In this ad by Lumin titled Mansplaining How To Avoid Dull Skin, we see a man trying to convince another man to pay more attention to his skin and to use their moisturizer. At the beginning of the ad, the man is looking in the mirror when a hand pops out and offers him skincare, at which he says skeptically, “skincare… for men?!”. The man who gave him the cream then goes through all the reasons why he should be using the skincare product and taking care of his skin, most of the reasons relating to being masculine and being attractive. He says that skipping skincare is like skipping leg days (and shows a man with skinny legs), he points at all the problems with the man’s skin, and at the end of the ad, the man is convinced of the need for the product and is shown using it, the other man saying to him, “We got this, I’ll spot you”.

 This ad incorporates lots of prevalent ideas about gender norms and expectations. In US society today, women are typically expected to put more effort into their appearance than men in terms of skincare – this ad is trying to market their moisturizer to the male market using certain gendered advertising strategies to market a typically feminine product to a masculine market. The title of the ad plays on the idea of mansplaining, which was first used in the comment section of an article from 2008 called “Men Explain Things To Me”, and is used when men explain things to women in a condescending manner and with the assumption that the women is ignorant of the topic. The man in the video claims that “skipping skincare is like skipping leg day”. The advertisers are assuming that most men work out and would appreciate a fitness reference. In saying this, they are comparing skincare to something more stereotypically masculine in order to dissociate it from femininity to make it seem more acceptable to be used by men. They show a man with skinny legs working out his arms, to instill fear into men that it’s just as bad to have bad skin as it is to have skinny legs. This brings in the idea of body image, and how toxic masculinity tells men that they need to be muscular and strong in order to be attractive, worthy, and manly. The ad uses words like ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ to play on common insecurities of men and guilt men into feeling like they are actually less masculine by not paying attention to their skin. The man in the video shown as the one with ‘skinny legs’ is also shown in all pink clothes and using pink weights. This is another way that they make this man resemble femininity, thus relating not taking care of your skin as something that’s bad because it makes you look more girly. With this logic, they’re saying that being girly is an inherently bad thing and something to be embarrassed about, whereas it should be normalized for men to wear pink and do things that may be considered girly and be proud of it. This ad is shaming men who may prefer to embrace the feminine aspects of themselves and tells men that they need to be manly in order to be respected by others and that men who are not hyper-masculine are failing as men.

This ad also brings up what we saw in the Poretsky and Everts readings in which they discuss how companies have created problems and insecurities in order to sell a product to solve that problem. In this case, men are told that they should be worried about having dull, wrinkly skin, and that this cream is something that they need to buy in order to be more attractive. The man in the video seems to have not cared about these aspects of his skin before, and now will spend money to fix something that Lumin has deemed a problem, not himself. In these ways, this simple, 30-second advertisement has very deliberately and blatantly played into gender stereotypes and marketing strategies that perpetuate stereotypical ideas of ‘masculinity’ and create insecurities in order to sell a product. In addition, all of the settings shown within the ad tell the viewer something about class and wealth, as all of the rooms and fixtures are expensive and fancy looking. This may be a way for the advertisers to make it feel like people who use this cream are fancy and wealthy, and so anyone who uses it will also come across this way.

It is also noteworthy that Lumin’s ads feature many men of color, non-white men, and racially ambiguous men. It is impossible for us to know whether this diversity is due to genuine race-blind casting or simply an attempt to appeal to the growing public awareness of the lack of diversity in advertising in order for the company to appear woke.

The whole Lumin skincare line is advertised as being specifically for men, which relates to other posts I’ve seen online about examples of things being unnecessarily gendered so that they can be advertised as ‘for men’ or ‘for women’. The whole Lumin skincare line is advertised as being specifically for men, which relates to other posts I’ve seen online about examples of things being unnecessarily gendered so that they can be advertised as ‘for men’ or ‘for women’. Companies then use different marketing strategies for the two so that they appeal to each gender in different ways. These gendered products are completely unnecessary and are simply ploys for the companies to make more money by perpetuating gender norms and stereotypes. I would be interested to see the scientific evidence (or lack thereof) of what makes these “men’s” products different from women’s products, as they claim substantial differences between men and women’s skin on their website. Personally, I see no need for products to be different from one another in accordance to gender, but plenty of people buy into the need for such products. Where do these gendered products leave non-binary people, gender-fluid people, transgender people, and anyone not within the gender binary? They are left with needing to choose either the male product or the female product.

