off.
UPDATE: I've also just learned that there's been an ad on TV and in the cinemas. (I don't own a TV in London, and I rarely go to the movies, so I had no idea.)
This is still shocking, but for some reason it seems more successful to me--as in, it doesn't make me angry at the advert itself. Perhaps it's because it's depicting an actual assault, rather than co-opting the language of assault; because the imagery is more tasteful, while still very truthful; and because there's the perpetrator is also represented, instead of just the victim. It also seems to me that the TV ad shows how normal the situation can seem--sympathizing with the victim for not thinking about the risks--while the print ad treated me like a moron who'd have no one but herself to blame. Even the tagline in the TV ad-- "Know what you're getting into"--is better than the text of the print ad, because it focuses on informing us, addressing us as intelligent adults who have a right to know what risks are out there. It's unflinchingly honest, but it's not bullying.
Apparently there's been an annual ad campaign in London to dissuade women from taking unbooked minicabs, and it's been very successful--80% fewer women now do so, and, over the past six years, minicab assaults have halved. So you tell me--am I splitting hairs here? Are the two ads essentially the same, and I should focus on the results?
*Though I shudder to think how they might depict a generic rapist.
**I also remember reading at the time that police had ignored the earliest reports from victims, simply not believing them, but I can't find corroboration of this now.
***If you're interested about America's rape arrest rates, it's 25% nationally...and 70% in New York, so yay NYPD! I credit Benson and Stabler.
****Consider the legality of rape in America: according to RAINN, only 6% of actual rapists spend any time in jail. They have the most encouraging statistics I've seen on reporting, arrest, and prosecution rates, so by some counts 6% might be generous. And remember, this is a national average--for every place like NYC that's doing better, there's someplace doing much, much worse.
*****Though, for the record, recent studies show that this kind of rape is actually pretty uncommon.
Black cab rapist: serial sex attacker John Worboys jailed indefinitely[The Telegraph]The Rape Conviction Rate In Britain Is Pathetically Low<[Jezebel]
Project Sapphire staying safe[Metropolitan Police]
Tfl 'Know what you're getting into' advert [U Talk Marketing]
Rape in America: Justice Denied [CBS News]
Reporting Rates[RAINN]
The Date Rape Drug Is An Urban Myth. Let's Put It To Rest. [The Sexist]
Monday, November 26, 2007
Does This Mean Men Want Their Dicks Sharpened?
Again via Feministing, one of the most awful products ever:
I think this is much worse than the infamous Axe mousepad, which while being puerile and nauseating at least implies the pleasuring of a woman*. But this...the screws in the hands and feet, the decapitation, the painful imagery...it makes you wonder, what kind of person would think to make this? Whether or not you think this product is that bad, whether or not it reflects or influences cultural ideas about women, can you imagine waking up and saying, "I have a great idea! A headless naked woman being fucked by a pencil**!" What kind of sick mind dreams that up? Obviously, a violent and misogynist mind, but, to me, being this creative with violence and misogyny is pretty disturbing.
*And hearkens back to our discussion of whether Axe ads are degrading or just dumb! Yeah relevance!
**(And, I don't know, shitting out the shavings? Hard to tell.)
Monday, October 15, 2007
All's fair in love and advertising?
The blogosphere is abuzz today because advocacy group Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood has written a public letter to Unilever, the company that owns both Dove and Axe, charging them with hypocrisy. Why? Because Dove ads promote a positive body image, and Axe ads are degrading to women.
So, my roundtable question: are Axe ads genuinely more degrading to women than your average commercial?
Obviously, the commercials are really stupid. Axe purportedly smells gross, and I doubt I would date anyone who falls for the advertising enough to buy the awful product. While I object slightly to the "questionable hook-up?" ads for the body wash, the body SPRAY ads don't offend me more than a lot of other ads that genuinely objectify women-- these ads say, "if you buy our product, women will want to sleep with you." This is not exactly a new tactic--Axe is just far more blatant about it. I'm inclined to say that the campaign is degrading to everyone--men just as much as women.
Furthermore, while it's not technically hypocriticalfor a parent company to have 'children' companies that cater to different demographics, I've always found the Dove ads themselves somewhat hypocritical. It's great that they use real-looking women, but they do so in the context of selling us semi-expensive "skin firming" cream. They're sort ofsaying that these women are beautiful, but they're also saying they need to change the way they look. I think the ads do more good than harm, because it helps adjust the atmosphere--we're constantly bombarded with the infamous Size Zeroes, so having even an occasional Size Ten puts a chink in The Man's armor*. But it's still exploitative, and still telling us our bodies are wrong, and bad, and need fixing.
So, while I applaud Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood's efforts, I'm not going to get up in arms about it. Thoughts?
*Albeit a tiny, tiny chink.
Posts
