Kitadol's Menophobia Message

Kitadol

When I say advertisement, what is the first thing that comes to your mind? Product marketing? Product sales? It's a common understanding that an advert is merely putting the word out about a product, usually to increase product sales. However, this particular advert that I found is selling more than just a product. The Kitadol advert not only sells a medication to relieve menstrual period pain, but also reinforces particular socially constructed ideologies and social taboo that society can associate with as being the norm or “common sense”. Patriarchal ideology, in particular, is dominantly reinforced in the advert. Hinting that the targeted audience for this advert is men, though the product is for women. The reinforcement builds a bridge between the meaning of the advert and the targeted audience, so men can relate and empathise with the situation presented in it. The representation involves stigmas surrounding menstrual period, and connoting that women aren't themselves as they “morph” into undesirable beings when in menstrual-period-inflicted pain.

It used to be a taboo and distasteful, still is in some societies, to speak about menstrual periods in public. Feminism and menstrual activism, dating to the mid 1970s, are in an ongoing mission to change that. Though there are more and more products pertaining to menstrual periods advertised on the market, it remains a taboo to talk about what it really entails. For instance, the colour red is never used in adverts or even on product packagings to represent what menstrual periods are mainly about- BLOOD. Sanitary pad adverts use blue liquid to demonstrate the absorbency of the product. The Kitadol advertisement reinforces that taboo. Besides the words “Menstrual Period”, there's nothing in the advert to imply it's selling a product in affiliation with menstrual periods. It could've been an advertisement about a migraine medication or anything, really. This shows that advertising companies are still far from accepting and embracing the fact that menstrual period is a natural and normal cycle, and shouldn't be abashing or seen as disgusting. This stigma about menstrual period gets reproduced and circulated within the society, and it becomes a vicious cycle.

The other social stigma reproduced by the Kitadol advertisement is that women display erratic behaviour during “that time of the month” caused chiefly by premenstrual syndrome or commonly known as PMS. And as if “PMS” isn't “abnormal” enough, doctors then came up with a more severe prognosis called premenstrual dysphoric disorder, also known as PMDD, though the cause of this disorder hasn't been found. The stigma that women aren't themselves when they display symptoms can be traced back to when Dr Katharina Dalton, the doctor who coined the term premenstrual syndrome, presented her “PMS” theory in her testimonies in court to defend women who pleaded diminished responsibility because of premenstrual syndrome, resulting in the acquittal of two women, one charged with manslaughter and another charged with arson!! 

 

Moving on, the Kitadol advert boldly depicted the woman as a muscular-with-hostile-demeanour Muay Thai boxer. Muay Thai is a form of martial art that engages almost all parts of the body where the forehead, the fists, elbows, knees, and feet are often used as the weapons during the fight. The comparison of premenstrual syndrome to Muay Thai reproduces the view that women aren't themselves, thus have no control over “PMS”. Instead of accepting premenstrual syndrome as part of a natural and normal bodily cycle faced by most women, the message the advert is circulating is- “PMS” is a disease, so husbands and partners out there save your woman and “get her back”.

Besides social taboo, the advert also reinforces socially constructed ideologies such as those seen in gender politics. O'Shaughnessy and Stadler stated that “gender involves issues of social power and equality: it is not simply a question of the social oppression of women by men, but a more complex situation in which men and women are constructed and oppressed by the patriarchal, competitive, and heterosexist values of society”. As seen in the advert, the man in the driver's seat is wearing blue which is a conventional colour for male and the colour of the tablet is pink, a conventional colour for female- gender colour schemes were of course socially constructed. The other signifier is the gender of the person behind the wheels- male. This advert reproduces society's “common sense” understanding that men are better drivers. Imagine the pressure put on men by the society, the expectation of having to be better drivers than women. “Behind the wheels” also symbolically signifies power of control, as stated by O'Shaughnessy and Stadler, men are seen in society as “a socially advantaged group” because they “have more social power and control than women, and there is still discrimination against women”. The connotation for control is also deployed by the slogan “Get her back”, which also reinforces the view that men are chivalrous.

Another example of ideologies deployed in the advert is on family and women's role in it. The Kitadol advert reinforces the conservative view that a family should consist of a mother, a father and child. The wedding band on the man's fourth finger implies that the man and woman are married, hence the presence of the child. This can be seen as an ideology of religion, where single-parent household, pre-marital sex, same-sex parent household are frowned upon. Again, this goes back to patriarchy where men and women have their own important roles to play in the family. Men's role is “to put food on the table” and women's is, as per the conventional society's understanding of everyday life, child bearer, nurturer and do-er of HOUSE CHORES. And this is reproduced by the advert by portraying the unshaved husband in a creased shirt, signifying that he has not been looked after and is under stress. The advert connotes that women's capability to look after their husbands is affected by premenstrual syndrome. It stops them from going about their “normal” wifely duties such as ironing. Again, inferring that premenstrual syndrome is abnormal and a disease that should be corrected.

This advert is one of its kind- a product for female targeting men audience. Although not all women get menstrual period symptoms, or do their partners' or husbands' ironing per se, the advertisement's managed to use ideologies and social taboo that most men can relate to as “common sense” understanding of reality, to reach its targeted audience. The Kitadol advert connotes that having menstrual period symptoms and not performing wifely “duties” are not normal. Men are made to see that they no longer have to “put up” with their partners' or wives' abnormal, erratic behaviour at “that time of the month”. Instead they should do what men “normally” do, that is to “take the wheel”, get in control of the situation and make it “right” again.

