ejs
© 2004 The Edwardsville
Journal of Sociology back to ejs volume 4
Volume 4
Commercial Homosexuality: Selling Lesbianism
William E. Janes
It is no
secret in the industrialized world that advertisers will go to great lengths to
grab, maintain, and capitalize on the attention of large consumer audiences.
The goal of advertising is, after all, to persuade as many people as possible
to purchase a particular product. In this attempt, those creating an
advertisement must find messages and transmission media that not only manage to
appeal to as many potential consumers as possible, but also manage not to
alienate other possible audience members. An ad that appeals to one segment of
an audience may raise serious moral, scientific, or personal concerns in
another segment. Even when communications seem popular with the majority of a
market, the potential backlash by other parts of society can cause irrevocable
losses.
Throughout history, no advertising ploy has tested, reformed, and redefined the limits of appeal and alienation as often as visual depictions of sexuality. Even the language of this phenomenon is common vernacular for most Americans. The oft-quoted mantra “Sex sells” is regularly sputtered as almost self-deprecating humor; our recognition that one of the most powerful tools of advertising has irreversibly altered our perception of the world. The power of libido in the process of persuasion is rarely, if ever debated.
The use of sexuality in advertising has taken several relatively new turns that deserve special attention and scholarly investigation. The inclusion over the past twenty years of intentional homosexual themes in print advertising has been well documented. (The same trend can be seen in other media as well, but print advertising is by far the focus of more scholarly work to date.) The most studied aspect of such inclusion is the impact on homosexuals of advertising meant to appeal directly to them. Less studied is the use of apparently homosexual imagery directed at a heterosexual audience. Specifically, scenes depicting women engaged in lesbian behaviors are being used in ads seeking straight male readership. The use of such methods begs two questions: First, are advertisers reaching their target audience? More formally stated, do heterosexual males view lesbian activity in advertising positively? Secondly, what do the ads mean to true lesbians? That is, do homosexual females hold such advertisements in significantly negative regard? Are advertisers in fact alienating an emerging lesbian market by objectifying their sexuality in an attempt at reaching a larger male audience? Before answering these questions, a firm sociological understanding of media depictions of sexuality and lesbianism will be necessary.
Literature Review
Advertising media are famous for providing a perverse, distorted view of sexuality that entices consumers with unrealistic expectations of gender roles in sex (Goode, 1998; Jhally, 1995) and how differentially men and women are expected to look and display emotion (Bogart, 1998). Women are typically depicted as excitable and submissive to male domination, while men are often relatively stoic and dominant. The vast majority of actors and models in print and television advertisements exemplify social standards of beauty and manic happiness (Reichert, Maly, & Zavoina, 1999).
Marketers,
in their attempts to sell products to the numerical majority, have long focused
their attention on heterosexual male Caucasians. As society progresses, though,
advertisers have chosen to recognize different demographic groups that have
attained high levels of social acceptance and disposable income. This trend has
been observed in minority groups other than homosexuals as well. African
Americans, for example, were rarely the target audience of mainstream
advertisements until the years following World War II. While there is debate
over dating of the first ads directed at African Americans, it is widely agreed
that several clear steps had to precede the shift in marketing strategy. The
first necessary step was research about the potential market, including a study
of income and expected acceptance by Caucasian consumers of African American –
oriented content (Brooks, 1995).
Beginning
with social movements in the 1970’s, homosexuality has slowly grown as a
publicly accepted demographic identifier (Bhat, Leigh, & Wardlow, 1996). In
recent years, advertising firms have begun to recognize the homosexual
population as one of substantial size and considerable spending power (Bhat,
Leigh, & Wardlow, 1996; Fejes & Lennon, 2000). According to some,
homosexuals have passed heterosexuals in average household income and in
average education level (Fejes & Lennon, 2000). Some estimates put the
combined income of homosexual Americans at well over $500 million annually
(Peñaloza, 1996). Thus, numerous advertising campaigns have been directed at
influencing an increasingly valuable gay and lesbian consumer market.
Peñaloza
(1996) lays out several strategies guiding firms that have traditionally
targeted a heterosexual audience toward this goal. Existing ad campaigns can be
redirected to reach homosexual markets. This simply entails placing existing
advertisements into gay-specific media. Modifying existing ads is another
possibility. Firms can simply re-shoot previous advertisements, supplanting
homosexual couples and behaviors for those of heterosexuals. A more involved
process is the developing of entirely new ad campaigns. Due to the commitment
of time and money necessary for market research, relatively few major
advertisers have taken this approach (Peñaloza, 1996).
