Melissa Lui

Response to classmates, Cam Kroeker’s post:  “How much skin is too much skin?”

Placing advertisements on girls’ thighs can be quite controversial. For example, in a feminist perspective, since the girls are being paid to advertise on their body parts, these girls can be seen as selling their body parts as walking billboards. In other words, these girls are objectified and exploited. Moreover, by allowing advertisements placing on their thighs and taking pictures of them, girls are encouraging media to focus on a particular body part of themselves. As a result, this phenomenon preserves the view of how a woman’s body can be seen as different separate pieces instead of a whole human being. Furthermore, this gives another legit reason for creepers to stare at girls. On the other hand, somefeminists may think that the women have the choice to place the advertisement on their bodies or not. This phenomenon sort of demonstrates how women have the rights to determine how they want to treat their bodies.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2281826/Enterprising-firms-rent-ad-space-young-Japanese-womens-bare-legs.html

 
However, in a more economic view, having all these walking billboards can be quite beneficial. As the girls need to have their advertisements on for eight hours, wherever they go they will attract attention. This can be seen as a relatively effective way to spread around any information on new products or companies. Moreover, it is relatively cheap to get such an effect.

After considering the motivation and the criticism of this phenomenon, I agree with Cameron that it seems to be quite immoral. I do not think it is acceptable for companies to use female body parts to attract attentions from strangers. It reinforces the objectification of women.