What do you think of the Dove campaign for real beauty?

[weightwatchingwaterwitch]

It's those ads with tick boxes and pictures of normal (i.e. not models) women with questions like 'Fit or Fat?' I'm just about to look at the website because I keep meaning to. I know it's only an ad campaign and I know they must be delighted to be getting the press coverage they're getting but I still think any debate about how real women get lost in adland has got to generally be a Good Thing. What do you think? site is here

[franch]

DillyDally exactly!!

[beansprout]

Great posts aloha. It is pathetic that we are so grateful to see some different women on these posters, but agree that the same old agenda reigns - judge, judge, judge the women, that's all we are good for..... sigh.

[DillyDally]

John Mccririck Fat or Foxy?

[franch]

aloha, I agree with every word you've said. It's a shame such a potentially revolutionary campaign has ended up doing the same old crap to women that we're so used to tolerating.

And yes, I'm afraid the ads do use the words 'fit or fat' and 'flawed or flawless'.

[winnie]

I really, really must go but am now on verge of contacting Unilever about the tick boxes (not that it will make the slightest bit of difference)but hey...

[winnie]

Aloha, I must get off mumsnet and get some work done but I too am depressed about Germaine Greer on BB and the way she is being discussed. Obviously she has put herself up for this but she is, obviously, so much more than what she is being depicted as. I have to wonder if she is doing it for some kind of research. Yes, people, individuals, all of us are obviously, always, much, much more than our sexual appeal.

[aloha]

I say I am surprised at how much I dislike the campaign, because I really enjoy seeing images of striking women and I totally agree it is amazing to see a woman of 96 photographed so beautifully, and looking so vibrant, intelligent and challenging without a hint of weakness or frailty and thus challenging our stereotypes of 'little old ladies'. I suppose it's partly because I find her so impressive that I think the tick boxes are so degrading by contrast.

[aloha]

Oh, I'm not saying that you can't be sexual as you get older, but one thing women don't need more of IMO is to be judged solely on their sexuality and sexual appeal appeal forever and ever, however old you are, whatever you do in your life, no matter how creative, intelligent, successful, whatever you are a PERSON. I find it SO depressing, actually. All this stuff about Germaine Greer on CBB, about how she isn't very pretty any more, how she's a bit fat etc. I think she is probably inviting it a bit by appearing on such a stupid programme to begin with, but we really don't judge men like this, do we? I cannot imagine a 'campaign' with an old man on it saying 'past it or perfect?" "bald or ballsy?" can you? I applaud using different types of people in advertising but I think the context here of tick boxes makes this just another cattle market, tbh. As I say, I have surprised myself by how much I loathe this campaign, and how much I think it sets women back.

[triceratops]

They are quite a big brand in America arn't they? Are they using the same ads there does anyone know? I would love to see how an "ordinary" american woman compares with and "ordinary" UK female.

[winnie]

one day I will learn to preview!
Aloha, the soap point is a good point and your point about the campaign element is something I will go away and ponder

[winnie]

aloha, I am not sure if your post was aimed at me but, just in case, I'd like to clarify that I don't like the ticking boxes element either as i said earlier but (and I know it is only a small thing) the fact that I hear so many women praising the campaign and feeling encouraged by it (especially older women) has to be a good thing as women do become invisible in the eyes of society. Women do not stop being sexy because they get older. Ones sexuality remains. I am not sure that it dehumanises the individual. Although it would have been better without the tick boxes. I find myself in an odd position here as I usually condemn everything that portrays women as little more than sexual objects and I loathe marketing but I do feel that more images of ordinary women of all ages etc is a good thing.

It does astonish me is that Doves profits increased by 40% in the last campaign... that is shocking

[aloha]

I would actually think it would be much, much better just to use this woman in an ad for Dove soap, rather than this so-called 'campaign', all dreamed up by an ad agency/marketing dept.

[aloha]

I disagree. I think it really does matter how the picture is used. I think that to take an extraordinary woman of 96 and reduce her to a couple of tick boxes to rate how attractive/sexy she is (FFS!) is really dehumanising. Yes, it would be wonderful to see her used as an example of an attractive woman or just as a person in an advertisement - like the older woman with the very long grey hair that Levis used as a model a few years ago - is something I do like to see, but it's the very explicit invitation to judge and condemn these women on their appearance that I find fairly repulsive.

[winnie]

Obviously I meant: to criticise the campaign because these women aren't normal enough seems little odd. Must learn to preview!
WWW, good post
In The Observer this week there is a picture of a woman, Irene Sinclair, who is reported to be 96 and imho she seems to shine with vitality & grace. Whatever the story of her life is the use of such a strong image of a woman of this age has to be a good thing imo.

