Sexy Meat, No. 2: Flirty Fish & Beefy Chicken

Thursday, July 9th, 2009

Updated, 11/18/09: Ben @ Suicide Food has an absolutely pornirific take on McCormick’s sexy fish centerfold.

It’s been a few months in the making, but here’s entry No. 2 in the “Sexy Meat” series. This set of advertisements from McCormick is unique in that it features explicitly female and male “meat.”

Let’s start with the female, who is represented by a flirtatious fish (again with the fish, oy vey!).

McCormick - Fish

The ad above features an obviously female fish: she has oversized, cartoonish eyes; long, lush eyelashes (seemingly curled, even); and wispy fins, one of which she touches to her lipsticked, collagen-enhanced lips in a flirtatious gesture. She rests, splayed out, on a platter, as if being presented for your pleasure and consumption. Not as if; exactly like. Her tail is raised in the air, giving the appearance of an arched back (or raised buttocks? It’s hard to tell; she’s a fish, after all!). An anonymous, faceless consumer – also obviously female – hovers above, pouring a stream of McCormick’s mustard on the fish’s head. The scene vaguely resembles a, ahem, money shot.

Though not relevant to determining her gender, it’s worth noting that the fish’s skin is gruesome in appearance, to say the least. She appears to have grilled or roasted, to the degree that her scales are almost unrecognizable as such; they’re dark tan in color and even bear dark burn marks from the grill. And yet, she seems so happy and…aroused.

The text reads, “Tu comida se va a poner más buena,” which Google translates into “Your meal will bring more good”…though I’m guessing that’s rough at best.

(More below the fold…)

White Castle: Now with edible porcine strippers! (1983 vintage)

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

Vegan Butterfly sent me a link to this detestable White Castle ad a few months ago. I meant to blog about it straight away, but naturally procrastinated. The video has since made its way ’round the interwebs; see, for example, I Blame the Patriarchy and Suicide Food.

No matter. ‘Tis never too late to deconstruct some Grade A kyriarchical Homer shit. Let’s get started, shall we?
 


 
In case you can’t view the video, here’s a breakdown.

Cue the scene: a bevy of skeevy, college age, white dudes sits in a smoky, dimly lit dive, hooting and clamoring expectantly. Onstage, a pig (!?) appears. Our “pig” is clearly a human decked out, head-to-hoof, in a cheap plush pig outfit. But let’s forget about that for a moment. This is one sexy stripper pig. She – we assume the pig is a she, since men are rarely reduced to sex objects – bursts into a sultry dance, thrusting her ass towards the audience, hips grinding to and fro. The camera pans around to two guys – and an animated White Castle paper bag (!?) – sitting at the front table. Miss Piggy shimmies herself onto a strategically placed chair, opening a creepy ole can of Flashdance on our asses. Still dancing, she thrusts a leg into the air, then back down to the floor.

Suddenly, a flirtatious female voice over:

“Introducing tempting pulled pork…”

Here, Piggy reaches for a chain, dangling down from the ceiling – and gives a good yank. Barbecue sauce rains from the sky, covering Piggy (whose back is predictably arched at this point) and splashing the audience, which doesn’t seem to mind a bit.

“…in barbecue sauce.”

The audience cheers! Piggy twirls and dances in triumph!

Cut to shots of murdered, dismembered, processed and cooked pig, i.e., “meat.”

“Shredded pork in a come-hither barbecue sauce. Sweet. Saucy. Oh so naughty. White Castle – what you crave.”

The ad ends with a fadeout of the aforementioned white dudes – sitting with a now grease stained White Castle bag – licking barbecue sauce off of themselves and enjoying the “entertainment.” Happy ending, anyone?

Where to start, where to start?

(More below the fold…)

Her milkshake brings all the boys to Carls.

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

Okay, so this commercial advertising a new line* of “real milk / real ice cram” milk shakes technically comes from Hardee’s, but hells bells, they’re identical franchises (right down to the logo) belonging to the same company. *Shrug* So sue me.
 


 
The thirty-second spot shows a nondescript white dude – your normal Hardee’s customer, I would assume – “shaking” a “dairy” cow. The idea being, of course, that he’s whipping up the milk inside the cow in order to make a milkshake.

Or, to put it more succinctly, the cow is but a mere container for the milk inside her. She is a milk container. Nope, no sentience there! (Sound familiar?)

