Buy•ology Part 5 of 5: Does Sex Sell?
February 13, 2009 by dr. lam
This is an age-old question and one that piques many individuals’ curiosity. Lindstrom argues in Buy•ology that sex can actually serve to distract a buyer from buying, especially men. In one study, provocative images of women distracted male viewers so much that they barely could remember the brand, the logo, or the message. Only 9.8% of them remembered what the ad was selling versus 20% in non-provocative ads. He terms this the “vampire effect” in that the attention of the male viewer is sucked away from the brand by the erotic image.
He then talks about the king of sex in advertising, Calvin Klein, and looks at how controversy has sold jeans and various other apparel very well for decades starting back in the 80s with the famous Brooke Shields’ commercial, “Nothing comes between me and my Calvins.” He goes on to discuss how Abercrombie and Fitch as well as a newbie American Apparel have done very well financially using sex as a potent vehicle in their advertising. He then reconciles this seeming paradox that sometimes sex works and sometimes it doesn’t by suggesting that when controversy arises that it can favorably help a brand whereas when it does not do that it would fail and only serve as a distraction. He also simply shrugs it off and says sex only can sell sex and nothing else. I would argue that Lindstrom is right and he is wrong. The examples of Calvin Klein, Abercrombie and Fitch, and American Apparel ARE selling sex since clothes really are a manifestation of how we communicate our sexuality to the opposite sex (or to your own, depending on your orientation). I think controversy is certainly part of the story, but I think that all of his examples point to a simple fact that clothes are selling sex in a way.
He then looked at how women were attracted to certain types of female models. He found that the more provocative and underdressed a woman was, the more that the female respondents were adversely repulsed. However, when the model was wholesome, unadorned, and fullly clothed, the women responded favorably to the model.
The next question then is does a celebrity help to sell a product or hurt it? Lindstrom found that in many cases the über-attractive faces of George Clooney and Nicole Kidman actually acted like the previously mentioned vampire effect, i.e., it sucked the attention of a viewer away from the ad and made it less memorable. All the viewer could remember was the celebrity and not the message. For example, a series of anti-smoking campaigns in England with John Cleese were only remembered for the distracting elements of humor and the celebrity himself but the message of not smoking was entirely missed or forgotten, eclipsed by the distracting presence of the humorous Cleese.
Then do we respond better to real-life individuals rather than models? Well yes and no. Lindstrom found that when real-life individuals were used in ad campaigns, we responded to them better because we viewed them as authentic rather than contrived like a celebrity endorsement. However, Victoria Secret ads with women wearing lingerie still have a powerful effect in our psyche for the simple reason that we want to be that model or be with that model, which brings us back full circle to Monday’s blog that focused on mirror neurons. Just as we want to be cool by buying Apple products or wearing a certain label, our mirror neurons are triggered when we see a cool or attractive person that we want to be.
Clearly, the answer about how sex in advertising works is much more complicated than a one-word, yes or no response. Gender-specific, context-specific, and many other factors come into play when answering that question. I think when thinking of plastic surgery that “selling sex” in the classic sense is not what it is directly about but selling attraction and confidence. Of course, an aesthetic result should be precisely that, aesthetic. I think we must be drawn to the after result so long as that after result is real and uncontrived (not a glamour shot, ugh!). Too often, when my patients come in for what bothers them it is focused on things that will make no overall aesthetic impact whatsoever so my obligation is to refocus on how to get them to simply look more attractive to their spouse, colleagues, loved ones, and social/professional encounters. If you are not drawn to my after results from attraction, then you should not choose me as a surgeon.
Comments
4 Responses to “Buy•ology Part 5 of 5: Does Sex Sell?”
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
O.k.
I am old enough to relive those Brooke CK commercials vividly. I can hear her voice. It worked on me THEN. LOL. The older I get, the less apt I am to be manipulated in the way described. My child rec’d. gift card for store similar to one highlighted. I took her there to use it and oh man. Felt like I was in a nightclub, an exceedingly LOUD one. (I am sure the very scrubbed and attractive staff therein identify ‘moms’ easily–the ones with hands over ears. 
There was definitely some somatic marking taking place. Paco Rabanne or something equally, um, powerful. We redeemed card for several wholesome t-shirts and made haste. Used experience as excellent lesson on manipulation and bright daughter seemed to ‘get it’, though we’re really up against some powerful marketing there.
I wish they’d do things like LFP does. Just be sincere, offer superior product and don’t try to manipulate consumer. Would you please clone yourself? Thanks.
funny story! thanks. don’t worry, i won’t wear a t-shirt that is too tight or revealing! haha!
I agree that you should be cloned!
Have a great weekend and a happy Valentine’s Day, Dr. Lam!
thanks! happy valentine’s day too!