International product advertisements are oftentimes the subjects of laughter for people around the world due to the presence of many cultural references or jokes that simply don’t translate well. Although these advertisements may not necessarily bring upon waves of international sales, they still usually manage to bring about fun conversation and good times. However, in the case of a viral advertisement for Qiaobi, a Chinese laundry detergent company, the only feelings being brought out of viewers are confusion and disgust. The advert, created to target Chinese audiences, was intended to be an outlandish, comedic take on just how effective Qiaobi detergent is at fighting dirt and grime to provide the most pristine clothes possible with every washing cycle. Ironically, all the advertisement has done is drug the company’s name through the mud. In a decision that can hopefully be defined as an ignorant, uninformed mistake instead of a prejudiced attack, the company decided that the best possible avenue for displaying the product’s cleaning power was to wash the melanin off of a black man. If this jumps out at you as being completely inappropriate and offensive, then congratulations; You’re at least not a blatant racist. Unfortunately, this advertisement is, in addition to some of its misogynistic elements.

The advertisement opens with an appearance of normalcy as it focuses on a young Chinese woman putting a load of laundry into a washer. However, the peaceful scene is immediately interrupted by the entrance of a black man covered in paint who stares at the woman provocatively before catcalling her. This scene is already triggering as it seems to paint catcalling, an offensive, misogynistic practice that many women, unfortunately, have to experience, as acceptable. Delving deeper into the scene, one can easily see how it upholds the racist idea that black people are sexually deviant, predatory creatures. These notions date all the way back to the Jim Crow era South where they were adopted by the white populace, still reeling from their defeat in the civil war, in order to accuse black men of rape and justify public lynchings.  This allowed the Southern community to put fear in the hearts of the local black populace while simultaneously supporting the power of the white authority in America. Unfortunately, these sentiments did not remain in America and have instead infected the cultures of countries across the globe. This can be seen in India where skin lightening creams are heavily marketed as the only way for women to be attractive or in countries such as Venezuela where the media is dominated by fair-skinned women. In addition to these issues, the scene itself is just unnecessarily triggering. Women experience harassment continuously in our problematic society, and this is only made worse by the trend in media to continuously use situations such as this just to add drama. Honestly, why does a commercial about laundry detergent need harassment to get its message across? Surprisingly, the woman beckons the man forward and seemingly reciprocates his attraction but instead shoves the man into the washer, before turning it on. I can honestly admit that I am a big fan of cartoonish violence in the right context, but I can’t help but feel uneasy about the image of a black man being roughly forced into a washing machine. The washing machine runs for a few seconds and then through some manner of tv commercial magic, the man exits the machine. However, when he exits the washing machine, he is now a fair-skinned Chinese man, much to the woman’s approval. We the viewer are then reminded that this is somehow supposed to be a commercial for laundry detergent when the company the logo appears on the screen as their signature jingle plays. This scene highlights the largest, most glaring issue within the ad, which is that it pushes the narrative that blackness is tied with impurity and filth while on the other hand whiteness is connected to purity and cleanliness. This sentiment is not a new one as it has been used to justify and further prejudice against all colored peoples.

Racism and colorism run so deeply in our society as humans that even our vocabulary reflects it. For evidence of this one only needs to delve into the pages of a dictionary of the English language. In the entry for the word “black”, we see definitions such as “dirty” and “characterized by hostility or angry discontent”. On the other hand, under the term “white” we see definitions such as “free from moral impurity” and “favorable”.  

Advertisements such as this one only serve the purpose of further ingrain these notions into our vocabulary and minds. It’s glaringly obvious why this advertisement went viral and rightfully received its badge of notoriety. One has to wonder; how did the advertisers think viewers with black skin (that doesn’t come off) would feel? Or did they simply not care?

If you’ve been on TikTok in the past week, you’ve most certainly heard the voice of iconic actor, artist, socialite and former dominatrix Julia Fox explaining how her role as director Josh Safdie’s muse for the film “Uncut Gems” compares to her relationship with Kanye West. Fox was recently the guest on Alex Cooper’s podcast, “Call Her Daddy,” where she spilled the tea on her (now former) relationship with Kanye, participation in sex work, and dived into sensitive topics of substance abuse, sexual assault, and her upbringing in the East Village. Immediately after the release of her podcast episode, TikTok was blowing up to the tune of Fox’s unmissable vocal fry and uptalk, pronouncing “uncut gems” as “uncut jaaams.” Countless celebrities, social media influencers and small creators have been using her voiceover in their own videos, poking fun at Fox’s voice and statement. 

