Adam Haupt
Adam Haupt

Sexism – catch them young with lollypops

Which kid doesn’t enjoy Saturday morning cartoons? My kid is no exception and I join him often enough, but this Saturday I am annoyed by Pin Pop’s very obviously sexist TV commercial on e.tv. Why is it being screened at a time when toddlers are bound to be tuning in? Does the answer lie in the fact that young people’s ability to filter and analyse commercial media messages is relatively limited?

Pin Pop makes lollypops and their most recent advertising campaign seems to employ the latest marketing ”flavour of the month”, hip-hop, to market the cool of its products. There is already quite a bit of research on the commercial co-option of youth cultures, like hip-hop, and so this is no surprise. But the latest Pin Pop ad raises an issue that we really should have dealt with constructively by now. Their latest commercial does not seem to be on their website or YouTube yet, but I spotted it twice on Saturday just after Bob the Builder and in an ad break during Dora the Explorer.

The ad starts with two male teens parking off on a couch in front of the TV, probably playing a game. One guy opens up his Pin Pop lollypop and ”cool things” begin to happen. You might say that a hallucinogenic effect kicks in: his friend on the couch becomes muscular, he takes a look outside and his car becomes a hot SUV. His female friend then walks into the lounge, he puts the lollypop in his mouth and concentrates on her chest. A mid-shot of her reveals her following his eye line and she looks down at her breasts. The camera tilts downwards as she drops her focus to her chest.

The implied narrative is clear: his lollypop makes ”cool things” happen. When he stares at things, they transform into ”cool things”. His female friend’s chest will transform into a ”cool thing”. Her breasts will become enlarged and her dress will pop — clearly a pun on the ”pop” in lollypop and the brand name. This is a troubling marketing message to direct at children during Saturday morning TV cartoons on a free-to-air broadcaster, particularly at a time when the country is debating gender politics and gender-based violence after a number of horrific news events.

The advertisement is problematic because it fetishes the female character’s breasts. It’s an example of how metonymy works in media and cinema: the part stands in for the whole. The young woman is reduced to her body parts — breasts, which become fetish objects that need to be enlarged. The problem with this reduction is that it dehumanises women: it reduces women to body parts; they become objects and are no longer presented as full subjects with intellect and a will of their own. Of course many may dismiss this reading by saying that it’s just a bit of fun, or that boys will be boys. This is the kind of thing they might say when boys are caught bullying younger boys or harassing girls on the playground. I would argue that this kind of metonymical representation of women legitimises patriarchy and that they make sexist ideas appear everyday and natural.

The implied narrative in the commercial is that it would be ”cool” to have a female friend with big breasts and, more importantly, a female who is sexually available to him. The lollypop therefore promises to give him ”special powers” — these are patriarchal powers. The young woman in the ad is now a trophy in his fantasy (like the hot SUV). What happens when this woman does not acquiesce to his ”special powers”? What if she objects to his reductive focus on her body? Does he even care what she thinks?

Once in a while a big and shocking news event captures national attention. Sometimes it is a gang rape. Sometimes it is the brutal murder of a woman or child. Sometimes it is both these unspeakable things at once. Such a big news event provokes a great deal of outrage for a while and then it subsides until the next big thing ignites anger and righteous indignation.

But if we want to make a real change in the ongoing problem of sexism and misogynist violence, we have to address everyday modes of speech and media representations that normalise sexist ideas about women. We need to address media messages that socialise our boys and girls into sexism. It is time for advertisers and commercial media to take responsibility for the messages that they convey to our children. Otherwise media noise about gender-based violence comes across as somewhat insincere.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

  • The uncomfortable truth about white masculinity
  • Spoiling your vote is a rotten choice
  • Over the rainbow – voices from the margins of South Africa
  • The powerful politics of love
  • 13 Responses to “Sexism – catch them young with lollypops”

    1. Howard Gabrielse #

      Hi Adam

      Great article! Another part of the problem is the words and language that we as adults use when speaking about the opposite sex. Phrases like “He/She is MY man/woman” imply ownership (once again objectification).

