Esquire editor admits that their female covergirls are “ornamental” and are there to be “objectified”

Comments 2
Posted by:

This may or may not come as a surprise to you, but apparently Esquire’s covergirls are there to be objectified and help boost sales. I know, you’re shocked.

Esquire Editor Alex Blimes is fully disclosing the magazine’s intentions with their covers, which usually feature barely-dressed women. He admits the use of “ornamental” women, “in the same way we provide pictures of cool cars.” Mmmhmm….

“The women we feature in the magazine are ornamental,” he said, speaking on a panel at the Advertising Week Europe conference in London on Tuesday. “I could lie to you if you want and say we are interested in their brains as well. We are not. They are objectified.”

Bilmes, speaking on a panel hosted by Cosmopolitan editor Louise Court about feminism in the media and advertising, added that men “see women in 3D” in many different roles in life “but at certain times we like to see them sexy”.

“[Esquire] provide pictures of girls in the same way we provide pictures of cool cars,” he said. “It is ornamental. Women’s magazines do the same thing.”

He said that in his view Esquire was “more honest” than many titles, citing the “anti-feminist” example of a newspaper using a picture of model Naomi Campbell next to a financial story “because she shopped at Marks & Spencer once.”

He argued that Esquire was, in fact, “less rigid” in its portrayal of women than women’s magazines. “We are more ethnically diverse, more shape diverse,” he said. “In fashion magazines women are much thinner. We have older women, not really old, in their 40s.”

He went on to cite the example of actress Cameron Diaz, who is in her 40s, as an “older” women used on the cover of a recent issue of Esquire. “Most women’s magazines don’t put them [older women] in their magazines.”

He said the women’s magazine industry and advertising targeting women were primarily responsible for perpetuating stereotyped and negative images of women.

I like how Cameron Diaz is considered “older.” Ugh, PLEASE. Anyway, I think the guy comes off like a pig, honestly, he should have just kept the comments to himself.

Here’s my thing. Cameron DaizMila KunisMegan Fox…. they weren’t drug there kicking and screaming. These girls certainly don’t look like they were forced into taking their clothes off. If this guy is objectifying women, the women certainly don’t mind. I don’t know…. victimless crime?

Source

Tags: , , , , , ,

Posted by:
Thursday, March 21st, 2013 at 2:14pm
Filed under Cameron Diaz | 2 Comments






Comments

Add Your Comment

  • First-time commenter? A confirmation email will be sent to you after you post your comment.

  • Please check your inbox ... your comment will not appear until you have confirmed your identity via email.

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

Comments

March 21st, 2013 at 3:15 pm

He is so full of crap. His magazine is crap and promotes crap. Womens magazines dont promote women as objects, idiots like him do.

March 22nd, 2013 at 8:30 am

Obviously the goal is to sell the magazine and get money through the objectification of women. Why else would they put them in sexy poses half naked on the cover. While he is just being honest, it doesn’t need to be said and he is just coming off as a pig. I really don’t think these women would be on the cover if they didn’t want to be.
















Follow ICYDK