As someone who has always been told my voice is too “feminine,” too “gay,” I argue that turning someone’s voice and pronunciation into a punchline is not only hurtful, but typically reinforces sexism and homophobia. Vocal iterations are a critical identifying variable of our gender and ethnocultural perception by others. If you hear a voice without any context, you may subconsciously identify that voice with a specific gender, sexuality, race and class. In our perception of others’ voices, we tend to make large assumptions about their background and experience. These assumptions are the foundation of stereotyped accents. People love critiquing others’ accents. There is a phenomenon, an obsession, with contrasting British and American or Northern and Southern (USA) accents. There exists an eroticization of voices which are unique or different from one’s own. This fascination creates space for judgment and assumptions about one’s character, experience and background. Ultimately, for feminine-presenting folx, voices are hypersexualized and criticized. Fox’s vocal fry is one example of a vocal iteration criticized for its perceived sensuality and ignorance. Vocal fry and uptalk are typically associated with the “valley girl” accent and stereotype made famous by the Kardashian family. Young women predominantly use vocal fry and uptalk either due to environmental vocal influences, cultural choice or due to social inhibitions. Due to the patriarchal structure of society and a history of mansplaining, women often end their statements on a higher register, as if they are asking a question. In our society, women ask the questions and men know the answers. (sidenote: In highschool, I recognized the same occurrence in my voice when my Debate coach suggested that I had a slight British accent. I associate my uptalk with an upbringing of patriarchal mansplaining in my family and community and people questioning my sexuality and masculinity. I always had something to prove and was therefore never sure if I was hitting the nail on the head in my statements.)

While the Kardashians are a brilliant, iconic, hard-working group of women, criticism of their “lack of talent,” perceived lack of intelligence and media-espoused hyper-sexuality have created a harmful association between them and the Valley Girl. Youtuber “marinashutup” explains in her video for Everyday Feminism, “Why do Women Talk Like Kim Kardashian?” that women who use vocal fry are perceived to be less educated, gold diggers or reliant on “daddy’s money” and unprofessional. This vocal stereotype has harmful implications for feminine-presenting folx. According to the same video, a study by Duke University found that employers are 86% more likely to hire a feminine-presenting candidate without vocal fry than a candidate with vocal fry. This statistic shows how assumptive people are towards other’s voices. When this level of discrimination exists against predominantly young, white women, the implications of vocal discrimination across racial and class categorizations is likely to be significant. 

Turning vocal fry into a meme reinforces the idea that these vocal iterations are nothing more than a joke and that the words they carry are insignificant. The popular focus on Fox’s vocal fry has left her experiences and emotions to be nothing more than a TikTok meme. This suppression of intelligence and valid experience is universal for people with vocal fry and uptalk. As a result, life-threatening incidents of sexual assault which disproportionately threaten women go unbelieved. Additionally, knowing that they are unlikely to be believed, people with vocal fry and uptalk are discouraged from reporting violence against them. Fox speaks about this experience in “Call Her Daddy.” After coming out that a former romantic and business partner had sexually assault her at his nightclub, many of her friends and those in her community of the Lower East side did not believe her. She remembers being called “dramatic,” a typical stereotype of the Valley Girl vocal fry. Fox recounts the second time she was assaulted, but still today has not identified her attacker. She blames her experience the first time with her inability to come out after the second. This is a blatant example of how women are so often discouraged from reporting sexual violence. It is empowering that she was able to defend herself the first time, but when her community turned their back on her voice, she was silenced.

When Peloton dropped a holiday ad right before Christmas 2020, they expected it to be received as an ad showing a husband gifting his wife a Peloton bike for Christmas because he loves her. However, Peloton received major backlash for their commercial, as it was received in the complete opposite way that it was intended. 

The commercial starts off with a man gifting a woman, who the audience can assume is his wife, a Peloton exercise bike. When she gets onto the bike she says, “A little nervous, but excited. Let’s do this.” The commercial then shows the woman doing daily Peloton sessions and taking selfies and videos during every single one, while also explaining how she is surprised that she has been doing it everyday (and even getting up at 6 a.m.). As evident from the photo above, there is a constant look of fear in the woman’s eyes. She is also very obviously grimacing, which suggests that she is uncomfortable. She looks scared that she is not going to get approval from her husband if she does not use the bike he got her, so she makes sure to document the whole process as proof. She does not look excited about the bike, and looks like she is being forced to exercise. Because the commercial was not understood by viewers as the creators intended it to be, the grimace on the woman’s face heightened the negative parts of Peloton.