While
appealing to gay and lesbian audiences, these advertisers must continue to walk
the fine line with alienating the numerical majority of their market. Some
research suggests that the increasing awareness and acceptance of homosexuality
provides a thin shield against upsetting the broader audience (Bhat, Leigh,
& Wardlow, 1996). In accordance with expectations, though, individuals who
are tested as homophobic still report low approval ratings for print ads
displaying homosexual behaviors (Innala & Ernulf, 1994). Thus marketers who
wish to communicate with a homosexual population are well advised to either
limit the extent to which they pursue such a campaign or to direct their
advertisements to homosexual-specific publication media.
As
is the case with heterosexuality, portrayals of homosexuality in advertising
are rarely accurate in form or content (Peñaloza, 1996). In keeping with
pre-established trends, homosexuals are portrayed as excessively attractive and
perpetually happy (Reichert, Maly, & Zavoina, 1999). Firms also go out of
their way to strictly define market segments dichotomously as heterosexual or
homosexual, ignoring the many possible variations of orientation which lie
beyond such strict boundaries (Peñaloza, 1996). This despite
warnings that such restrictive market segmentation actually reduces advertising
effectiveness. To limit the possibilities of any demographic variable by
definition cuts down marketing flexibility and defines purchasing habits of
large groups incorrectly based on stereotypes of behavior (Bhat, 1996).
While
studying the aggregate trends of homosexuality in advertising is important and interesting, ads specifically featuring
lesbianism yield peculiar patterns. Confusion over the definition of
lesbianism, deceptive marketing techniques and a continuing emphasis on
straight male consumers all serve to confound lesbianism as it is depicted in
print advertising.
To
identify a truly lesbian subset of the population is no simple task. To
operationalize the word “lesbian” requires several educated assumptions. Rust
(1992) recognized the lay definitions of heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual
as ideal types, meant to encompass the entire population of people experiencing
any sexual feelings or behaviors. She is quick to point out, though, that these
ideal types hold very little weight when individuals are allowed to self-report
their own sexual orientation. Two thirds of the self-proclaimed lesbians in
Rust’s sample reported that they were also sexually attracted to males, to
varying degrees. Women who define themselves as heterosexual explained their
same-sex contact as a simple extension of emotional expression (Rust, 1992).
Thus the terms lesbian, bisexual, and straight overlap depending on whose
definition is being used. In practice, this means that the ideal type of
bisexuality is often under-reported, while straight and lesbian categories must
accept for some inherent sampling error. Marketers avoid these issues
altogether by homogenizing different styles of sexuality. In advertisements
featuring and directed at all segments of the population, sexuality is depicted
only within the ideal types of heterosexual and homosexual (Reichert, Maly,
& Zavoina, 1999).
Because of
their disproportionate under-reporting and exclusion by the advertising community,
bisexual women will not be a primary concern of this work. This omission should
not suggest a lack of interest in this important group, but is rather intended
to align the methods of this study with the simple theoretical framework
outlined by previous researchers.
Presuming
the acknowledged market segments of homosexual and heterosexual males and
females, the question of who is targeted by ads featuring lesbianism seems the
next logical line of inquiry. Once again, lay assumptions precede empirical
study. While many suggestions are made that lesbianism in advertising is
directed at heterosexual males, literature directly supporting that hypothesis
is practically non-existent to date. What is available, though, is extensive
research on the factors that influence audience perceptions of advertising. On
the surface, it may seem a logical fallacy to derive the intentions of media
from the reactions of their audience. One must consider, though, that marketing
firms devote great time and resources to developing ads in accordance with the
taste of their predetermined target audience. Such research as is presented
below is no doubt utilized and expanded upon greatly by marketers. Thus what
are analyzed here as reactions to media are, to marketers, an essential
precursor to the public launch of an advertisement. It
is a fair and defensible assumption that an analysis of responses to
advertisements will reveal the original intentions of their producers.
Some basic
similarities exist in male and female perceptions of advertising. For both
genders, attitudes towards print ads and the brands they represent are
dependent on the attractiveness of the model presenting a message (Bhat, Leigh,
& Wardlow, 1996). DeBono and Telesca (1990) explain that attractive models
result in more positive attitudes toward ads. This effect is not entirely
stable, though. The same study reveals that attractiveness has almost no effect
on attitude when the text of the advertisement is of great interest to the reader
(DeBono and Telesca, 1990). Very basic differences exist between male and
female perceptions of advertisements. Generally, men are more influenced by
photographs than by words, while the opposite is true of women (Goode, 1998;
Hatala and Prehodka, 1996). Therefore, an advertisement directed primarily at a
male audience would be expected to contain an attractive model and relatively
little text. Advertisements directed at women would likely also contain an
attractive model, but would place greater emphasis on written words to
influence consumers. Riffe, Place, and Mayo (1993) have also demonstrated that
female models in male-directed ads rarely speak, a
significant difference from female-directed or neutral ads.