Of course, one can’t exactly pick up a cow and shake her like a milk carton, so nondescript white dude is instead forced to act out the “shake” on her body, i.e., by kind of shimmying her skin to and fro. Which he does while dancing – not with her, exactly, but on her – to a rap/R&B number. The result being that it looks as though dude is “housing” (or dirty dancing or whatever teh kidz r calling it nowadays; holy Jebus am I getting old) with a cow. It’s all strangely obscene.

To make matters worse, the short video features at least one gratuitous close-up of the cow’s udders (read: cleavage), and the dancer slaps her on the ass, to boot. And, um, did I mention that said slap is accompanied by the sound of a whip, BDSM style? *shudder*

But wait! It gets worse! Behold: the techno version!

(More below the fold…)

PETA takes a page from the Fred Phelps playbook.

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

Update, 6/4/09:

Well, then:

Anti-Abortion Protesters Crash Vigil For Slain Doctor

About 10 members of the Westboro Baptist Church bearing signs with messages like “Baby killer in hell” were an unwelcome presence at a vigil for murdered abortion doctor George Tiller.

————–

Oh, no, no, no. Just, no:

WICHITA – A national animal rights group plans to erect billboards in Wichita urging people on both sides of the abortion debate to go vegetarian.

null

null

One version of the billboard says, “Pro-Life? Go Vegetarian.” The other says, “Pro-Choice? Choose Vegetarian.” Both feature a photo of three baby chicks.

Lindsay Rajt, campaign manager for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, said the billboards were prompted by the recent shooting death of abortion doctor George Tiller, who was killed Sunday at his church.

“The discussion of the value of life is front and center right now in the public conversation,” Rajt said today.

“We think we would be irresponsible if we don’t talk about how we’re all guilty of extreme cruelty to animals every time we sit down to a meal that includes meat.” […]

Rajt said the timing or content of the Wichita billboards may be controversial.

But, “If our billboards leave a bad taste in anyone’s mouth, we just think they might give a thought to what animals feel when they go to the slaughterhouse,” she said.

“We want to remind people that no matter where they come down on the abortion issue, each and every one of us can spare a life every time we sit down to eat.”

Frankly, the actual content of the proposed billboards is rather inoffensive – and downright blasé when compared to 75% of PETA’s other ads. In fact, I think the “pro-life” version is rather cute – and, on a subtle level, calls so-called “pro-lifers” out on their hypocrisy and ethical inconsistencies. The pro-choice one, meh, not so much; it just strikes me as a forced corollary to the “pro-life” billboard. A reach, albeit a harmless one.

But the timing – the timing is beyond crass and tactless. Fuck that shit, it’s downright amoral.

(More below the fold…)

Together, We Are

Monday, May 18th, 2009

Also new from Mercy for Animals is this awesome PSA, “I Am Mercy for Animals.” In addition to the diversity of voices – men and women, adults and children, people of color and the melanin-deprived, professionals and “freaks,” vegetarians and vegans – I quite like how MFA stresses our interconnectedness, our strength in both numbers and multiformity.

The video hits upon so many points, from the individuality of the animals we exploit, to our similarities to and connections with the least fortunate among us, to the role the animal rights movement plays in the larger push for social justice and human rights.

For those who can’t view the video (which may be a few of you today, as You Tube seems to be acting up at the moment), MFA helpfully provides a transcript on its website, which I’ve copied below. I’ve underlined some of my favorite passages for emphasis. (Okay, so about half the transcript is underlined. Like I said, powerful video.)

Thoughts?

(More below the fold…)

Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary: Don’t Let Him Kill Me!

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Peaceful Prairie - Don't Let Him Kill Me (front)

(More below the fold…)

Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary: Dairy is a Death Sentence

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Peaceful Prairie - Dairy is a Death Sentence

(More below the fold…)

Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary: Don’t Kill My Baby!

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Peaceful Prairie - Don't Kill My Baby (front)

(More below the fold…)

Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary: Milk Comes from a Grieving Mother

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Peaceful Prairie - Milk Comes from a Grieving Mother

(More below the fold…)

On being someones, not somethings.

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

I’ve heard mention of these campaign/outreach materials from Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary from time to time, but it wasn’t until I received a Mother’s Day action alert from the sanctuary that I clicked on over to check them out. Now that I’ve had a chance to look the materials over, I think I can honestly say that Peaceful Prairie’s fliers and pamphlets – particularly the “Milk comes from a grieving mother” series – are some of the most powerful I’ve seen.

