I.

The ads do show woman as objects, as Kilbourne notes. As well, it demonstrates

the status necessary to obtain women as objects, which isnt as much emphasized by
her. It shows how women in advertisements are constituted according to an ideal, to
fulfill their objectified role
II.
1. Both men. For Unforgiveable Womens, men who desire status along with access
to women. Probably wealthy. The company wants their money. For the Budweiser,
probably younger college aged men. Only young men that have poor taste in beer and
will fall for a cheesy advertisement like that.
2. the first focuses on the way the man caresses the woman. it definitely lends
credence to the fact that if you wear their cologne, you get the woman. the second
focuses on the aesthetics of the beer and the woman on the beer.
3. the first, both are dressed classily, the woman with makeup. the second, the
woman is dressed in a one-piece with make-up
4. the first shows the aggressive handling of the woman, the second shows a
woman laying on a beer bottle. Men like handling women, men like beer. whats not to
understand behind what the messages are suggesting?
5. the first is up close, the sexual vibes are clearly present. the second is from
somewhat of a distance, with a clear view her upper legs up, in a seductive pose
6. dark clothes, with bright light from above, black man on light skinned but possibly
mixed woman. second one is a white woman on a brown beer bottle, with a red
backdrop
7. bright light in the first upon the womans face. the second one the background is
dark but the woman is well illuminated
8. a wall, the woman is pressed up against a wall in the first one. the second is a
red backdrop with condensation on it.
9. the first shows a sexual body language that is male dominated, the second
shows a woman with a bottle, demonstrating both as objects of possession. they both
show a setting of certain standards and accessibility to women as objects.
III.
I think the context of these images in advertisement employed for the pursuit of capital, making
these models and making the possession of these commodities in exchange for social capital
over women is wrong. The employment of these images are harmful in that it reinforces these
sorts of exchange relationships.
Both show the name of the company, the former suggesting one can obtain woman through
status, the second being plastered on the womans logo. The former has a man aggressively
fondling a woman, and the man shows clothes that demonstrate status. The latter has a woman
showing herself provocatively, like a cold beer.

Intro:
Introduce by suggesting that ads can encourage different things for different genders,
that encourage a heterosexist form with different expectations for both. introduce the
thesis.
Body:
describe the relationship of the woman and the beer in the second one, as similar
objects
elucidate the commensurability of object choices, and how this plays into the very
formation of objects
describe the sexual differences in the first ad.
show how status is intertwined with the obtainment of object choices.
Conclusion:
end with implications of the thesis on our day to day life ethics and practice, relate it
concretely to the thesis