Sexism in a Professional Marketplace

Since we were talking about getting "disrobed," I thought I would pick up a prior inquiry into sexism in advertising (see vintage 1, vintage 2, & general discussion).  Not so sadly, the title "JurisPrudes" has already been taken by Dahlia Lithwick for her post on the "Custom-Tailored" ad by Jiwani.  The ad, picturing a woman pulling a man towards her by his leash tie, was published in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.  The ad states, without citations, that "A custom-tailored suit is a natural aphrodisiac."  Since "suit" references clothing instead of litigation, this ad is less disturbing than Dr. B. Blake Bradley's ad in Bourbon Magazine for his OB/GYN services in Lexington, Kentucky.  Also making an allusion to the magazine's theme, the ad states with freshman enthusiasm, "Bottoms Up!"

The Custom-Tailored ad is more problematic for contemporary feminists than the "Bottoms Up!" ad which is merely creepy. Lithwick raises the interesting issue of whether "sex" is inherently "sexist."  Is the ad demeaning just because the ad has an erotic theme?

At some point in the evolution of feminism, three distinct concepts -- sex, sexuality, and femininity -- became interwoven with the feminist critique of the marketplace.  As Dr. Lenore Wright explains, a backlash against feminism emerged from the gender wars and this backlash wants nothing to do with a feminist philosophy that tells women to reject the power of sexuality and the softness of femininity.  (see "The Wonder of Barbie: Popular Culture and the Making of Female Identity").  Perhaps this is why self-proclaimed feminists would say that this ad is not demeaning of women... it is just about sex, which is everywhere. For this same reason, argues Dr. Wright, many young women bristle at being identified as a "feminist."