Alice Blogs Gender & Sexuality

Another Herald article accompanied by sexy photo of young model posing on red carpet, and with sexy title Court bans sexy little thing. The headline seems to imply that the court has banned this sexy little model from something/somewhere….but it’s misleading. The opening line, “Nobody can call themselves a “sexy little thing”, a Manhattan court has ruled”, isn’t very informative, and is also misleading - though catchy of course!

The article is simply about an American judge’s advice to fashion designer that she could be sued by another fashion company for trademark infringement.

In fact, it’s a very dull little article about a small American court case - it doesn’t seem very news worthy - all it’s got going for it is a sex factor manufactured by the journalist and photographer. Admittedly, it is in the Fashion section of the paper.

See my other post about the (over)use of sexual imagery on the SMH website.

This relates to the theory that nowadays, ‘News focuses less on providing what has been traditionally thought of as the information necessary for a democracy and concentrates instead on entertaining audiences’ (Williams and Delli Carpini, 2000) and that there are ‘increasingly blurry boundaries between news and entertainment and the overall celebration of commercial culture’ (Hartley, 1996). I think this is particularly prevalent in regards to news about gender and sexuality.

I know I’m linking to a LOT of Sydney Morning Herald articles - but basically, it’s because I’ve found they publish more articles on issues related to gender and sexuality than most of the other mainstream local newspapers I’ve been monitoring. The News Corp papers really don’t focus on such issues as regularly.

Anyway, a recent SMH article titled A change is brewing examined the way the “sweating, beer-swilling Aussie bloke is dying out as wines creep into the market and women work up a thirst for the amber fluid”.

The article demonstrates how gender relations, characteristics and stereotypes, have changed, and also how Aussie culture has changed, by showing the changes in our beer drinking habits (a big part of Aussie male culture).

It explains that in the past beer was always marketed to men, using very true-blue male imagery, characters, music and phrases - the major themes of the ads were usually mateship, sport, hard-yakka and larrikinism. Perfect examples are the old VB ads, which portrayed images of sweaty men licking their lips in anticipation of a cold VB, while “John Meillon solemnly intoned the ways in which you could work up a ‘hard-earned thirst’ for Victoria Bitter”.

Although they now use the occasional throwback to these old ads, eg. the new ad featuring iconic cricket legend David Boon, the ads created for beer companies are now very different (as are the beer-drinkers) - they portray more metro-sexual type men as well as women drinking beer anywhere but in the pub. They have to develop new ways to market beer as they face stiff competition from wines and ready-mixed drinks. Plus, as the article states, “today’s Australian male is more likely to be pushing a pen than wielding a pickaxe”.

Apparently, women now account for a quarter of beer drinkers, so to reflect this, women are also playing a more active role in the ads, eg. the Tooheys New advertisement that features a woman opening the bottletop with her belly button.

On the same day, the Herald published another article about the beer market, titled Tapping a circle of care - for any occasion. It’s written by Julian Lee, the same person who wrote the first one, and although it provides different info, it’s about the same issue. The first lines read, “PITY today’s beer marketer. He must weep when he looks back at the days when an Aussie working man would spend as much on beer in a week as he did on his mortgage. Back then your choice of beer said as much about you as a man as the car you drove or the team you supported. Occasionally you might have a light beer — if no one was watching. There was little else on offer. Today, the average Aussie has at least six drinks in his “repertoire” and scores of brands of spirits, wines and beers.”

It analyses the “average” young Aussie male’s drinking habits, but unlike the other article, doesn’t mention women.

By publishing these types of articles that analyse changes in gender characteristic, stereotypes, relations, as well as changes to Aussie culture, the Herald is acting as a social commentator - drawing public attention to the way our society has changed over time.

An article published in the SMH, titled, Teenage girls trapped in a web of mixed messages, quite hypocritical on the Herald’s part.

It begins with the sell, “Raunch culture is a product of society’s double standards, writes Rachel Funari.” and proceeds to demonstrate the double standards of the Herald by making statements about the glut of sexual images in the media (the Herald being one such publication that offers a glut of sexual images of girls, particularly on its webiste, where young girls are probably more likely to access the news).

She refers to a book by Ariel Levy, titled Female Chauvinist Pigs, which argues that the rise of “raunch culture” is an indication that women are mistaking voyeurism for empowerment. One of Levy’s points sserts is that sexualised media images lead young women to mistaken the difference between their own sexual desire and their need to be liked and accepted. So, girls are having sex, not because they want to, but because it’s cool.

The article states: “Girls and boys receive a glut of sexualised images every day from advertising signs, television shows and commercials. It is continually reinforced that female power - financial and social - is garnered through the body, one that is desired, available and on display.” This statement implies that the sexualised images in the media have negative implications. But it seems hypocritical to me, when the Herald is one of those publications that portrays “sexualised images”. On the SMH website, displayed right next to the link to this article, was a large image of a faceless teenage model in low-cut hipsters pulling seductively at her shirt.

Although the SHM may not seem to be as sexy as other publications, like it’s Sunday equivalent, and The Daily Telegraph, I think it’s increasingly using sex to attract readers (see my entry on Sex Sells in the SMH for examples). See today’s Herald for more examples - the feature picture is of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, with the headline “Jolie and Pitt to have baby” - hardly seems like serious international news, and would be more suitable for a gossip mag like Who Weekly. And despite the fact that Pitt could be considered one of the most famous men and sex symbols in the world, he is only pictured in a small inset in the corner of the large picture of Jolie - I guess sexy images of girls sell better than those of men as they appeal to both males and females.

Another article featured on the homepage of SMH today pictures Britney Spears with the sell, Britney tops ‘worst dressed list’, with “over-the-hill Lolita” look. Need I say more?!

I guess the article by Rachel Funari does aim to provide “honest and comprehensive sexual discussion” to help young people gain a better understanding of sexuality, but I think the problem begins because attracting young people to a “serious” publication like SMH may require the portrayal of sexy images. And so, it’s a vicious cycle.

Using sex to sell in advertisments is nothing new, but I’m starting to realise that the ads displayed on the online version of The Sydney Morning Herald tend to be even sexier than those featured in the hardcopy paper versions of publications. Not just in style, but also in content. And after monitoring the websites of the major Australian newspapers, eg. The Courier-Mail, The Adelaide Advertiser and even The Daily Telegraph, it seems that SMH is the sexiest of the lot.

Many SMH ads promote dating services, something that I don’t think would feature in the actual newspaper. Others feature half-naked men and women in tropical holiday destinations, and attractive men and women to promote cosmetics. There don’t seem to be as many business related ads as there are in the paper, though there is the odd credit card and home loan ad.

There’s a little box on the top right-hand side of the online SMH homepage which constantly flashes from one picture and headline to the next. It usually features juicy little stories with sexy little pictures - today one of the flashes featured a pic of Kylie Minogue’s famous arse in gold hotpants.

Another flash displayed the heading Sexist, Moi! and a picture of a male and female in a passionate embrace on a bed - the article was a review for a new film titled Russian Dolls. Another is about sexual harassment claims against halfback Craig Gower, and the other flash reads Brunettes Have More Fun.

All of these articles would have been in the paper version also, however the web seems to allow for a sexier format and style. Plus I guess the online versions of publications appeal to a younger, more savvy market and this is why the ads are getting sexier and promoting sexier products. But I am surprised to find that Fairfax’s site seems sexier than the Murdoch publications’ sites, when the SMH is generally considered to be a more serious, intelligent, left-wing newsy newspaper, as opposed to a tabloidy celebrity-obsessed mainstream publication.