Gender Portrayals in Razor Ads

1) What commonalities/differences exist between your chosen advertisements in terms of how gender is presented? 
A shared commonality amongst all three of the features is that it is imposing a beauty standard on both genders– that facial and body hair is to be removed because it is aesthetically undesirable. For the woman's side, this is stressed more strongly on shaving leg hair and for men, facial hair, implying that if that hair is not shaved off, it will make the genders potentially romantically undesirable. Another commonality on the Venus adverts is that they are both objectifying woman as it has dehumanized them as persons and simplified them to shaved, tones legs. As for the men's advert, it is stressed that a man's romantic desire is valued highly on the lack of facial hair. In short, all three adverts are essentially placing a nearly villainous quality to a natural feature in all humans which is the growth of facial and body hair. 

One of the major differences that exist however, is that the Venus razors encourage rather, the shaving of hair for a personal and societal benefit whether the men's advert encourages men to do it for the benefit of flattering a woman. This puts forward the male stereotype or the generalization that all men are attracted to that type of Western blonde woman and that they are heterosexual. 

2) What do your chosen ads reveal about how your industry/product is marketed to consumers? 
The ads reveal that there is a clear divide in how the product is marketed to men and women, leading to a gender divide for essentially the exact same product with the exact same function. On the one hand, the women's razor is marketed in a feminine, beauty-focalized manner, implying that shaving is a necessary thing is women are to be deemed beautiful. Because of the objectification portrayed in both, women are required to have smooth, long, lean beautiful legs in order for themselves to be beautiful– they have to "landscape" in order to achieve this. This effect would be an example of self-objectification as women consider their own body, and that, if it doesn't meet the objectified standard, they are to not feel feminine and even undesirable. As for how it is marketed for men, it can be concluded that that purpose for men is to appear desirable and pleasing to women, as a smoother face is apparently more pleasant to kiss. This can communicate that men are only meant to look aesthetically pleasing for women, and that otherwise, they have no motivation to shave. 

What this type of gender divide in marketing consequently creates more pressure for women because to an extent, not only do they have to look good for themselves, society, other judging women but also for men, whereas the latter only has to do so in order to look desirable for women.


3) What do your ads reveal about society?
What the ads reveal about society is that it highly values smooth, nearly flawless skin and that it is necessary to achieve beauty and to an extent, a romantic partner. What this encourages is that how a person is deemed beautiful is determined more heavily on outer beauty and aesthetics, rather than the person's actual personality. This is evident from the objectification reflected in both Venus ads. The ads also are imposing a certain beauty standard specifically on women, as they need to be slim with long, flawless legs of preferably a whiter skin tone. It also is degrading and placing a villainous property on facial and body hair, something that is meant to be completely natural. This is implying that it is something that should be removed, regardless of the cost and the tediousness that it can imply.