I was scooting through my Instagram feed a couple of weeks ago (as one does) and I saw a pic of a woman sitting on her bed in appears to be a pajama bikini top and shorts with her synthesizer. Other than her clothing, her pose was not particularly sexual and she is holding her hands on her headphones.
It will probably surprise exactly no one to hear that when I see a photo like this, I often dig deeper. Not because there is a problem with it per se, but because photos like this are often handled poorly in social media and marketing and I wanted to see how the company dealt with it.
The good news is that as it turns out, this ad helps illustrate one of the more nuanced points of the Music Gear Bechdel Test, which I discussed in detail in episode 13 of Mid-Riff and also in a blog on my website. I’ll provide links in the show notes to these.
I created the Music Gear Bechdel Test with the intention of providing an easy assessment of whether a particular ad or piece of social media content moved the representation of women forward or backward. It can be used by folks in the industry to do a better job of representation in their content and for consumers to recognize harmful content when they see it.
So, how does this ad stack up? Does it pass the test?
Let’s take a look.
1. There is a woman
CHECK
2. She is presented as a capable musician
CHECK
The first point here is that this picture was from a user of the product who tagged the company in their personal post, which the company then re-shared. So, it is assumed here that the artist had control of the content she was creating. While she isn’t playing the instrument, everything is plugged in, she’s wearing headphones, she has two guitars on her walls and Logic or Garageband on her computer in the background. Seems legit to me.
3. If she is presented with an instrument that has a traditionally feminine aesthetic (pink, with flowers or sparkles, etc.), there is a companion ad featuring a woman with an instrument that is not traditionally feminine in aesthetic
N/A
This synth was not pink or sparkly.
4. If she is presented sexually, it is on her own terms, and there is a companion ad featuring a woman who is not presented sexually
CHECK
THIS is where folks tend to get tripped up in representation. For a long time, I did, too. Many of us are trained to assume that when a woman is presented sexually, she is automatically being objectified. The key here is the difference between sexual objectification and sexual agency or empowerment. If we automatically assume that a woman is being objectified, we are also automatically assuming that she doesn’t have power or control over her own image or sexuality. Is that often true, especially historically? Yes. Is it always true? No. Women can present themselves sexually if they choose to do so and it can be a way for them to exert their identity and power.
But! If a company is exclusively selecting images of women that are sexual in nature, THAT is when we have a problem. Women of a variety of identities, experiences, interests, and presentations should be shared. When women are expected to conform to one identity or image, that is a problem. One of the first things I did after seeing the ad was to check the representation in the rest of the company’s feed. They had a post just the day before of a woman who was fully clothed playing on stage. Their feed included a lot of women of varying identities and presentations. Check, check, check!
5. If she is a woman of color, she is not presented using racial stereotypes
CHECK
She is a woman of color, but she is not presented using stereotypes.
6. If she is a trans woman, her identity and pronouns are respected
N/A
She does not state that she is a trans woman.
7. All sexual or offensive social media comments about her are promptly and appropriately addressed or screenshot/deleted
CHECK
There are more than 600 comments on this post. While I would have preferred they’d gotten to it a little faster (I ran across comments like, “look at those droopers,” which were later deleted), the company responded very diligently and clearly to pretty much ALL of the negative comments, educating folks where relevant. That must been a TON of work for their social media manager and what that says to me is that they are NOT phoning it in. That said, I don’t begrudge folks just deleting offensive comments at all. But you have to do SOMETHING.
I saw another ad from another electronics company the other day featuring a lot of “I’m not even looking at the gear” and “is that a Gibraltar rack?” comments. They did nothing to address them. No check for them!
So, then what’s the verdict on the ad at hand?
They passed!
And THAT, my friends, is how a picture of a woman in a bikini top can pass the Music Gear Bechdel Test.
If you have any thoughts or ideas about the test or particular ads, please reach out and let me know!