I would like to thank the anonymous person who shook me out of my apathy. The next poster I glanced at was the same poster, but written on it was, "Are you offended by this? You should be." I looked closer and thought, "Yes, of course I am offended." I am often offended by images that sexualize and objectify women, but I usually feel like there is little to do. I have chosen to boycott certain stores that feature smaller than average women in their magazines, but other than that, it is hard to fight back against such a large, powerful presence. One action, though, that we can all take is to stop reproducing these images.

I am disappointed with the advertising campaign used for the Clark party, because it perpetuates these images. Of the posters that I looked at, 10 posters featured women: two were bare-breasts, two were crotch shots and three women were almost naked. There were three posters of men: one crotch shot, one almost naked and one of older men. They reproduced images that show one aspect of personhood, the sexual possibility of a person’s body. It is not that presenting sexuality, in itself, is wrong, but in these images the featured person exists for the viewer- the "object’s" thoughts, feelings, and other capabilities are not represented. The images also showed a narrow vision of what type of body is attractive: white, lengthy, super slim and trim.

Talking with one of the members of the party planning committee, he assured me that they didn’t believe these images were offensive or harmful. In fact, they showed the posters to Public Safety and Dean Kishimoto, the assistant dean of student services, and they were not offended and found many to be humorous. Objectifying images were sanctioned by University Officials. This is disturbing and is indicative of the insidious nature of this problem; On a basic level there is cultural acceptance of the state of women, and to some extent men, as objects. I believe this is why the Clark Unit Council and the university officials found these images acceptable. I don’t believe that any member of council was trying to hurt or offend anyone. I think they were drawing sexist and objectifying imagery from a sexist,  and over appearance oriented, culture.

Images like these do damage. It is well known that women are at a high risk of being sexually harassed during their lifetime. You can’t convince me that this has nothing to do with myriad images on television that portray women as "passive sex" objects. A Glamour survey found 75% of women thought they were "too fat" (quote taken from About-Face! Website). I won’t believe that the proliferation of Kate Moss look-a-likes has not been a factor in this situation. There is evidence that men increasingly have dissatisfaction as companies market health-care and beauty products more heavily towards men. The proliferation of images that portray limited ideals of female and male beauty of and that show women as consistently sexually available are not neutral and they are certainly not funny.

We need to develop new ways of representing physical desire and healthy eroticism. I applaud the choice of one of the council’s posters. It is a collage of couples kissing. Although the people are all heterosexual and stereotypically beautiful white men and women, this image moves in the right direction. It shows the act of physicality between two (we hope) mutually consenting individuals. Neither body is seen as an object to get, rather, the act is seen as one to desire. It is still erotic and might inspire people to go to a "Fresh Flesh" party, and it de-emphasizes one individual being the object of sexual fantasy.

The Wesleyan community can be more creative in our approaches to advertising. We can stop relying on images of thin white women to symbolize sex. Why not let sex symbolize sex? I think it is fine to show people touching and being sexual/sensual. How about showing different types of people in this activity including multi-racial couples and individuals of different body shapes and sizes? Reproducing images in popular culture reproduces the ills of popular culture. If we are going to use these images lets, present them critically, otherwise, lets avoid them even in the simple act of advertising for a party, because they have serious affects.

Sexism and objectification is widely accepted in our culture, but we do not need to accept it here.