Dear advertisers, can you please stop making sexist ads if I’m one of your potential customers? Dear magazines, can you please stop running sexist ads if I’m one of your potential customers?
[Edit: I’m grateful to have friends willing to engage in this conversation with me. I realized after publishing that the term I was going after was alienate rather than sexist. So the strong feelings were there, but not the proper terminology. So while these ads may not be sexist, they still alienate women grapplers]
If you’re making protective cups or jock straps and want to make sexist ads, that still sucks, but I’m obviously not a potential customer, so I won’t be buying your stuff anyway. Let me just stick to companies that COULD be selling to me, a woman in jiu jitsu. Like – soap. Soap is gender neutral, right? We all need to be clean. I avoid Fight Soap because of their obviously sexist ads and use of ring girls to sell soap, and their soft-core porn photos – to sell soap. Defense soap, however, hadn’t appeared on my sexist radar until I went to leaahh.com and read Chelsea’s article called An analysis of advertising: Defense Soap, Jits. Mag
Note it says it’s for combat ATHLETES
The text under their name says “The Combat Athlete’s Soap,” but the text says “She’ll do cauliflower, but she won’t do ringworm.” So, dear readers, who is this selling to? Combat athletes, or men? Ding ding ding.
With one ad, Defense Soap and Jits Magazine both lost me as a potential customer.
I really liked Chelsea’s take on this:
The woman in this ad doesn’t have any agency. Despite clearly being an athlete […] the only important thing is what she won’t do. She’s defined by this, these restrictions that she has placed on him. Like the women in the daughter books, she is defined (within the scope of this advertisement) by the things of value she can do for the man in the ad.
Let’s perform a little bit of a thought experiment. Let’s change the text of this ad: “They’ll do cauliflower, but they won’t do ringworm.” […] Why does this so radically change the meaning of this ad? Because it puts them on even footing. It gives her agency– she decided to “do” cauliflower, just as much as he decided to “do” cauliflower. She’s no longer a groupie, now she’s his equal, deciding autonomously to participate in whatever shenanigans are about to go on in that shower (?) with him. It changes from the old, time-worn narrative of “women hold the keys to sex, men have to jump through hoops to get them to give it up” to a narrative where they both mutually decided that some frisky times were appropriate in the gym showers (for reference: NOT APPROPRIATE, GUYS). It changes the meaning of the ad from “buy Defense Soap! Get bitches!” to “be clean! Don’t get ringworm! Be badass! Have sex with attractive people!” I have to say I like that second message a lot better.
Overall Chelsea had a very thoughtful analysis that went on much longer, included several other ads, and at the end she suggested contacting Defense Soap to give them feedback. I highly recommend going and reading her article – she doesn’t often talk about gender issues in ads, but this was a rare exception, and a wonderful, balanced read.
I went to Defense Soap‘s website and sent them this message:
I am really saddened and frustrated by your use of the text on the back of the Jits Magazine ad. It’s the one that reads “She’ll do cauliflower but she won’t do ringworm.”
I am not a WAG (Wife and Girlfriend). I am a woman in Jiu Jitsu, and a viable consumer of your product, which is SOAP, something both men and women need. Why create sexist ads to sell soap? I had considered purchasing your product, especially after reading what Guy had written on Sherdog, but this was really disheartening, to say the least, and I won’t be purchasing any.
By using this text you’ve clearly marketed to only men. Additionally, by saying “She’ll do cauliflower but she won’t do ringworm,” the woman is defined as both the keeper of the sex (men must jump through hoops to get the sex from her) and by her relationship to him – he is clearly the grappler, she is clearly the WAG (wife and girlfriend).
Changing this to THEY – THEY’ll do cauliflower but THEY won’t do ringworm – that now puts them on equal terms: they’re both grapplers, they’re both concerned for their health and partner’s safety. AND it sells to both genders, including me, a woman in BJJ.
I hope that you will stop making sexist ads. You have a gender neutral product and it would be awesome if your ads sold to both. Women are such a minority in jiu jitsu that I don’t need to be reminded or to be hedged out further by companies that could be selling to me as well. I don’t buy gear or products aimed at jiu jitsu practitioners when the companies making them produce sexist ads. Thank you for reading, and I look forward to your response.
Jiu Jiu
jiujiubjj.com
I decided to also send a message to Jits magazine, a magazine for grapplers of all genders, because they chose to run this sexist ad. Yes, Defense Soap made it, but Jits Magazine had the ability to say “Sorry, this doesn’t fit with our magazine’s motto of “Lifestyle for people who train.” Here was most of my message to them:
I am really saddened and frustrated by your choice to run Defense Soap’s ad on the back of your magazine. It’s the one that reads “She’ll do cauliflower but she won’t do ringworm.”