For the whole commercial, she is unsure, timid, and shy, all while acting like she needs approval from her husband (which is why she started the workouts in the first place). The commercial pans to an instructor shouting her out and the woman saying “She just said my name!” All of these clips are then compiled into a documentary that the woman created to show her husband how grateful she is for the gift. She thanks him by saying, “A year ago, I didn’t realize how much this would change me. Thank you.” 

The controversy within the commercial comes with the claim that it’s sexist. The husband wanted his wife to get in shape so he gave her a peloton to “force” her to work out, and then, when she shows him the final video, he looks satisfied with the transformation. The other controversy within the commercial is how the woman is portrayed. There are many scenes in the commercial where you can see her big eyes with a look of fear in them. She is constantly taking videos of her on the Peloton to prove to her husband that she is using it, while also saying that she is surprised that she is still going, which means that she is feeling the effects of working out and is exhausted. At the end of the commercial, she compiles her videos to show to her husband. After her husband sees the video, he just gives her a smile and no other words of affirmation.

This Peloton commercial and its choice of actors proves further stereotypes and standards that society places on women. At the beginning of the commercial, the woman was not working out and was surprised to get a Peloton, which is obvious through her surprise when her husband gifts her one. She was timid while working out and is still timid at the end when she shows her husband the video that she made. The woman in the commercial is also already a healthy weight. She is what society would consider “skinny,” and society believes that if a person is skinny, they are healthy. However, she is still seemingly forced to work out by her husband, which further supports the impossible standards that society puts on women’s bodies. Women will never be able to achieve a “perfect body” and will always feel like they have to work to achieve a body that others will find attractive, even when they are already at a healthy weight.

The commercial also completely skews why people decide to workout. The Peloton commercial portrays the woman as only working out because her husband thinks that she should. When she starts using the Peloton, it’s obvious that she is “out-of-shape” and trying to get into a schedule for working out. She is trying to figure out how to use the bike, while also visibly struggling in all the classes. It makes it seem like she is doing it for him, and not just for herself.  While some women work out because they want to change their appearance others workout because it helps their mental health. This Peloton commercial puts forward many toxic ideas about women’s workout culture. 

The previously mentioned ad is not the only problematic ad that Peloton has released. The majority of Peloton commercials are considered controversial. Peloton creates their ads to be targeted towards a certain demographic, which is the group of people who can afford a fifteen hundred dollar exercise bike. As evident in the photo above, Peloton commercials almost always include a skinny woman on her Peloton bike, which has a designated platform in her well-decorated house. The snapshot above includes a thin white woman on her bike in front of a wall that is all windows, which can lead a viewer to infer that she is well-off. Peloton’s CEO John Foley even said that Peloton’s target demographic are “people who have children, live in suburbs, have nice homes, they have the money and space but don’t necessarily have time.” The majority of people in the commercials are also white. All of these factors put forward an unrealistic expectation of what people’s peloton experiences are going to be. It also gives off the impression that everyone riding a peloton has to be a “put-together rich person.” This is further complicated by the majority of the commercials including white people. Does this mean that Peloton’s vision of a “well-off” person is a white person?

Broadcasting exclusively skinny women working out can make fat people feel like a Peloton is not meant for them. It can also create unrealistic body standards for people working out on Pelotons. If Peloton is broadcasting skinny white women as the ideal Peloton users, other Peloton users could use this as unrealistic and unhealthy goals that would turn their workout journey into more of a “self-hate” journey than a “self-love” journey, all while trying to get their bodies to look like the ones they see in commercials. 

Peloton tries to put forward a “life-changing” experience with their workout machines, but they are not successful– but this could all be part of their marketing scheme. Leaving viewers feeling insecure and feeling desirous can lead to more business for Peloton. Their commercials leaves viewers feeling insecure about their own bodies and workout routines, all while projecting harmful ideals about body types, along with certain demographics of Peloton users. 

References:

Peloton Commercial: https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/3/20993432/peloton-new-commercial-horror-movie

CEO Quote: https://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/08/pelotons-race-for-home-cycling.html

Photos: https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/3/20993432/peloton-new-commercial-horror-movie

Peloton Commercial Song – Indoor Exercise Bike