Apropos my reintroduction of the “consuming women” series last week, I decided to create a second series of similar images I like to call “sexy meat.”
“Sexy meat” is a sort of hybrid of “consuming women” and “suicide food.” Whereas the “consuming women” series features women who are posed to resemble “meat” (or other consumable animal products), “sexy meat” is just that – “meat” that’s been sexed up, usually in a traditionally “feminine” manner (women, of course, being the sex class). Oftentimes, this “sexy meat” is flirtatious in appearance, seemingly beckoning the audience to devour her, hence the “suicide food” angle.
Possibly, the two types of images are so closely related – each is essentially an inverse of the other – that they might be grouped together, but I chose to tease out the differences for maximum visual impact.
The first series of photos I’d like to share is a collection of three adverts for Rachachuros Seasoning. Each ad features an animal corpse, arranged in a pornorific pose for the camera (i.e., the male gaze), a concept which is reinforced by the product’s tag line, “The Temptation of Taste”:
From top to bottom, we have a chicken, a duck and a pig. Each corpse has been stripped of its hair and feathers and/or skinned, and then roasted. Brown, humanoid eyes are garishly Photoshopped onto all three animal corpses. Each animal strikes a sexy pose for the consumer: the chicken is crouched down on all fours, her ass tilted obscenely in the air; the duck sits up on her knees, chest thrust forward, arms/wings behind her head for maximum perkiness; and the pig lounges back on one elbow, legs splayed open suggestively. Of the three, only the pig’s pose leaves open the question of her/his gender, while the manner in which the chicken and duck are posed are obviously “feminine” and extra-pornified.
By displaying “meat” – once-living animals, now dead and dismembered corpses – as sex objects, the advertiser links sex with death (sex = meat = death). This meme also serves to further objectify and exploit non-human animals: previously treated like edible commodities, their suffering is now sexualized and made into a joke – a joke cracked at the expense of women. Already members of the sex class, women too are further degraded, transformed into edible corpses.
Both the misogyny and speciesism displayed in these ads are equally problematic – just as women are not “meat,” neither are non-human animals. Or, put another way, all animals, men and women included, are comprised of fat and muscle tissue; technically, we’re all “meat.” Non-human animals are no “meatier” than us – only speciesism (complete with anthropocentric criteria for moral consideration) makes it so.
Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare intersections parallel oppressions the pornography of meat carol j. adams animals and women speciesism sexism misogyny advertisement ad meat sex flickr photo sexy meat pornified Rachachuros Seasoning chicken duck pig porn sexy suicide food marketing photo blogging