Lots of companies SAY they want to be pro-women and “Girl Power” and all, but the truth is that they want women to THINK that they are all pro and power and whatnot, but they never ACTUALLY do anything about it.
Magazines still use the same stick thin models for their fashion spread even though the article directly proceeding states that they think all women should love themselves regardless of their size. Tabloids tout the “fat actress” who has *gasp* slipped dangerously into Size 8 territory. Online dating sites have statistically lower click-thrus of women who are Average or A Few Extra Pounds or Looks Like The Majority Of Women.
Now while I fully admit that Americans (especially) have a serious problem with over-weightness (is that even a word?!) I also think we have a problem in the opposite direction. The funny thing is that most women are never going to look like 5% of the population. They just genetically can’t swing it.
So I’m always encourage by campaigns like Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty. Or studies of thousands of people investigating the age women are most beautiful (hint – it isn’t 21!)
And this “most recent ad” by Nike empowering women to revel in their best feature. A nice big round butt. Sir Mix-A-Lot would be so proud. But the interesting thing is that this isn’t a new campaign by Nike. They ran the same campaign in 2005 with a valiant grassroots support but not enough to continue the campaign.
I personally am a bigger fan of the simple and more minimalistic ad.
But in 2005 it was all about the colors and snazz and…well…the butt!
So which one do you like better? And what do you think of Nike’s “re-campaign” overall?
*** Just as a special treat for all you blog readers, check out this awesome cover of Baby Got Back by Jonathan Coulton. I pinkie-swear promise you will not be disappointed!!
Mmm. A nice ass. By far my favorite part on a girl! And as a guy who loves a good butt, I feel like you wrote this post just for me! Aww, swoon.
Seriously, where can I get those posters? I. WANT.
(I should probably actually read this post now instead of just looking at the butts. Oops.)
Haha, no the post was not directly for you but I’m glad you enjoyed. I didn’t even realize the older campaign til I started researching it!
Shh. I’m pretending it was written strictly for me. It makes my ego feel better. 😉
By the way, I did end up reading your post and not just staring at the pretty pictures. Here’s a Fun Fact for you (or rather disgusting fact)…
My sister works in fashion and told me that today a size 8 is considered a plus-sized model. Crazy! Yeah, that won’t make 14-year-old girls feel self-conscious (sarcasm obviously).
Yeah, isn’t that fantastic? I learned it watching America’s Next Top Model. Their “Plus Sized” winner was a Size 8/10
I totally agree with what you are saying in your post, but I wonder if both of these Nike ads convey the same message as having stick thin models in the ads. For example, when I look at the women in the first ad, I immediatley thought she looked extremely ripped and fit. Instead of using this women to be an example of “real women”—they are pointing out one of her physical features as a “flaw” rather than embracing her kick ass physique. I mean, I suppose its a step in the right direction because the ad sends the message that this women accepts her body, but what about using a model like her to sell products without even mentioning her butt size?
Anywho, good post–I enjoy seeing topics like this brought up in a non health/fitness blog. =)
Well Nike does have Venice Williams. While she may not be a model, she is an athlete that models apparel for Nike. And she is a super fit girl with a good sized booty.
Actually, she’s a little too ripped for my taste. Looks like she could take me on bench pressing. That’s sort of scary.
At first I struggled with the same thoughts, that Nike shouldn’t even be pointing that out. They should be celebrating a healthy and fit woman, not emphasizing the size of her butt.
However I quickly came to look at it from a point of pure “reality.” As I said in the post, society doesn’t look at women like that as “skinny.” And she probably can’t fit that ass and thighs into anything less than an 8 maybe 10 jean. And somehow we think that’s wrong.
So I chose to err on the side of optimistically looking at the ad. Celebrating the statement they were trying to make instead of penalizing them for the fact that they have to make it.
2010 version all the way! the 2005 ad is too sexual, it diminishes the message about fitness, and health, and natural beauty. that said, this woman still has an unreal body, but i’ll let them off the hook because it’s nike and they are a sports gear company. i do love the dove campaign, and playtex (i think) has some great bra commercials right now for women with really big boobs… they’re both charming and realistic and spot on.
Oooh, I agree so much with your comparisons of the ads. In part I was put off by how “busy” the ad was but looking again I’m also a bit offended by the sexualization (making womens’ butts objects instead of assets is kinda counter-productive to the campaign!)
Yeah, she has a body that most don’t have, but I have quite a few triathlon friends that rock bodies like that. It definitely takes a lot of work, more work than I’d be willing to do from the comfort of my yoga mat and Boulevard runs. 🙂
I’m a big fan of the Dove campaign as well. I think it’s probably the BEST example of “real women” being used as models.
In my opinion, she doesn’t have much of a butt. She says it is “big and round” but it looks fit to me. If it were any smaller, IMO, she wouldn’t have a butt at all. If they want an ad that celebrates a woman’s natural curves and being proud of it then they need someone who has more of a butt than her.
Thanks for doing a post focusing on that topic!
She doesn’t have a huge butt, but (hahaha) I am impressed with the way it’s kinda busting out from the bottoms she’s wearing. Granted, it might be cause they did that on purpose and put her in a smaller size, but I did notice.
I kind of like that she has a bit of a butt not a huge one. Again, I think if it was *too* prominent then it would be just about the butt. And I feel like the ad is so much more. As Broke207 brought up above, I feel like one of the biggest detriments of the 2005 campaign was how it focused SO MUCH on the butt.
