Sex sells, but at what price?
- added April 20, 2008
- 10 responses
-
-
-
-
- yai
- added this
-
Advertising agencies live by the aphorism that sex sells because it's one of the most basic, driving forces in our lives. Getting it, however, is a different matter altogether. In the animal kingdom, males and females of many species are known to trade resources for sex. Humans are no different. In the most basic terms, men can be said to offer protection to females, while females offer the promise of offspring to the males (we're talking caveman mentality here; let's leave the modern societal norms aside for a moment). What is unexpected in this equation is a recent finding by University of Michigan researchers which suggests that these behaviors are hard wired in us, so that no matter what a person's status in life, he or she will always attempt to make an exchange of currency for sex (and no, I don't mean money).
The study found that men were more likely to try to get currency—game tickets or study help, for instance—in exchange for sex while women were more likely to try to get sex in exchange for currency. What was most telling about the results is that the subjects were all college students. Daniel Kruger, one of the scientists on the study, points out that their young age and relative affluence would seem to suggest they wouldn't need to make these exchanges, and yet they happened with regular frequency. The extrapolation the study then makes is that the exchange rate likely only increases as age increases, with the assumption that an older population would have more unmet needs.
The study found that men were more likely to try to get currency—game tickets or study help, for instance—in exchange for sex while women were more likely to try to get sex in exchange for currency. What was most telling about the results is that the subjects were all college students. Daniel Kruger, one of the scientists on the study, points out that their young age and relative affluence would seem to suggest they wouldn't need to make these exchanges, and yet they happened with regular frequency. The extrapolation the study then makes is that the exchange rate likely only increases as age increases, with the assumption that an older population would have more unmet needs.
-
'The confirmation of hypothetical predictions regarding these exchanges once again demonstrates the power of an evolutionary framework for understanding human psychology and behavior'. So declares Daniel Kruger, research scientist at the University of Michigan School of Public Health, rather grandly. This is a hypothesis which was confirmed by a very limited study using a very specific participant base: students in the USA, who were on the whole 'well-provided for'. Being as wealthy westerners are an acute minority in the world, how is this representative? How does Kruger bracket this out to equate this behaviour with the rest of humanity - everywhere and from the beginning of time? That's... ridiculous. I would be interested to hear Kruger's thoughts on the commodification of the body and sex in American society, and what impact, if any this has had in skewing his results.
This sounds like bad science to me...-
-
-
-
- mischabarrett
- 5 months ago
-
-
you all might know that dove & axe are under the same branch. irony at it's best..?
-
Well Dove doesn't really sell itself as a whore magnet like Axe does.
-
Donna, that video is great! Thanks for sharing it.
I think the study above, blows.
Anybody want to have sex for money? What, are we all whores? Gahbeezus.-
-
-
-
- Julie_Soller
- 5 months ago
-
-
ipodrulz . . . you missed the point of the Dove vs. Axe issue. If Dove wants to promote itself as empowering women but Axe objectifies women and they're both owned by the same parent company . . . wouldn't that make Dove a hipocrital brand? The problem isn't that Axe is a whore, it's Dove letting Axe be the whore.
-
Dove isn't a hypocritical brand. "Dove" doesn't care about woman or empowerment, just as "Axe" doesn't care about woman as objects. The brands identity is created to capture a markets, one captures empowered woman while the other captures horny guys. It simply has to do with what will make the company the most money. The morals are a reflection of the targeted consumer, not the company.
As for the study, it strikes me as obvious. Assuming, as I do, that all people are fundamentally self-centered then obviously sex will (in most cases) mutually benefit both parties. Thats all I gather from the synopsis anyways. -
its marketing to the weaknesses of the masses, pure and simple
-
-
-
-
-
- Incredulous
- 5 months ago
-
-
Dove is just repositioning for the new feminist. Axe is positioning itself for the "shy guy who wants girl attention". It's just marketing.
Clairol doesn't actually care if you like your hair colour. They just want to sell hair dye. It's all part of the same game. -
The initial intent of the article was to show that we have sex with people who can benefit us in some way beyond just the sex. That benefit is the "currency" being referenced. Be it a conscious decision or not is entirely up to the individual.
As for representation, yes, this study is not externally valid. However, run the same study with other ethnicities, and the validity will be improved. College students are the most accessible group of test subjects, but any other group will do just fine.-
-
-
-
- dariustwin
- 5 months ago
-
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