I am not a WAG (Wife and Girlfriend). I am a woman in Jiu Jitsu, and a potential customer of your magazine, which is for grapplers of all genders. Why publish sexist ads?
[I included why this was a sexist ad using most of the language above]
I hope you will consider changing your policy about running sexist ads. I don’t purchase products for grapplers that create or run sexist ads. I will instead stick to GiFreak magazine and the like.
I look forward to your response.
I’m a source of revenue. I’m a woman in BJJ and I like buying gear. I’ve bought from Meerkatsu, Pony Club Grappling Gear, OK Kimonos, BJJHQ (more than my fair share, to be honest), Fuji, Fenom, Isami Store, and more. I am a single woman with no family to support, and my main hobby is jiu jitsu. In other words, I’m an ideal customer. I put my money where my mouth is, and I expect to be treated by companies as a grappler, not a grappler’s girlfriend or (potential) sex partner.
To sum up, I won’t buy from BJJ companies that produce sexist ads. This means that Defense and Jits Magazine will not be seeing money from me.
What was your reaction to that ad? Do you buy from athletic companies that produce sexist ads? Do they bother you? Does this change your opinion of Defense soap or of Jits Magazine?
I agree with not buying anything from companies with sexist ads. In the modern BJJ world you can throw a rock and hit like five BJJ companies so if you want me as your customer you’re going to have to not actively drive me away with sexist bullshit. Of course I think defense soaps and other fancy soaps are largely a scam anyways and I’ve never seen anything to indicate that work any better than just regular soap. This interview seems to agree with that (http://www.gifreak.com/content/microbiologists-take-bjj). None the less, I keep a mental list of which BJJ companies have misogynistic tendencies and avoid them… although it’s getting so large I might have to start writing it down -sigh-
I’m split on this one. I’d say the ad is sexual, but not inherently sexist…specifically because I think the product is sexually relevant. I’d be willing to bet there are some hetero men who’ve been shut down by partners because of rashes. Does it unnecessarily alienate hetero women and gay men? Yes. Which I take to mean that Defense Soap And JitsMag chose to use their positions to further the status quo. Every business has that right, but it just means this is a moment they chose not to make things better.
Thinking about it more, I just don’t like it, mostly because I’m always iffy on sexualizing jiu jitsu environments. Targeting men who may have had issues because of ringworm is one thing. Choosing to do that using intentionally titillating imagery is another.
I do think that the ad is based on a status quo in BJJ and by doing that in the context of a sport that isn’t always welcoming, and is frequently hostile to homosexual men and women of any orientation, specifically through the use of sexual jokes and innuendo, it is doubling down on that behavior by choosing to address a sex problem (the concept of a woman rejecting a man because he has ringworm) AND titillation (the visual of naked bodies in a sexual context) as a vehicle to sell a product. That’s why it’s not comparable to say, using a red-head to sell a car or as innocuous as them, choosing a buff, young White guy alone in an ad. It’s the sex and sexualization, not maleness that causes the raised eyebrow IMO.
That said, I disagree with the assumption that the woman has trained based on her build (they may have just chosen a body type they thought their target demographic finds attractive). I wouldn’t boycott Defense Soap over this, but it’s definitely not a shining, or even neutral choice.
Even if they’re making jockstraps, it behooves a company to not torque off women. Who do you think buys all the jockstraps for the male athletes under 18? Mom.
Hi Julia,
I am sorry if we have offended you. Please allow me to explain.
When I first opened your email I thought that I offended you with the photo that we chose. We know it pushes the limits of risqué and you have my word that we would never go farther than this. It took me 2 or 3 times reading your email to get the full understanding of what you were saying. I will address your point shortly but first I would like to explain the ad.
I literally had to twist my marketing department’s arm to create and publish this ad. We have always run very clinical and informational ads. I wanted to run an ad that was light hearted and let our customers know that we are grapplers too, not just a soap company profiting from your hard work. The concept of the ad for the most part was successful. This actually is the first time I had to publicly defend it. We have both woman and men who find it quit humorous. A good laugh and smile is what we were looking for. No marketing department in the world would have come up with that line unless they were grapplers themselves. The fact that we are grapplers, suffer from cauliflower ear and have had ringworm (enough times that I had to create a soap to prevent it) makes me feel I should be able to express this with my customers in this manner. That is all the ad stands for. We did not mean anything deeper then that.
Now to your concern. By no means are we sexist and by running an ad that features a male athlete hardly qualifies us as sexist. Your comment on “WAG” can be considered way more sexist then my ad. What do you call husbands and boyfriends that support their girlfriend or wife who competes? Shouldn’t they be labeled with a derogatory name as well? You will never see us speak of woman in this context who simply are supporting a loved one.