      I was listening to Dr. Eve on Cape Talk yesterday, she was trying to show adults how to explain rape and other forms of abuse to our children, and thus empower them to recognise and prevent this from happening to them in family and other situations. She used phrases “Good Loving” and “Bad Loving”. My response to this is that “Loving” is good, if something is “bad”, it cannot be loving. The use of the word loving as Dr. Eve uses it, denigrates it to nothing more than a verb.

      Gone are the days when we would only use the word “Love” when we were sure we were committed to that person. Celebrities use the word love at the drop of a hat, consequently the meaning of the word is lost on our teenagers and young children.

      We need to impress on our young people the importance of respect for other people, regardless of the gender. When we do this, we prepare them for a loving and fulfilling life with whoever they choose for a lifelong partner.

      February 23, 2013 at 2:44 pm
    2. Adam Haupt

      Thanks, Howard. I agree. I think that we need to engage people in serious debates about the ways in which language shapes reality, and challenge the idea that language operates outside of ideologies and relations of power.

      February 23, 2013 at 8:49 pm
    3. Judith #

      Thank you for analysing this advert and pointing out how inappropriate it is. Please report it to the Advertising Standards people

      February 24, 2013 at 7:37 am
    4. Momma Cyndi #

      I haven’t seen the advert so I can’t comment on what its message is. I am, however, very cautious about ‘shooting the messenger’. I’ve heard everything from Elvis’ music to Tarantino’s movies for being the ‘reason’ for violence.

      We have a large number of children who are growing up feral. Do we need the media to become the parents? Take the old ‘electronic babysitter’ to the next level? I’m not sure that would work. Children learn what they live. If daddy klaps mommy upside the head if dinner isn’t ready on time then a steady diet of the Cosby Show on TV isn’t likely to make a difference.

      February 24, 2013 at 2:24 pm
    5. Barb #

      Excellent article – I can’t believe more don’t report this.

      February 24, 2013 at 5:10 pm
    6. george orwell #

      Thank you for this analysis, Adam.

      What you describe is the thin edge of the wedge.

      Please take 10 minutes to reports to Advertising Standards. It can be done online fairly painlessly, I believe.

      More of us need to complain more often.

      Then read Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Bernays book on advertising, called ‘Propaganda’.

      Follow that with ‘The Corporation’ (2008) a brief, pointed and powerful book by Canadian professor (and father of young children) Joel Bakan.

      Corporate advertising has but one bottom line – and it’s not philanthropic altruism or the true upliftment of women and girls.

      Couple pursuit of profit with seductive creativity and irresistable psychology and you have modern-day advertising. While it might be good for the share-holders’ bottom line, is it good for us as human beings?

      “Childhood Under Siege: How Business Targets Children” (2011) by Prof Joel Bakan is another must-read.

      February 25, 2013 at 10:31 am
    7. hippiegoth #

      Sies, Pinpop!

      Not only are such methods of marketing “cheap” and lazy – they’re also entirely unacceptable.

      Thank you, Adam.

      February 25, 2013 at 7:55 pm
    8. Touched #

      This is why my children are not allowed to watch TV. They are allowed to watch full length episodes of Barney, Noddy, Dora etc via DVD or blu-ray but without the adverts.

      February 26, 2013 at 10:13 am
    9. sonto #

      good article, I’ve also seen this ad and it really is degrading to women why should everything come down to our sex.

      February 28, 2013 at 9:29 am
    10. Mandy Francis #

      I agree totally. Great article

      March 1, 2013 at 7:11 am
    11. Zaheer #

      the ad is still being aired, has anybody complained to ETV or BCCSA cos im about to?

      April 23, 2013 at 11:04 am
    12. If you are going for most excellent contents like me, only go
      to see this site every day as it offers feature contents, thanks

      May 18, 2013 at 4:56 am

    Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. Adam Haupt Concerned About Sexist Lollipop Advert Aired Between Children’s Shows | HSRC Press - March 7, 2013

      [...] Complete article: Mail & Guardian [...]

    Leave a Reply

     characters available