Sex Sells: Empowering or Objectifying?

Ella Nelmes

Follow

Feb 13, 2017 · 4 min read

Sex Sells. It’s as simple as that and it is on the rise. 15% of adverts used sex to advertise in 1983 and this rose to 27% by 2003. It draws us in, grabs our attention. But when have adverts gone too far, when are they no longer selling the product and instead selling us bodies?

The perfume industry brings in a staggering £16 billion a year, however only 3 per cent goes on the liquid itself, the further 97% contributes to the marketing, packaging, and advertising.

But how to you sell a scent through a screen? Perfume adverts rely on selling an experience or a feeling, but who’s? The sensual display of the physical form could be considered to highlight self-confidence and showcase empowerment. Where is the shame in that?

However, when this confidence is displayed through the validation of the opposite sex is the same message created? Many campaigns indicate that perfume is needed to give a woman a value and allure.

One such advert is the ‘Be Desired’ campaign by DKNY. It may be considered as rather an inoffensive campaign. Cleverly playing on the story of Genesis by setting a garden of Eden scenario as ‘a delicious story…’ begins. A dressed — well if an open jacket and short shorts count — woman appears and attracts the gaze from a naked fellow. She begins to undress — by this I mean remove the two items of clothing that she was wearing — it is clear that she is undressing for his desire. Stretching up she selects an apple and bites into it while staring seductively at the camera. Presenting her the perfume bottle he leans in nuzzles up her new scent as the strap lines ‘be delicious’ and ‘be desired’ appear. All in all it may be considered relatively harmless there is a level of sexuality played with, but when analysed a little further the campaign is indicating not that the woman feels that she smells good — which is, I would argue, what should be the reasoning behind a purchase — but it is the males wish that she wears it, she is wearing the perfume for his pleasure and in order to ‘be desired’.

This is a common theme in many perfume adverts. The perfume is being advertised to provide pleasure of others and not the actual consumer. The difficulty here is does this show empowerment or objectification?

Many of the female figures seem in control, it cannot be denied they are achieving this through their seductive nature. However, it cannot be overlooked that many campaigns show women almost as a prop.

Should the flaunting of her female form be shocking? Considering that no one blinks an eye if a males nipples are on display… why should women be restricted? Do we only feel this is inappropriate because it is not something that has been normalised but shamed? Are these adverts, therefore, empowering by embracing and celebrating the female form?

‘Between love and madness lies obsession’ Eve Mandes seductively whispers as she writhes around between the sheets. The snippets of footage give the impression that we are being allowed to observe forbidden scenes. Nearly all with Mandes gazing away from the camera or with her eyes closed. It is clear that the campaign indicates that the perfume drives desire and Mandes although exuding body confidence and sensuality is also doing this for the desire of others. As you watch neither the use of perfume nor the bottle itself is even shown until the last shot. What makes this a perfume advert and not just a sensual display or even performance?

Marc Jacobs advertising has often caused controversy and so did the 2010 ‘Bang’ campaign. However, being a male’s cologne advertised through the use of a male’s body perhaps it may not be as controversial as Tom Ford’s ‘for men’ campaign. By selecting to not show the model’s face or even her body as a whole alongside the placement of the bottle uses the female figure as a dehumanised prop. Perhaps this is where the line between empowerment and objectification is crossed…