Throughout its materials, PPS stresses the family ties of the (more often than not) nameless, faceless creatures we exploit for “meat,” milk, eggs and the like. When you eat meat, you’re eating someone’s father, brother or son. When you drink milk, you’re drinking milk that was stolen from a grieving mother and was meant to nourish her murdered baby. The exploitation of farmed animals necessarily involves the manipulation and severing of these familial relationships, so fundamental to their (and our) emotional and social well-being and survival. How do YOU say, ‘Don’t kill my baby!’? Should any mother have to?

PPS also gives these animals names and faces, by emphasizing their unique individualities, as well as their relationships to one another: Lillian is more than “just a pig,” more than “pork,” more than the sum of her animal parts. So much more! Lillian is both someone and someone’s daughter. Someone’s sister. Someone’s aunt. Someone’s mother, perhaps. Lillian is important and valuable and unique because she’s Lillian the individual – there is no other quite like her! – and because she’s Lillian to so many others. Like you or I, Lillian is irreplaceable.

(More below the fold…)

Consuming Women, No. 4: Rustling Up Some T&A

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

I re-discovered the following ad from Rustlers last week while “spring cleaning” some of my online accounts (in this case, You Tube – see all the pretty new playlists?). It’s more than two years old now, but meh – the message is still as relevant as ever, as we shall soon see.

Rustlers, by the by, is a fast food chain in the UK:

Rustlers are a range of burgers and hot sandwiches produced by Kepak Convenience Foods, based in Kirkham, Lancashire, England. The parent company, Kepak, is based in Dublin, Ireland. Each product in the range comes packed with a sachet of sauce appropriate for the food. Several products are now also packaged with a slice of processed cheese or a rasher of bacon.

The focus of the marketing is on the short cooking time and the use of a microwave oven to reheat the food. The brand’s slogan is “0 to Tasty in Seconds”, recently modified from “0 to Tasty in 70 Seconds”.

This Rustlers commercial is somewhat appropriately titled “Date,” and is available on the You Tube Channel I Love Rustlers.
 


 
In case you can’t view the video, this particular Rustlers tv commercial shows a semi-nerdy lad* welcoming a fetching young lass into his apartment, seemingly after the couple’s first date together. The woman comes off as a bit disinterested – in more sexist terms, frigid – declining her date’s offer to take her coat with a demur request for a quick cup of coffee. The message is clear: as eager as the young man appears, he’s not getting any action tonight.

Until, that is, our “hero” breaks out his secret weapon! Under the pretense of making coffee, he pops into the kitchen…which is actually a control room of some sort, outfitted with a keypad and an observation window that looks out onto the living room. As the audience gazes upon the nerd’s date, perched all prim and proper-like on the edge of the couch, nerd-boy excitedly pokes at the keypad’s buttons, which set the couch a-spinning, like a turntable. With one 360-degree rotation of the couch, the date has lost all of her inhibitions – and clothing (save for her black, lacy lingerie…this is family tv, after all). From Liberty University co-ed to FHM cover model in 70 seconds flat.

Tag line: “If only everything was as quick as Rustlers. (You’re so hot.) Rustlers. Naught to Tasty in 70 Seconds.”

Cut to another scene, this one of a Rustlers “burger” spinning on a microwave turntable, and then of same nerd-boy hungrily showing down on the prepackaged animal corpse.

Because women (and female sexuality) are exactly like pieces of “meat” (or rather, they should be): just heat in the microwave for 70 seconds and then enjoy!

Also worth noting – in half a minute, Rustlers manages to trot out the following tired memes:

– Women are “tasty,” like morsels of food (in this case, “meat,” or food which was formerly living, sentient beings);

– Obtaining women’s consent for sexual activity is a huge pain in the ass, and wouldn’t it be awesome if you could just heat those cold bitches up like the pieces of “meat” that they are? (And, along those lines, Foreplay? What’s foreplay?)

– “Meat” is a form of sex, or sexually arousing;

– Women are “meat”; attractive women are sexy “meat.”

Even the company’s name is significant; “Rustlers” is an obvious reference to cattle rustling (in which cattle are the living embodiments of the consumable “meat”), a phrase which means “to steal (livestock, especially cattle).” In the context of Rustler’s “Date” ad, then, the woman also functions as livestock, the nerd-boy, as a cattle rustler/rapist.

(More below the fold…)

Yes, thank you!

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

(On multiple levels, seeing as this is a PETA ad and yet everyone managed to keep their knickers on.)
 


 
And also: *swoon!*

(More below the fold…)

Rachachuros Seasoning, Redux: Zombie Cannibal "Meat"!