Further
investigation by Goode (1998) reveals that men show a strong preference for
photographic advertisements in which female models are shown with their heads
tilted, smiling, acting childlike, laying down or kneeling; all demonstrations
of submission. While the head tilt and smiling are also common among male
models, the remaining submissive suggestions occur almost exclusively in ads
featuring female models (Goode, 1998).
Given an understanding of
the ideal female-directed advertisement, we can now look separately at the
preferences of straight and lesbian women. While women of both orientations report being influenced by the attractiveness of
advertisement models, the effect is much stronger for lesbians than straight
women (Cohen & Tannenbaum, 2001). This fact seems to suggest that a key pattern
of lesbian attraction is similar to male attraction. Such an assumption,
though, would be inaccurate. Despite this similarity, lesbian attraction has
been described as much more closely resembling heterosexual female attraction
than any form of male attraction (Hatala & Prehadka, 1996). As Cohen and
Tannenbaum (2001) proceed to explain, lesbian women have very different ideas
of “attractive” than do gay and straight men. Waist–to–hip ratio has been
identified as the most important factor in ratings of physical and sexual
attractiveness. Whereas men prefer thin models (either male or female) with
high waist-to-hip ratios, lesbian women show a clear preference for heavier
models with lower ratios. This deviation from the traditional definition of
beauty is thought to demonstrate that lesbian women accept and internalize
societal beauty standards much less than do other segments of the population
(Cohen & Tannenbaum, 2001). Therefore heterosexual women tend to prefer
more mainstream depictions of beauty than homosexual females.
Among heterosexual men, visual depictions of lesbianism have been identified as a common subject of pornography and fantasy (Innala & Ernulf, 1994). Lesbian scenes in mainstream advertising and pornography alike present women as commodities for heterosexual male consumption (Reichert, Maly, & Zavoina, 1999). This means that even in cases of products being marketed to heterosexual females, lesbianism is often presented as an instruction for women to please straight men. When presented with the same photograph of a woman, men told the woman is homosexual tend to rate her as more attractive than men told she is heterosexual (Innuala & Ernulf, 1994; Kilbourne, 1995). Clearly, lesbianism in certain forms is intended to appeal to heterosexual men.
When combined, these truths about advertisement appeal, attractiveness, and sexuality reveal to whom lesbianism in advertising is directed. An ad intended to attract homosexual females, we can conclude, would likely picture attractive models with low waist-to-hip ratios, weighing more than those preferred by straight males, who appear to be speaking. The advertisement would also include valuable textual information about the product. A print ad directed at heterosexual males would look quite different. The ad would include attractive, thin models with small waists and large hips, in submissive poses. They would not be seen speaking and instead would be playing much like children. The ad would likely not include a large amount of informational text. As described here, straight male-directed ads appear much more frequently in mainstream media than do lesbian-directed ads.
Given what we now know about advertisements directed at different market segments, predictions can be made about their expected reactions to a mainstream print ad portraying lesbian behavior. A mainstream advertisement featuring attractive, thin models with small waists and large hips, in submissive, childlike poses who do not appear to be speaking is expected to appeal most to heterosexual male audience members. The ad is expected to appeal significantly less to homosexual females. Heterosexual females are expected to find the ad only slightly more pleasing than homosexual females. Because of the lack of research regarding homosexual male attraction to females, little can be predicted about their approval of such ads. Thus the researcher hypothesizes that heterosexual men will find the advertisement most appealing, while homosexual women will find it least appealing. Heterosexual men and heterosexual women are expected to fall somewhere between the two extremes, but show no significant differences in either direction.
Methods
Subjects
Data collection for the study required access to a large number of heterosexual and homosexual individuals. Because of the difficulties of underreporting described earlier, special steps were taken to ensure the recruitment of persons willing to self-report as homosexual. The researcher is acquainted with a businessman who offered the use of his facility to recruit this segment of the population. The bar caters to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender patrons. Thus the facility was an ideal location for finding persons of many sexual orientations who were willing to honestly self-report at a higher rate than that expected at other potential sites. While some heterosexual subjects were recruited at the bar, a larger number was needed in order to allow for statistical analysis. The remaining subjects were recruited at a major hub of student activity on the campus of a university in the same general area as the bar.
