BMW

Cars are often referred to as "she." "Isn't she a beauty?" "She is a fast car." When the word "she" is referred to as a car, it implies that women are property. Just as cars are the property of people, women are supposed to be the same thing. Historically women were objects that could be purchased for marriage. In a sense that did make them property of their husbands.

In the modern world the purchasing of women has become much more covert. From prostitution (which is by no means modern but is more publicized and exploited via media) to the enforcement of gender roles, women are faced with a glass ceiling. Gender roles are enforced in a whole new way since they are under attack by modern forms of feminism and progression of equality. In earlier times gender roles were never under question and were a seemingly normal part of how society was set up. It seems to be no coincidence that when women gained social agency the idea of men owning them became more of desired aspect of life. If men could "own" women they were kept in a position of power. Most men own corporations and are CEO's of the places that women work for. Few too little women have positions such as these. This distinction enforces the idea that women are still a kind of property. Men (and even some women) refer to their artifacts as "she's." This further enforces the idea that women are objects for women to own or be dominated by men.

This BMW advertisement is a good example of what it means to objectify women not only as objects but sexually as well. As I have discussed, women are associated with cars. This ad shows that this woman is essentially a car. I also see this ad as telling BMW consumers that women come second to cars. The type in the middle of the advertisement says, "The Ultimate Attraction." This says that women and cars are one in the same. BUT it also still implies that women are supplemental to cars or other objects of ownership. I believe that images such as this keeps women from being equal to men. I can see how some people can see images such as these as empowering to women. After all, they are exposed because of their own will and can choose their status as a sexually desirable woman. Although this may be true, I still see this kind of image as a "glass ceiling." They can choose their status- but they cannot truly reach above the glass ceiling to be more than sexual. The advertisement enforces idea that sex, while enjoyable, would be more enjoyable in a car. In addition, this advertisement implies that women's company would be even more enjoyable if their faces looked like cars.

Personally, I would like to be seen as more valuable than a car. The fact that BMW is preying on sex as a means to sell their cars is slightly revolting. I believe that car companies need to see that by sexualizing the idea of their products they are also devaluing possible customers. I doubt that this one advertisement truly has any effect on how much business they have. BUT in the long run advertisements like this in large quantities could turn people off to the image that BMW is portraying. As a result they might look elsewhere to buy their luxury cars.

What do you suggest that BMW should use to make their marketing more friendly to both sexes.

*Sorry for the randomness of this blog. I was just rambling off my thoughts about this advertisement.