I started this blog from a simple Facebook post, expressing my frustration.
“Knowing I’m autistic and hypermobile, I started a program of daily exercises designed for an autistic, hypermobile body. I recently bought some resistance bands to add, to strengthen muscles around my hypermobile joints to help stabilise the joints. I bought a product marketed at women. Smaller diameter and thickness on the bands, girly pinks and purples as opposed to the men’s bigger, thicker and generally black bands. That’s ok. I’m starting out. I’m happy with a lighter, graduated set. So imagine my feminist outrage when I open the box of this product, marketed at females, to find a male model in the photos on the instruction sheet. WTF?”
Femvertising
Femvertising is the use of feminism in advertising. Slogans like “You go, girl” and “Girl, you’ve got this” are rampant, yet the companies behind these campaigns often fail to live up to their marketing. Recent lawsuits and scandals involving companies such as Dove, KPMG, and the Australian High Court illustrate this hypocrisy.
Interestingly, the company behind my resistance bands isn’t guilty of femvertising. There’s nothing on their website claiming feminist values or corporate social governance (CSG) statements to suggest they uphold such values. They do sponsor women’s sports teams like the Matildas (soccer) and the Opals (basketball), but there’s no explicit feminist branding. CSG is generally required for companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange, as part of their Annual Reports.
For a deeper dive into the concept of femvertising and its impact on consumer perceptions, you can refer to Negm’s (2023) study on femvertising social marketing and Sterbenk et al.’s (2022) exploration of corporate commitment to gender equality and Katie Martell’s post on Chief Marketer (2019).
The Issue, Unboxed
Despite this, a novice like me might assume that a product with a woman on the box is specifically for women. This was my perception.
Discovering my autistic identity and acknowledging my hypermobility has been a game-changer. At 52, I realized it’s never too late to start focusing on mobility, agility, strength, and fitness. My autistic need for routines led me to design a daily exercise routine tailored to my body, focusing on strengthening muscles around my hypermobile joints to enhance stability and reduce injury risk. Recently, I decided to up my game by incorporating resistance bands into my workouts. Little did I know, this simple addition would spark a wave of feminist outrage.
These resistance bands, in lighter, graduated weights, and adorned in rainbows, seemed like the perfect fit for someone like me who is just starting out. The smaller diameter and thickness of the bands were exactly what I needed to ease into this new aspect of my fitness journey. As an autistic, hypermobile woman, the gentler progression promised by these bands was what I wanted.
Imagine my surprise and disappointment when I opened the box to find a male model featured in the photos on the instruction sheet. Here I was, having purchased a product clearly targeted at women, yet the first visual guidance I received was of a man demonstrating the exercises.
It felt like a slap in the face. In a market where women’s specific needs are frequently overlooked or downplayed, the decision to use a male model in a product designed for women seemed not just careless but insulting.
This incident might seem minor to some, but it underscores a broader issue. Why, in 2024, are women still being subjected to such thoughtless marketing strategies? The fitness industry is rife with gender-specific products, yet it continues to perpetuate outdated and exclusionary practices.
Women, especially those like me who are navigating unique physical challenges, deserve products that not only cater to their needs but also respect and acknowledge their identity. Seeing a male model in the instructional material for a women-targeted product reinforces the notion that women are an afterthought in the fitness industry.
Curwen and Park’s (2014) research on female consumers’ negative emotions can provide further insights into how such marketing missteps affect women’s experiences and perceptions .
We Deserve Better
My feminist outrage isn’t just about a model on an instruction sheet; it’s about the pervasive issue of women’s representation and respect in all areas of life, including fitness. It’s about demanding better, not just for myself but for all women.
This experience serves as a reminder that as consumers, we have the power to demand change and to support brands that genuinely understand and cater to our needs.
The journey of understanding and embracing my autistic, hypermobile body has been empowering and enlightening. Integrating resistance bands into my routine was a step towards greater strength and stability. Yet, this small act of purchasing a fitness product unveiled a glaring issue in the way women’s products are marketed.
As I continue my fitness journey, I am reminded of the importance of not only physical strength but also the strength to stand up against gender biases and demand better representation. Here’s to all the women who refuse to be sidelined and continue to push for a world that sees and respects us.
References and Bibliography
Cunningham, J., & Roberts, P. (2006). Inside her pretty little head a new theory of female motivation and what it means for marketing / Jane Cunningham and Philippa Roberts. Cyan.
G. Curwen, L., & Park, J. (2014). When the shoe doesn’t fit: female consumers’ negative emotions. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 18(3), 338–356. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-12-2012-0078
Martell, K. (2019) The new rules of using feminism in marketing, Chief Marketer. Available at: https://www.chiefmarketer.com/new-rules-using-feminism-marketing/ (Accessed: 25 July 2024).
Negm, E. M. (2023). Femvertising social marketing: a focus on perceived authenticity and perceived congruence of the advertising and consumers’ attitudes toward female portrayal. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Science, 5(5), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-05-2023-0053
Sterbenk, Y., Champlin, S., Windels, K., & Shelton, S. (2022). Is Femvertising the New Greenwashing? Examining Corporate Commitment to Gender Equality. Journal of Business Ethics, 177(3), 491–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04755-x
The Auld Skald's Fudgel 