From within this sampling frame, subjects (n=85) were recruited at the researchers convenience. Three subjects self-reported as bisexual. Because the hypotheses of the current study focus on heterosexuality and homosexuality, these three subjects were omitted from further consideration. Remaining participants (n=82) ranged in age from 18 to 64 years, with a mean age of 30 years. Fifty-three males took part in the study, as did twenty-nine females. Because of the widespread use of slang, responses to the question of sexual orientation were evaluated independently by the researcher and an assistant. All of the responses were agreed to fall into one of three categories: Heterosexual (n=46), homosexual (n=36), and bisexual (n=3). Subjects were offered no reward for participation in the study.
Instruments
An informed consent document was crafted such that subjects’ names could not be matched to further responses. The document also described confidentiality issues to potential participants in an attempt at ensuring honest responses. An advertisement for Toyo Tires, printed in Mini Truckin’ magazine (Primedia, 2003), was selected as the stimulus to be administered. The black and white ad was blown up to 8 ½” x 11” and reprinted on heavy cardstock.
An 11-item survey was created specifically for this study, but was worded such that Toyo Tires were never directly mentioned, allowing future application in other settings. Open-ended items attained the gender and orientation of each participant. One item used a Likert scale to determine how attractive participants found the models featured in the advertisement. The seven potential responses were anchored at “Not at all attractive,” and “Very attractive.” Another Likert-scaled item assessed participants’ overall opinion of the advertisement, ranging from “Strongly dislike,” to “Strongly like.”
Procedure
Subjects were approached by the researcher and asked if they would be willing to complete the survey. Subjects that agreed were provided a copy of the informed consent form and a pen. After completion of the informed consent, subjects were asked to place the document inside a 10” x 13” clasp envelope, ensuring that even the researcher was unable to match names to responses on the survey. Next, each subject was individually provided a copy of the advertisement and a blank survey. Subjects were told that they were under no time constraint. Again, upon completion of the form subjects placed them inside a clasp envelope to ensure anonymity of responses.
Results
A 2x2 between subjects ANOVA was performed to determine what impact gender and sexual orientation had on opinion of the advertisement. No significant difference in opinion was found for gender, F (1, 81) = 2.929, p > .05. A significant main effect was demonstrated for sexual orientation, F (1,81) = 11.738, p < .05. Homosexual subjects clearly reported a more positive opinion of the advertisement (x = 4.68) than did heterosexuals (x = 3.516). An interaction approaching significance was found between gender and orientation, F (1, 81) = 3.871, p = .053. This finding, although insignificant, suggests that while males’ opinions of the advertisement were independent of their sexual orientation, homosexual females found it far more appealing than did heterosexual females.
A second ANOVA was performed to verify whether participants perceived the models as attractive in accordance with the theories proposed above. Gender and sexual orientation were applied to attractiveness ratings in this second ANOVA. No significant main effect was observed for gender, F (1, 81) = 1.177, p = .675 or for sexual orientation,
F (1, 81) = 1.304, p = .257. A significant interaction was demonstrated, F (1, 81) = 9.483, p = .003. Heterosexual males reported much higher levels of attraction (x = 5.32) than did homosexual males (x = 4.48). The inverse is true of heterosexual females (x = 4.17) and homosexual females (x = 6.00).
Discussion
The results of this study fail to support the hypothesis that straight males would most positively respond to lesbianism in advertising, while true lesbians would respond most negatively. In reality, the opinion toward the ad reported by straight males (x = 4.14) is slightly lower than opinion toward the ad reported by lesbian women (x = 4.73). While this finding does not support the current hypothesis, it does agree with the results of the second analysis, which suggest that lesbian women find the models in the advertisement more attractive than do other raters.
Clearly, the theoretical assumptions on which the current hypotheses were formed are faulty. Several explanations for this fallacious reasoning are provided. The results of the current study suggest that lesbian women and straight men hold somewhat similar ideas of attraction, contrary to the conclusions of Hatala and Prehadka (1996) and Cohen and Tannenbaum (2001). Surprisingly, the responses of these two groups matched more closely than those of any other two groups.
It is also possible that the advertisement selected for use in this study was a poor choice. A comparison with other ads reveals one major difference: the ad used in this study features a substantial amount of text. As was previously discussed, the presence of text tends to distract male viewers and appeal more to females. Also, the hip-to-waist ratio of the models in the ad could not be directly assessed, as the concept was never fully explained by Cohen and Tannenbaum (2001).