Fantastic! I always love when society realizes that not everyone looks like Jennifer Aniston or Jessica Biel. I also focused on the fact that for that girl she is incredibly fit and not that big of a booty. Then I thought, “who am I to say that?”. I know that I’ve said before that I have a big booty and gotten yelled at by someone in the room. However, for me, it is big. Big and bootylicious, but it’s my booty and my opinion of it. I love that this ad is celebrating curves and that many of us work hard at those curves. I also think though that maybe we shouldn’t throw the first stone either. We all have different body shapes and sizes. For that girl, that might be a big booty. We should be celebrating and excited at the fact that this model was ok with doing the ad and that Nike did the ad, not once but twice. We should link arms and stick out butts and support what the other has. Not pick it a part.
Awesome post Paco 🙂 Real women have real curves, be ok with it. Love it. Embrace it!
Such a good point! We all have very different bodies and what is a ton of junk in the trunk for one person might barely be a tire jack for others. 🙂
Sex sells.
When I first looked at the ad I was a little shocked, thinking aren’t we past this yet. Which of course, we will never be. I enjoyed this blog post. But can’t help thinking of the young girls in the world looking at the ad, what do they think? the 11, 12 and 13 year olds? Do they look in the mirror at their own butt, do they go into the bathroom and throw up? What is the message??
This could go on forever!!
So very true. I’m sure that as well as creating an ad that will celebrate the beauty of women and their assets, there was also some strategic thought at the ad agency (and probably Nike) thinking that putting a minimally clothed woman with a rocking body on the pages would allure both men and women (as my friend David so eloquently states above) 🙂
I agree, and am saddened by the fact that we probably never will be beyond this point. Or we’ll always have to come back to it. But my hope is that while we might not be able to revolutionize how society imposes we can at least begin to change how women and girls view themselves. And instead of going in the bathroom to throw up they’ll instead look in the mirror and celebrate and booty dance and revel in the beauty that is their body.
Which is why I’m also SO EXCITED to add your website to my sidebar. Be A Girl Today – and frickin’ love it!
There does seem to be a disconnect between the person in the picture and the message. It seems that the women in this ad has such a nice body that when a young girl sees this ad they might think “of course she is able to accept her “big butt” her body is amazing!” It also sends them a message that even a person with a body like hers is thinking about her “big butt” and even if she is proud of her big butt, it is still emphasizing that her body part is important enough to talk about and think about.
If young women are ever to a point where they are throwing up in the bathroom, I believe that her parents have failed her in several ways and that posting a picture of an attractive healthy looking women, so that you can sell more sneakers should not be held responsible for young woman’s eating disorders or mental health issues.
Interesting point. At what point does the whole feminist movement become less about “empowerment” and more about “making issues out of stuff.” There seems to be a very thin line between the two.
I will say I don’t know that it’s just the parents….but there definitely is a failing occurring for young women in our society. I mean, Miley Cyrus is a role model. MILEY CYRUS! I’m sad to say I actually like some of her music, but I don’t think I’d want any of my kids to “grow up to be like her.”
I’d be interested to see how that study was conducted, the language, et al. Women’s first impression of men is based on confidence, poise, looks, etc. but it’s not like that with guys. It’s 100% strictly looks. I suspect that if you put a bunch of photos of women all different ages most men would trend towards 20-26.
I’m not sure which study you are referring to, but the one from the post actually showed women of all ages to men of all ages and the “most beautiful” age was 31. Still young, but definitely not 20.
I definitely like the 2010 version. The 2005 version is just a bit, uhm, I’m not sure…it just doesn’t sit well with me. Though, Andrew raises a good point. We see all of these women like Beyonce and Jennifer Lopez with their amazing butts, but they also have these amazing (sometimes unattainable) bodies. I like the message, and the model is definitely a notch up from what we usually consider models, but I’d like to see them closer to the Dove campaigns. Perhaps that’s asking for too much since it’s an athletic company. I suppose it’s a dream of mine.
I agree with what you are saying and definitely like the Dove campaign a ton. But I feel like there is something to be said for considering the different industries. Nike is an athletic company, it only makes sense to have someone with an athletic build. And while I think it’s a body many won’t attain, it doesn’t mean it isn’t something we could look at as healthy and beautiful. Rather than people so skinny that wearing clothes looks like dresses on a hanger.
I just completed a course last semester in Global Marketing and one of the areas that was identified as HUGE potential was real marketing to women. As you say, a lot of companies pretend but few actually do.
Nike is a great company to be doing this and I must say the minimalist advert is excellent. Thank you for sharing.
There *IS* huge potential marketing to women. They make like 80% of the purchasing decisions in a household, and yet they are often neglected in sales and marketing. Fortunately I see that trend changing a bit, but more towards the “let’s make it pretty and pink and shiny.” Like the 2005 ad. Not a big fan of that!
I agree with everyone else – I’m a fan of the 2010 ad and find the 2005 version to be too much of an attempt to market to real women with a sort of fall back on the sex sells (or at least draws the eye in). I would have been fine with the color from 2005 with the 2010 photo… the bright colors and less minimalist background doesn’t bother me much nor do I really feel like it takes too much away from the message.
And – because I’m a disgustingly huge nerd – wasn’t the study only done with British (not Americans)? So unfortunately, I’m not sure if we Americans deserve this much credit… or maybe we just need a new study to prove it!
The 2005 ad is way too in your face. I think the new ad is much classier. I never grew up with all these body image issues of wishing to look like the girl in the magazine, but it is a shame that our kids are bombarded with it and kids are made to feel more self conscious.