Ironically, yesterday we just posted on Facebook and Twitter our continued commitment to Girls in Gis. Here is the link: http://girls-in-gis.com/blog/girls-in-gis-oklahoma-special-event-recap-photos/ Should we discontinue our support of them because it is only for Girls in Gis and no men. We have been with them a couple of years now. I believe we are their largest and most committed sponsor providing cash, prizes and soap for all those who attend.
I ask that if you are going to judge our company you do so on the totality of what we do for all athletes and not just one ad of dozens that we have created. Your call for a boycott on Defense Soap could have an adverse effect on organizations such as Girls in Gis who attempting to promote your very cause.
I will make a deal with you if you would graciously accept it. We are starting a new online grappling publication. We already have tremendous talent such as Marcelo Garcia, Eddie Bravo and Marcos Torregrosa agreed to interviews. I would be willing to have our editor grant you an interview on the topic of “a woman in Jui Jitsu” to help bring light to your cause if you reconsider your position on this topic.
Once again I am sorry if I have offend you but please judge all of me not a sliver.
Guy
Defense Soap
Guy,
I’ve been buying defense soap for years, and reading Jiu Jiu’s blog for days. I think you’ve missed the point of this article. I don’t think anyone is arguing that your company doesn’t do positive things. Your commitment to “Girls in Gi’s” is positive. I applaud this. However, the particular advertisement in question is in fact sexist.
First, your advertisement has injected sexual themes into the sport for the purpose of selling soap. I Second and more importantly, the advertisement is very clearly targeted only at men – specifically heterosexual men. This photo in this advertisement says, “Use defense soap and she will do you.” Obviously playing to peoples most base emotions, you’re essentially equating your bar of soap to a faceless sexually uninhibited woman. This add strategy has been used so many times before that we’re numb to it now, but it is – and always has been sexist and offensive to women. I can’t really think of a more eloquent way to explain WHY this is offensive, so I’ll just quote leaahh.com;
“These ads treat women as beings whose worth is dependent upon what they can give to the men in their lives.”
I understand the concept of targeted advertisements, and while I’m not a market researcher I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that most grapplers are men. So targeting a male consumer makes perfect sense to me in this case but maybe you can find a more creative and original way to do that. I’m sure that Jiu Jiu would be more receptive to your company and it’s very good product if you were to recognize the sexism inherent in your advertisement and promise not to repeat it. And I’d like to respectfully add that you’re NOT going get positive feedback from this blog’s readership by trying to turn the argument back at Jiu Jiu with your “WAG” comment.
Guy, you kind of killed coming off well by trying to point out your perceived double standard with the WAG thing.
Hi Guy, I saw that you cut and pasted most of this response to Chelsea on her blog as well. I sat on my comments so I could process what you were saying and respond in an even-manner.
Before we start, please be clear: My blog post shared what I wrote to you and Jits Magazine. I then asked an open ended discussion question calling for other viewpoints, NOT a boycott. I was judging your AD, not YOU.
Rereading your response, I see: explanation, deflection, accusation, and bargaining.
Explanation: why you made the gi. I appreciated this part most. It made me realize that rather than say “nope, not buying anything from you ever” from normally good companies that create sexist, or iffy ads, is hasty at best. I think the better thing to do is approach it more from a “Is this the direction your company is headed, because that’s not cool.” I think a lot of BJJ ads get made without much thought as to how women might view it, thinking “This would be cool” without malice. But it still doesn’t make certain aspects less alienating or sexist or “other”-ing.
Deflection: claiming “we’re not sexist.” There is a big difference between saying someone IS something and saying something they DID is something. It’s the “Who you ARE” vs “What you DID” conversation. I was having a “What you DID” conversation, which has nothing to do with what you are, who you support, etc. It has to do with this specific ad. Support of female athletes is awesome, but does not make an ad more or less sexist.
Accusation: saying my use of WAGs more sexist than your ad. First, there IS no term for husbands and boyfriends because in our society, they are defined by their own status, whereas women frequently are referred to as “the Y’s wife”. Chelsea mentioned several examples. Second, rather than gently inform/educate me or suggest I educate myself, you attack me. Third, this is about YOUR ad, not MY word choice.
Bargaining: exchanging an interview for a reversal of opinion. While I think it would be great to do an interview, I am uncomfortable with your phrasing, which reads to me as “I’ll give you an interview if you’ll state that this ad is not sexist.” Were you simply to have said that you would like to include more women’s voices in your publication, I would jump at the chance, but not in exchange for stating something I don’t believe.
To sum up: It’s cool that you care about your company. Thank you for not attacking, although the accusing and bargaining aspects left me a somewhat negative impression. I think you had no malice behind your ad. I don’t think your company is sexist. I still believe your ad is sexist. My use of WAG is my own issue. Your support of women’s organizations does not make this ad more or less sexist.