Tuesday, April 21st, 2009

As a follow-up to last week’s Sexy Meat post, I bring you another series of advertisements for Rachachuros Seasoning.

(Courtesy of Ben at Suicide Food, who covered these ads last year. Timely, I am not.)

Rachachuros Seasoning - Chicken 2

(More below the fold…)

Sexy Meat, No. 1

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

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”:

Rachachuros Seasoning - Chicken

(More below the fold…)

Consuming Women, No. 3

Thursday, April 9th, 2009

Some time ago – we’re talking two years plus – I started a series on this blog called “Consuming Women.” My intention was to highlight examples of advertising campaigns in which the consumption of “meat” is likened to the consumption of women, usually by depicting women as obviously edible foodstuffs. My own personal Pornography of Meat, if you will.

Because I’m a scatterbrain and tend to bite off more than I can chew, I never got past post #2 in the series. Which is a shame – but, luckily, one that’s easily remedied!

For now, let’s start simple and return to the series’ roots: woman-as-fish. Classy.

The Seafood International Market and Restaurant - Mermaid

For those who can’t view the image, the ad depicts a woman – a mermaid – lounging seductively on a table in what appears to be a fancy restaurant. Our mermaiden is surrounded by spoons, forks and knives, all of which will presumably be used to murder, dismember and eat her. And did I mention that she’s totally succulent and mouth-watering, in more ways than one?

In addition to reducing both women and fish to consumable commodities, something to be bought, sold and eaten, this ad for The Seafood International Market and Restaurant also draws upon a fairly popular gendered insult, in which women’s lady bits are likened to fish.

To be fair, I should note that the restaurant in question is located in Singapore; perhaps their slang differs in this regard. Would any international readers care to weigh in?

(More below the fold…)

A new genus of the fauxgressive species?

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

Sigh. Shit like this is, I think, a natural outgrowth of the Chicks Love a Vegetarian (and similar) way of outreach, in which my “pussy” is treated like a reward for good male behavior. While admittedly kinda sorta cute (zomg! fluffy baby chickies and hot boyz!!1!), it’s also kinda sorta sexist. Let’s not pretend for a second that “chick” isn’t slang for women, and that a rather obvious double entendre is at play here.

Of course, both are natural outgrowths of living in a patriarchy, so ultimately, IBTP.

(Photo via whizchickenonabun; “fauxgressive” via Shakespeare’s Sister.)

(More below the fold…)

Lettuce be thankful!

Monday, April 6th, 2009

Updated, 5/26/10: Upon further reflection, I think I have to agree with commentators who noted that PETA’s failure to sexualize and objectify Ms. Leachman is, rather than a step in the right direction, simply further evidence of their rigid beauty standards. As in, PETA didn’t refrain from stripping Leachman down to her skivvies as a sign of respect, but because of ageism: Who wants to see an old lady nekkid? Yuck!

Who knows, perhaps I’m being too harsh on PETA. Be your own decider person.

FWIW, I meant to post this update ages ago, forgot (naturally!), and was only reminded when this post saw a huge uptick in views this past month. My skepticism (cynicism?; tomato, tomahtoe) re: everything PETA isn’t a recent phenomenon, is what I’m sayin’.

——————-

Last week, Stephanie at animalrights.change.org gave a tip of her (faux suede) hat to PETA, for their latest ad featuring Cloris Leachman:

I’m a strong believer in acknowledging–and encouraging–the good while criticizing and discouraging the bad, especially if our plan is to effect change, both in people and in organizations. And although it’s rather unusual for me to talk about PETA two days in a row on this blog, and even more unusual for me to write about PETA in praise of one of its ad campaigns, I’m going to do both. Their latest ad has just been revealed today, and my initial reaction was “Oh my god, it’s stunning, and I love it.”

I couldn’t agree more – it’s important not just to criticize those campaigns that we find objectionable (whether from a human or animal rights perspective), but to offer solutions and praise organizations when they get it right.

PETA (Cloris Leachman)

The Cloris Leachman ad is classy, eye-catching and gorgeous – all of which is accomplished without objectifying Ms. Leachman. It’s also nice to see an older woman featured for a change. More often than not, PETA’s print models are young, thin, white, conventionally attractive, heterosexual (or amenable to lesbianism for the male gaze), and sexually available. PETA bucks several of these trends with Ms. Leachman’s advertisement.

