Sunday, October 17, 2010

"Wow Matey!"



Times Square is the commercial intersection of New York City. It is an overlapping of stores, billboards, window displays, restaurants, tourist traps and every aspect of the area is lathered in advertisements exclaiming, “this could be you!” Yet it was underneath the bright lights, and the numerous airbrushed giants that we found a shocking depiction of sex and gender in the big apple. Being mid October, the city has been growing Halloween stores right and left, like pimples on an adolescent. However, one particular Halloween store that we stumbled into in Times Square contradicted some of our fondest childhood memories.


Instead of our misty images of pumpkins and ghosts from the past, we found ourselves in a pot of sexual innuendo and scantly clad representations. In whichever direction you looked, your eyes found images containing long legs, short skirts, excessive cleavage, and pouty lips. Not only did the models look unreal and representative of porn stars, but the innuendo that accompanied the package was overwhelming. Strip officer, Tara U. Clothesoff, Beer Pong Babe (with a skirt reading “don’t forget to wash your balls”) Chick-A-Dee’s chick who was chocking a chicken, Naughty Nun, and Light Me Up Ladybug. These costumes covered a whole two floors.


Although there were some male costumes that were full of sexual innuendo, and penis jokes, none of them seemed as risky or revealing as the women's outfits. One particular representation that we found fairly contradictory was that of two sailor outfits. The males was plain white, entitled “Sailor” and covered up almost the entirety of his body. The models pose on the packaging was almost child like, and the model himself had plenty of what you would call “boyish charm”. However the counterpart to the “Sailor” costume, was the women’s equivalent, “Wow Matey!” made by Delicious: Sexywear of New York; this costume was in many ways an opposite. Depicted on the front was a young women with a bare stomach, her costume was tight and very revealing. The models pose included one hand on her hip, and the other playfully coiled in her pigtail. She was very thin, very tan, and to many men, very inviting.


We observed, that in this particular costume shop, men were not being objectified as objects of sex, whereas women were. And in the few cases, that men were being objectified, it was always in a powerful, masculine manner (pimps, wrestlers, warriors.) Different to the women, who it seemed were always there “to serve” the men and bring them pleasure. Not only was this somewhat disturbing, but we also found a whole section entitled “Teens and Tweens” who had similar outfits for young men and women.


The implications of these “sexy”, scandalous, skimpy costumes are that, they are giving women and young girls alike the same message. That they should be merely attractive whores. Some of us thought objectification of any kind was bad, yet others believed that objectification was okay, as long as it was being done to everyone. Our goggle-check also showed some interesting habits, like laughing and posing with all of these costumes while simultaneously being horrified. However, we all left wondering, what this store reflected of our modern day depiction of men, women, sex, and gender?


-Gracie, Paul, Tori, Leo

1 comment:

  1. Why do you think that it resounded so strongly with you when you noticed that there were so many raunchy female costumes and not as many male ones? Do you really think that it had changed from the "pumpkins and ghosts" times of our childhood or were we just unexposed to the inappropriate sexual innuendo costumes that we have access to as teenagers?

    -Abby

    ReplyDelete