[weightwatchingwaterwitch]

One of the women is 90 odd isn't she? So she differs quite a lot from conventionally beautiful women of the type usually used in ads. We don't even normally see women over 30 represented in ads at all unless they're worrying about washing powder and even then they're in their very very early 30s. I agree that to ask the question Fit or Fat isn't terribly PC and that being asked to judge women on their looks alone is not a good thing. But at least (I know, however many years of feminism and I'm sounding slightly grateful for this sop) this campaign suggests that something other than conventional beauty might be beautiful. And I do think that's a good thing.

Has anyone read The Beauty Myth? Some convincing arguments there about how women have been so conditioned by the beauty industry to accept an abnormal image of beauty that they mostly say they don't want to see 'normal' women. Naomi Wolf says a lot about how the industry creates dissatisfaction because a woman needs to be dissatisfied with her looks in order to be a good person to sell a beauty product to (makes sense hey?). And this seems to be getting away from that a tiny bit so I think I do think it's a good thing. The cynic in me notes though that although they are in partnership with an eating disorders group and are talking about setting up groups to help young girls with image/eating problems presumably the brand name Dove will be all over this stuff, meaning that school girls will be exposed to their brand very early on. And I don't think business has any place in schools so I thoroughly disapprove of that.

[winnie1]

Aloha, I take your point about judging and I agree The Body Shop didn't do that. I don't like that aspect of the Dove campaign myself. However, I do hear lots of comments from women around me about how glad they are that real women are being used (which is an interesting term in itself). I do feel that women do identify with these women in a way that they don't identify with the usual types of models used. However, to criticise the campaign because these women aren't enough seems a little odd. Ordinary, 'normal' women are beautiful, attractive etc., beuty is, afterall in the eye of the beholder.
nasa, I agree with your point too.

[motherinferior]

Quite

[marthamoo]

I think if I was, say, the woman with the freckles I'd find it quite humiliating to know that over 16,000 people ticked the "spots" box. It's still judging women on their appearance: I don't like it.

[motherinferior]

I did like the Body Shop slogan about how many women AREN'T supermodels. Aloha, you've pinpointed my unease perfectly. They are presented as 'ordinary' but quite frankly they aren't; as a result real ordinary women are left not quite matching up.

My personal annoyance is with actresses in soaps and sit-coms: they too are supposed to be 'ordinary' but they're all incredibly skinny. Annoys me much more than glossy superstars.

(I do rather like Dove soap though, it doesn't dry my skin )

[HelloMama]

i read that Dove's last campaign (with all the differently shaped women in white underwear)increased their profits by 40%!

[aloha]

Exactly, nasa.

[nasa]

'Fit or Fat' is one of the ads, I saw it on the side of a bus yesterday.

It would be much 'braver' if an advertiser was actually to use normal women in a campaign without making the fact of using them the actual campaign IFYKWIM

[aloha]

But you are, very explicitly, asked to judge a woman. I think the Body Shop is different because those women are just there to show or embody the product, you aren't asked if they are ugly or beautiful. In fact, just by being used as models the Body Shop was saying, 'these women are attractive and appealing' - the Dove 'campaign' is asking people to look critically at women and judge them. I think a huge problem is that women are judged all the time on appearance alone, and often very harshly. I don't think this is any better than catcalling builders telling women to cheer up or that they have big boobs, frankly. Except of course that the Dove women are volunteers for this humiliating treatment. I hope they got paid well to have strangers dismiss them as 'wrinkled'.

[weightwatchingwaterwitch]

So which are you, a twiglett or a soupdragon? I am confused!

[Soupytwiglettydragon]

You aren't asked to chose between "fit" or "fat"; it's terms like "outsized" or "outstanding", and for the lady with the freckles it's "Spots" or "beauty spots".

I think if it was done purely as an attempt to improving womens self-esteem regardless of whether they are conventionally attractive or not, then it would be a very positive thing. However, this is being done purely as a marketing campaign. Nothing is actively being done to raise awareness of how images in the media can give women negative self-images, and how such advertising shapes general attitudes towards the fat and unattractive (a group which I count myself part of, btw).

All of the models are beautiful, regardless of the fact that they are meant to have flaws in the eyes of society. I would have felt it more meaningful if they hadn't used obviously attractive models - although unfortunately I think more people would have responded negatively to images of wobbly tummies and unattractive models.