Hot guys, baby animals, objectification?
Posted at 12:01 PM Dec 18, 2009
By Andrea Grimes |
Which is kind of funny, and cute on both ends. And hey, the proceeds go to animal rescue organizations. But man, the PR pitches never fail to disappoint. In this case, the accompanying press release described this item as such: "The product is a calendar featuring two things that women love most - gorgeous men and baby animals."
I mean, I like gorgeous guys and I like baby animals. But would I go so far as to say that these are the things that women love most? All women? In the entire world? Man, I hate a throwaway gender claim. Because actually, hot guys and baby animals seem to mainly be the things the calendar creators love most, which makes sense, since they ... made the calendar:
"I got sick of seeing pictures and calendars of bikini-clad girls sprawled out on sports cars," explains co-founder, Audrey Khuner. "I wanted to make something that would appeal to women like me. So I decided to combine my two favorite things: sexy men and baby animals."Call me cynical and mopey and sulky, but ...
By purchasing this photographic wall calendar, shoppers are contributing to several nonprofit animal rescues, including Bunny World Foundation and Karma Rescue. Every baby animal in the calendar is a rescue and many of them still need homes.
The answer to "bikini-clad girls sprawled out on sports cars" isn't reverse objectification. That doesn't lead to equality--it simply leads to viewing more individuals as sex objects and fewer individuals as actual humans. To be sure, the guys in the baby animals calendar are not as overtly sexualized as women are in the whole girls-and-cars-trope, but I don't care if it's a bunny or a Mustang, putting an
Mope mope mope mope mope. Off I go to mopey sulky land. Sorry I can't get more pumped about the furry things, guys. Am I being too cynical? Should I embrace the boys 'n bunnies?
Comments
Never mind all the lady-lovin-ladies out there who will have no interest in this calendar (you can buy a charitable animal-only calendar through many rescue organizations anyway). And what about the men who like "gorgeous men and baby animals," they are being ignored here. Assuming that only women would buy this calendar is unfair and poor marketing to say nothing of the objectification.
Posted 12/18/2009 at 12:37:55 PMIf you embrace the boys and bunnies, then there is nothing wrong with embracing the babes and... the only word I can think of to go with that is booze. Which tells you where MY mind is at.
Oh, would you look at the clock? It's half past whiskey! Time to call it a day!
Posted 12/18/2009 at 12:58:47 PM"I don't care if it's a bunny or a Mustang, putting an inanimate object and a (conventionally) attractive person next to each other for mass consumption..."
Ever seen a bunny? They're not inanimate. Turtles, maybe.
Posted 12/18/2009 at 01:28:29 PM:)
Defenestrated - Hah, so true. Poor choice of words on my part.
Posted 12/18/2009 at 01:29:24 PMWhere are the calenders for the nerd boys and girls among us? how about a one of sexy girls/guys reading comics or playing final fantasy?
Posted 12/21/2009 at 03:18:10 AMWhere are the calenders for the nerd boys and girls among us? how about a one of sexy girls/guys reading comics or playing final fantasy?
Posted 12/21/2009 at 03:20:10 AMSoo...as the comments suggest, Yeah, you are not being too cynical. If you think you are, then "Hott Girls n' Stuff!" imagery/objectification is okay too.
Posted 12/21/2009 at 12:54:47 PM...which it can be, if you are capable of treating humans like humans, while being able to have fantasies.