I’ve always liked the “vegetables, fruit and assorted plant-based matter as clothing” concept; PETA’s execution of it (read: skimpy lettuce bikinis), not so much. Ms. Leachman’s red cabbage and lettuce ball gown demonstrates how yummy vegetarianism can be, thus promoting animal rights without engaging in misogyny. (Though a pro-veganism message would have been even better.)

Not to mention, when the campaign slogan is “Let Vegetarianism Grow On You,” more clothes are better, no?

After the jump are several more PETA ads that I like – none of which you’re likely to see on certain feminist blogs (*cough*cough*).

(More below the fold…)

Sarah Haskins in Target Women: Carl’s Jr.

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

In the latest installment of Target Women, Sarah Haskins takes on the meat-peddling, woman-hating fast food chain Carl’s Jr. for its extreme douchebaggery. While the “meat as sex” and “real men eat meat” memes are only tangentially explored, Haskins is in typical hilarious form, and demonstrates how the Carl’s Jr. (et al) commercials promote sexist stereotypes in the course of exploiting non-human animals. All in a day’s work, eh?
 


 
(More below the fold…)

ARA PSAs: Women, Men and Fur

Thursday, March 12th, 2009

After January’s “fur hag” post, I’d like follow up with several examples of anti-fur ads that I like – albeit, with a few caveats.*

While I’m rather ambivalent when it comes to PETA’s nude “I’d Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur,” “Turn Your Back on Fur,” (and similar) campaigns, I quite like anti-fur ads which depict fur as the bloody, murderous mess that it is. (In theory, anyway…hence the forthcoming caveats.)

For example, this recent series from IndyAct:

IndyAct - Stop the carnage 01

IndyAct - Stop the carnage 02

IndyAct - Stop the carnage 03

Each ad features a thin, white, conventionally attractive, stylishly dressed woman, decked out in a fur coat which once belonged to various animals. The knife-wielding women are covered in blood spatters – bright red blood, everywhere. The woman in the first ad is, inexplicably, rubbing the knife along her chin, as if in contemplation of fellatio (?). Needless to say, I prefer the other two ads in the series.

(More below the fold…)

When anthropocentrism meets androcentrism: KA-POW!

Thursday, March 5th, 2009

Last week, while bored and browsing the Flickrs, I stumbled upon a collection of academia-themed photo sets, uploaded by a user in Germany. Most of the photos are of various conferences and lectures, hosted at the University of Heidelberg. One particular set caught my eye: “The Myth of Animal Rights,” with Professor Tibor R. Machan, Ph.D.

Now, I don’t know much about the man, nor do I care to. His Wiki page is rather sparse, and barely touches upon his animal rights views, except to say

Machan has also argued against animal rights (in his widely reprinted paper “Do Animals Have Rights?” [1991] and his book Putting Humans First: Why We Are Nature’s Favorite [2004]). His full ethical position is developed in his book Classical Individualism: The Supreme Importance of Each Human Being (Routledge, 1998) and it is applied in, among other books, Generosity: Virtue in Civil Society (Cato Institute, 1998).

As if the shameless anthropocentrism evident in Machan’s book titles isn’t ridiculous enough, behold the flier which advertised his appearance on the University of Heidelberg campus:

For those who can’t view the image, a diminutive lil’ chimp sits – in a diaper!? – next to a towering Brandon Routh-as-Superman. Completely breaking with reality, Superman stands at least ten times taller than the “lowly” chimp – no doubt meant to represent MAN’S superiority to mere beasts. A bunch of text offers conference details, with the title of the lecture – “The Myth of Animal Rights” – front and center, in outlined font (lolcats styley, natch: seriousness, ur doin it rong!).

Clearly, this ad reeks of speciesism: though humans are just one of millions of animal species which inhabit the earth, Machan apparently thinks that we’re the only species that matters: we’re “nature’s favorite.” In terms of importance, we dwarf even the chimpanzee, our closest primate cousin. We – oh, hell, the speciesism is so over-the-top, need I continue?

Yet, Machan’s choice of Superman to represent the superiority of humankind is telling as well. Had he chosen to depict an anonymous man and/or woman, the concept would have worked just as well. Instead, he chose a superhero, and an iconic one at that. Think about it: Machan could have went with Wonder Woman, or Supergirl, or Storm, or, jeez, Jean Grey.* Predictably, though, he picked a dude to represent the awesomeness of humanity. A white dude. A heterosexual white dude. A manly man. A man so manly, that both his manliness and his supremacy are proclaimed in his very name: SUPER MAN. He is super, he is manly: he is super-manly!

(More below the fold…)