The newest line of attack in abstinence education is…sex! Check out this tank top.
Where to even begin? Well, as the blog Sociological Images points out, there are no male versions–the “you” is always male and the female is always the one responsible for control. And of course, there’s no mention of birth control as an option. But really there are two intertwined points about this really caught my attention–today, everything is for sale and sex is the default method of selling everything.
Let’s take a minute to look at the organization that came up with this shirt. The Candie’s Foundation has “the mission to educate America’s youth about the devastating consequences of teenage pregnancy.” They use celebrities and catchy slogans like “Not what you had in mind for your first set of wheels, huh?” over a picture of a baby stroller (see all the PSAs here). Again, the point is that babies are a commodity, a purchase like a car, and the foundation seems to believe that teens just need to be told how to spend their money. I’m suspicious that two horny teenagers are going to stop having sex because they thought about how much a year of formula is going to cost.
But more important than the foundation is the offshoot of Candie’s, a clothing line that caters to teenagers and is infamous for overtly sexy ads. This, from the mid-90′s, is my favorite:
What’s amazing is how similar the two ad campaigns are. Candie’s sells clothes and shoes (and occasionally fragrance) to girls. They sell these things using celebrities and other pretty young people in overtly sexual situations, and the promise that buying the product (the tank top or the fragrance) will get the girl what she wants by making her sexy…even if what she wants is abstinence. Because she doesn’t really want abstinence. She wants to be popular and wanted (because that’s what our culture tells girls is really important). And Candie’s foundation doesn’t really care about teen pregnancy; they just want girls to buy Candie’s fashions rather than diapers.
And, to be quite blunt, sexually satisfied teens (and adults) are probably less likely to shop than sexually frustrated ones. The post-orgasmic haze is not conducive to trips to the mall or even on-line purchases. Or do you think it’s strictly a matter of policy that Candie’s is pushing abstinence (and $15.00 shirts) rather than condoms?
Professor Bean
Professor Moss
“Again, the point is that babies are a commodity, a purchase like a car,”
Actually, I disagree with this point. This line and lines like it that come from the abstinence-only crowd generally sound to me as “babies are a punishment for having sex.” So that one is “You could have had an awesome car but instead you had sex, and now you are punished forever with a baby.” Which is also deeply disturbing to me.
Aside from that, I very much agree with your post.
You make a good point. I think I was trying to say that but didn’t explain as well as you did. The fact that babies are a punishment for making the wrong “spending” (sorry, couldn’t resist the Elizabethan slang joke) is very disturbing, since presumably at some point, babies are supposed to become a good thing, a reward!
Very good point about babies being punishment for having sex!
I’ve not seen either of these two ads. There is an air of teens are too stupid to get subtlety so we need to be as overt in our sexual imagery as possible. Then again overt sexual imagery permeates most of popular culture today. It is its own sexual revolution, redefining what we think of as “nice girls”.
Interesting that the t-shirt only implies that the other person has to wait. The wearer of the shirt makes no such claim. There is also an air of empowerment because the wearer of the shirt decides when the waiting is over. It is an efficient ad in that it could be used for a multitude of campaigns and/or products.
It did occur to me that even with the t-shirt “ad” the onus of control and responsibility regarding sex are left to the woman. Not only are young women to control their own sexual urges but they must also control the boys’.
You may be right, Cindy, but of course the implication of the shirt is that she’s only worth waiting for *if* she is very sexy. Also, I can’t help but think that this sentiment encourages men to be even more aggressive (i.e. she’s waiting for me–I’d better keep pushing until she gives in).
Agreed!