A woman sees a man buying a salad. Instead of thinking that the man is unmasculine, she sees his strength to stay fit and his love for greens. Another man sees the same salad purchasing customer and admires his will. He decides that instead of getting a chocolate filled cupcake, he will buy a heart-strengthening and cholesterol-lowering dish. Unfortunately, Carrie Packwood Freeman and Debra Merskin portray a different belief in their article “Having It His Way: The Construction of Masculinity in Fast-Food TV Advertising.” They see a man being marked as unmasculine for buying a salad instead of a steak. Freeman and Merskin claim that there are specific food-based category for men and women, advertisements create sexist stereotypes for attention, and men connect food with sexual desire.
Freeman and Merskin acknowledge that commercials give each gender a role in terms of what they consume. Women are seen to eat healthy greens, and men are viewed to eat meat after they have slaved to kill the animal (Freeman and Merskin 455). Adding on to that, commercials use men to advertise meat (Freeman and Merskin 456). Supposedly, the men on those commercials prove masculinity, which tempt other men to eat the same food. Lastly, Freeman and Merskin conclude that men associate their desires with women and meat (470). They state, “Commercials sometimes show the meat becoming conflated with the flesh of women as mutual objects of male desire” (Freeman and Merskin 470). This means that commercials use women as objects in comparison to meat to sell the company’s food. All in all, advertisements and society connect men and animal products together.
One belief Freeman and Merskin present is that men are seen to eat selectively. Of course, they address that women do eat meat, but America mostly views men to be the superior meat-eaters. The authors state, “Even though most women also eat meat, females are more closely associated with cultivation and consumption of plant-based foods, whereas males are more heavily associated with the killing, grilling, and consuming of animals” (Freeman and Merskin 455). Overall, they believe that society only views men to eat meat versus salads because vegetables would be too feminine. My own view, however, is that society does not see men’s consumption of salads in a negative way. I have never thought that a man would be effeminate for eating green and healthy food nor has anyone I know. In addition, not all men are seeking masculinity. Society knows its boundaries and wasting its time on the belief of salads being more feminine would be outrageous. Freeman and Merskin for some reason claim society views men and women to eat foods that would be more appropriate to their own gender.
According to both Freeman and Merskin, advertisements are gender-based and create stereotypes. They claim that “advertising doesn’t just sell things, it articulates values and builds meaning, sometimes through constructing stereotypes that simplify a complex trait such as gender” (Freeman and Merskin 455). This means that commercials show men with meat to prove masculinity. In contrast, I believe that not all men are interested in eating meat nor does it prove masculinity. In 2011, McDonald's had a commercial with a woman eating an angus burger, but the restaurant has not been the only fast food company to have a woman promote meat. If meat were such a masculine food, then why would Wendy be promoting the Wendy’s roast beef sandwich? Freeman and Merskin only believe that commercials are used to give a general statement in sex because men are not promoting salads, but reality is that women are not promoting salads either. Rarely have fast food commercials advertised salads. Conclusively, there are not stereotypes portrayed in the fast food commercials.
Finally, Freeman and Merskin believe that when women are used to promote meat they are dressed inappropriately. According to the authors, the reason is to draw in a man’s attention to the commercial’s product. Freeman and Merskin state, “Commercials sometimes show the meat becoming conflated with the flesh of women as mutual objects of male desire” (470). While this does not always happen, I have to agree that there have been cases when women are used as objects to sell a burger. For example, in 2012 the Super Bowl banned a Hardee’s commercial due to Kate Upton’s lack of clothing and profanity. Another example would be in 2015; a commercial for Carl’s Jr. burger objectified Charlotte Mckinney by placing her in a bikini top and short shorts. Why would there be a need to showcase women? Is the burger not good enough to sell itself, or are fast-food companies just that shallow? Unfortunately, I do agree with the fact that women are objectified in fast-food commercials.
In conclusion, Carrie Packwood Freeman and Debra Merskin wrongfully claim that certain types of food can be consumed depending on the person’s sex and stereotypes are created based upon gender; however, they rightfully state that fast-food commercials objectify women to satisfy a man’s wants. In their article “Having It His Way: The Construction of Masculinity in Fast-Food TV advertising,” Freeman and Merskin make clear of the point that society does not accept men to eat salads. In reality, society accepts the healthy choice. In fact, they admire the strength a man or woman have with choosing a salad. Salads are not gender-oriented; they are not masculine nor feminine.
Works Cited
Freeman, Carrie Packwood and Debra Merskin. "Having It His Way: The Construction of Masculinity in Fast-Food TV Advertising" They Say I Say With Readings. By Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein. Ed. Russel Durst. 2E ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. 454-479. Print.