You are correct that the ad is sexist. I’d like to suggest choosing your battles, though. This ad wasn’t the most egregious I’ve seen. Maybe you come from the philosophy that you want to fight every battle, and confront sexism at its core no matter where it lands on the “offensiveness continuum.” I respect your position, and can see why sexist shit aggravates you. If I were in your shoes, for what it’s worth, I’d focus on crap like this: http://www.platinumbjj.com/product/angel-gi
I think the horse is dead. Bringing up EVERY possible advertisement about “sexism” in BJJ is getting old and boring. If you’re trying to build a readership, this is not the way to do it. You wrote a great article about losing weight with BJJ and then follow it up with this bust of an article. Anyone that you might have gained as a new reader, quickly lost interest. Especially if you’re going to write an article about sexism in BJJ once a week.
The problem with BJJ is that women make up probably 1% of the customer base for an Academy. So advertisers, schools, Gi’s, etc, focus on the 99% of the population who trains and buys their stuff.
You’re beginning to make mountains out of mole hills and just trying to keep an argument alive that really isn’t that big of a problem.
I’m going to use my real name to disagree with “Me”. Yes, men are a majority of BJJ probably and yes advertisers are going to target them. But I disagree with your characterization of sexism as “isn’t that big of a problem.” i strongly disagree. Sexism is a huge problem precisely because it is so banal it today’s western culture and since we don’t live in a vacuum you can see the effects of it in the way people behave. I’ll let you connect the dots to Miley Cyrus and the Steubenville rapists for yourself.
Seeing as how Jiu Jitsu is going through a kind of renaissance in the west right now, we have an outstanding opportunity to prevent this kind of thing from creeping into the sport. Stop it now while BJJ is growing because it will be a lot harder to stop it later.
I’m a human being too. I look at women. But I try to keep that to myself and I certainly don’t want my daughters to grow up around – and train with – a bunch of sexist pigs. It’s a subtle form of bullying and no self respecting BJJ school would put up with a bully.
Personally, I think discussions about sexism and racism are fascinating. I follow a few feminist blogs, and it’s something I could read and discuss for hours. So while SOME people don’t care for this topic, overwhelmingly I’ve received positive feedback from readers. And to be more frank, I’m writing on these topics to help support women in this sport, which is why I also share their stories.
But let’s be honest – you aren’t really worried about my readership. You’re couching your own dislike of this topic in concern for my readers losing interest. What you mean to say is: And that’s totally fair. It’s also why I aim for variety – not have too many sexism articles in a row, too many tournament discussions in a row, but heck – sometimes I’m like a dog with a bone and just gotta talk about what’s on my mind.
What you also mean to say is “[You’re] trying to keep an argument alive that really isn’t that big of a problem for me.” And let’s be very clear – that’s what you actually mean. A person of the majority telling a person of the minority that no, there actually is no problem, is what’s called ‘splainin or mansplainin or whitesplainin. And it’s bad behavior.
There’s trouble in River City, and if you really don’t see that there’s a problem, then either you are closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge, or you are legitimately unaware of the issues that (some) women in our art face.
In any case, it means you can either continue to be irritated and annoyed and feel persecuted (and to be fair, I think you probably should feel persecuted, since your comment leads me to believe you are NOT an ally and are instead intentionally trying to shut down important conversations), or you can come at this with a bit more of an open mind and remember that other people around the globe may be having VERY different experiences than you do in your school.
You know what WOULD be cool? For you to be an ally! For you to hear the things we’re saying and to work with us. That would be super cool.
For the record, no more mansplaining is allowed on my blog, from any gender. You don’t get to come to my space where we’re discussing issues that women are facing and then claim there is no actual issue – it’s just rude and frankly I expect more from you. I’m facilitating conversation, not shutting it down.
Guy,
Your response re: Girls in Gis feels a lot like when a white person says, “What? I’m not racist! My best friend is black!” Having done so much for BJJ women in the past, why would you turn around and make an ad like this? Supporting BJJ women doesn’t mean you now get a “pass.” In fact, I think you’re actually held to a higher standard. If you have access to a network of women, why not run it by a few of them before making it public? Would it be difficult to keep the ad but just change the text from “she” to “they?” Leaahh’s suggestion isn’t unreasonable and you can still use pic of the beautiful naked people.
“Me,”
If there are this many sexist ads being addressed, then isn’t that evidence that it *is* a bigger problem than you say? Literally, my reaction to thekillerj’s link was a frustrated, “Man, this just never ends…” I thought BJJ was for everyone. Aaron is right – it’s a form of bullying. If you think reading about sexism is old and boring, can you imagine how I feel about being its target?
[…] conversations, with people being dismissed as “feminists” (hence the warning) or being mansplained why I’m making mountains out of molehills. That’s why these conversations are important – precisely because, while they may not […]