As it stands, the current study provides something for both sociologists and lay readers alike. From a sociological perspective, the work challenges theoretical positions regarding the attraction of a lesbian audience to mass media advertising. Clearly the lesbian market segment, as ad firms so rigidly define it, has strong opinions as to what they find attractive and what appeals to them in advertising. Perhaps advertisements originally intended to appeal to a heterosexual male audience can be effectively redirected to target a growing lesbian audience.
For casual consumers of media, the current findings may suggest a rethinking of anecdotal understandings of advertising. While it is often assumed that advertisements featuring lesbian activity are directed at a heterosexual male audience, this work suggests that they may also be appealing to lesbians themselves. Thus, if marketing firms have devoted such extensive time and resources to developing advertisements as has been previously suggested, then it stands to reason that they may also be well aware of this phenomenon.
Future researchers would be well advised to proceed with more qualitative measures than those used by the current work. Rather than relying on quantitative summaries of what people find attractive, a better method may be to simply go to the source. Structured interviews of lesbian media consumers may well reveal what aspects of physical appearance make women, lesbian couples, and the ads that feature them attractive. A solidified understanding of these concepts would allow for more thorough and accurate measurements to be made at a later point. The current work not only defies the logic of existing theory; it challenges researchers to re-examine the assumptions at the very base of lesbianism in advertising.
References
Bhat, S.
(1996).
Some comments on “marketing to the homosexual (gay) market: a profile and
strategy implications”. Journal of
Homosexuality, 31(1/2), 213-217.
Bhat, S.,
Leigh, T. W., & Wardlow, D. L. (1996). The effects of homosexual
imagery in advertising on attitude toward the ad. Journal of Homosexuality, 31(1/2), 161-176.
Bogart, L. (1988). The multiple meanings of television advertising. Culture and Society, 25(4), 76-80.
Brooks, D. E. (1995) In their own words: advertisers’ construction of an African
American consumer market, the World War II era. Howard Journal of Communications, 6(1-2), 32-52
Cohen,
A. B. & Tannenbaum, I. J. (2001). Lesbian and bisexual women’s
judgments of the attractiveness of different body types. The Journal of Sex Research, 38(3), 226-232.
DeBono, E.
G. & Telesca, C. (1990). The influence of source physical attractiveness on
advertising effectiveness: a functional perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 20(17), 1383-1395.
Fejes, F.
& Lennon, R. (2000). Defining the lesbian/gay community? Market research
and the lesbian/gay press. Journal
of Homosexuality, 39(1), 25-42.
Goode, E. (1998).
Photographs as sexual advertisements: responses to personal ads. Sociological Focus, 31(4), 373-389.
Hatala, M.
N. & Prehodka, J. (1996). Content analysis of gay male and
lesbian personal advertisements. Psychological
Reports, 78, 371-374.
Innala, S. M., Ernulf, K. E.
(1994). When gay is pretty: physical attractiveness and low homophobia. Psychological Reports, 74, 827-831.
Jhally, S.
(1995). Image-based culture. In G. Dines & J. M. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race and class in media (pp.
77 – 87).
Kilbourne, J. (1995). Beauty and the beast of advertising. In G. Dines & J. M.
Humez (Eds.), Gender, race and class in media (pp. 121 – 125).
Peñaloza, L. (1996). We’re
here, we’re queer, and we’re going shopping! A critical
perspective on the accommodation of gays and lesbians in the U. S. Marketplace.
Journal of Homosexuality, 31(1/2),
9-41.
Primedia
(2003). Mini Truckin’, 17(11),
39.
Reichert,
T., Maly, K. R., & Zavoina, S. C. (1999). Designed for (male)
pleasure: the myth of lesbian chic in mainstream advertising. In M. C.
Carstarphen & S. C. Zavoina (Eds.), Sexual
rhetoric: media perspectives on sexuality, gender, and identity (pp. 123 –
134).
Riffe, D.,
Place, P. C., & Mayo, C. M. (1993). Game time, soap time, and prime time TV ads:
treatment of women in Sunday football and rest-of-week advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 70(2), 437-446.
Rust, P.
C. (1992).
The politics of sexual identity: sexual attraction and behavior among lesbian
and bisexual women. Social Problems,
39(4), 366-386.
William Janes received his undergraduate degree in Psychology and Sociology at SIUE in the spring of 2004. His email is wjanes@wustl.edu