Stereotyping: Working Both Ends of the Spectrum

by www.adamsacks.com

Every society has different impressions and views on various ethnic minorities. When magnified, the discrimination or the tolerance of an ethnic minority in a particular society is traced back to the essentialist view of language, economic, culture or custom, and environment, resulting in stereotyping which is then circulated and reproduced by the media through their representations of the ethnic minorities. However, the term stereotyping need not be a negative discourse. The outcome of stereotyping can turn an ethnic minority in a particular society into social pariahs or, at the other end of the spectrum, turn another into a socially desirable group. To exemplify what I meant, I'll use a blog by a Singapore celebrity writer, Holly Aroozoo, to illustrate the reinforcement of an essentialist view of two ethnic minorities in Singapore, showing you how stereotyping can work at both ends of the spectrum.

So I've already mentioned that stereotyping can work to the advantage of some ethnic minorities but against other ethnic minorities. How?? For example, society generally gauges the education of an ethnic minority by the language they speak right? That means that society regard English speaking ethnic groups as more educated than non-English speaking groups, though technically that's erroneous. Society also generally gauges the social and cultural status of an ethnic minority by their ideologies, hence 'ranking' their social standing in comparison to the 'majority' group. Society judges the wealth of an ethnic minority by the economy of their motherland and their visible material possessions, again working to the advantage of some ethnic minorities and to the disadvantage of others. These traits can be seen in Holly's blog post titled Banglah Hits On ME ???!!!!, which basically narrates about an incident when a Bangladeshi who was interested in her sneakily took down her contact details as she was filling in a lucky draw form, and contacted her later. Holly makes it clear that she was annoyed and appalled by that act, not because of fear for her safety as she doesn't “think he's any danger”, but because a low socio-class Bangladeshi, presumably, a construction worker had the audacity to assume that he'd stand a chance with her. She adds that she was insulted by the attention she got from the Bangladeshi “who hardly speaks english, smells of 3 day old sweat, holds other Bangla men's hands.” In a sentence, Holly has judgementally represented an ethnic minority based on her essentialist view of their language, wealth and culture. In the post, she also comments that Bangladeshis “always have a knack for walking too close by, staring as if they've never seen women before or getting in your personal space”, negatively stereotyping Bangladeshis while ignoring the fact that this could easily describe any man wooing a woman or vice versa. 

At the other end of the spectrum, Holly's blog posts titled Multi-national Couple Trend and White Men Can't Jump. Well, Neither Can I., portrayed a stereotype of another ethic minority in Singapore- the Caucasians, but this time in a positive light. The term Caucasian is used to replace specific Caucasian ethnic minority because a) the ethnicity of the men in the posts was not specified by the blogger, and b) the Caucasian race in Singapore per se, even with all the Caucasian ethnic minorities coalesced, is still a minority group. In Multi-national Couple Trend, she credits Caucasian men for being persistent when they are wooing Asian women as the author puts it, “pursue them left and right”, unlike Asian men who falter around women “they perceive as even remotely possibly maybe out of their league” and therefor it's comprehensible “that these women would date White men, because they’re not pursued by any promising candidates from the Asian race.” Holly also added that Asian women who have evolved out of their traditional culture, and become “less appealing to the typical Asian man”, will still be palatable to Caucasian men. These are very contradicting views of courtship to the one involving the Bangladeshi. She's presenting a favourable view on the persistence of Caucasian men yet was put off by the attention she got from the Bangladeshi.

by www.guardian.co.uk

 The two ethnic minorities have been stereotyped based on Holly's essentialist way of thinking. The essentialist view deployed in those posts suggests that the Bangladeshis' contemptible standing on the social ladder is justified by their lack of hygiene, occupation, incomprehensible culture (Bangladeshi men hold each other's hands as a sign of close-knit friendship and sticking together), and their incapability to speak good English, hence not suitable for successful and beautiful Asian women such as herself.

by www.nomad4ever.com

 On the other hand, Holly commented that most “white men” converse in English well, an indication that they're befitting companions of articulate Asian women. She also stated that Caucasian men have a “more imposing size” physically, are “different” “yet compatible”, are chivalrous, and “tend to be more experience” unlike their Asian counterpart who “tend to still be latched on and suckling on their mother's teat.” What we've seen so far are mere stereotypes of Bangladeshis and Caucasians portrayed through Holly's understanding of the socially constructed reality (and judging by the blog's high readership, that view is circulated and shared widely with the rest of the nation, or even the world). More importantly, the portrayal of stereotypes has worked differently for the two minority groups. And as we've seen, the stereotype of Bangladeshis has demean and de-value their social standing in the Singaporean society making them social pariahs, whereas the stereotype of Caucasians portrays an attractive embraceable ideology, making them a desirable social group in that society.

by www.guidemesingapore.com

Thus, stereotyping doesn't just surround unfavourable portrayals but it can also positively depict an ethnic minority. This reflects that stereotype need not be consented as a bad thing, as the term stereotype can be used as a neutral discourse. Regardless, how warped or pleasant the society's essentialist view of an ethnic minority is, stereotyping can work at both ends of the spectrum.

Slack much??

OMG what a slacker I am! It's been a while since my last post. Been tooo long. I will endeavor to not let that happen again 'cause there's just sooo much controversial issues to ruminate about and sooo little time. My next post will be looking at social stereotyping. Here comes the controversial part- we generally associate stereotyping with discrimination or prejudice, but stereotyping can also work positively for some, so stay tuned. Till next time.


P.S: I just realised that this is my first post for 2011. Slack!