Medicalizing Women's Discontent

Medicalizing women's discontent is something that has become more common with time.  It is important to pay attention to because it emphasizes how women's natural biological processes (ie PMS) are classified as a "medical condition" and then treated with drugs that are the same as Aspirin, ib profin, etc.  Analyzing this artifact is important because it spreads awareness about women's menstrual cycle as a disorder that needs to be treated.  Premenstrual syndrome, a natural biological process in women, presents a paradox for feminists because they acknowledge the importance of women’s complaints and want them to seek medical attention, but the fear of the syndrome gaining legitimacy will have a negative impact on women as a whole.  The impact of women's menstrual cycles and the symptoms that come with this process should not be classified as a medical "disorder" because it emphasizes the idea of women "always having  problem." 

A medical condition is defined as "a pathological condition of a part, organ, or system of an organism resulting from various causes, such as infection, genetic defect, or environmental stress, and characterized by an individual group of signs or symptoms; or a condition or tendency, as of society, regarded as abnormal and harmful."  The definition of a medical condition does not offer the idea that premenstrual syndrome can be classified as an actual medical condition.  Premenstrual syndrome is not a condition that is regarded as abnormal in society.  All women with normal hormone levels experience a monthly menstrual cycle, so it cannot be classified as an abnormal condition.  The argument I make in my essay revolves around the idea that: While physicians aim to treat premenstrual syndrome as a disorder, the dangers of overpsychologizing normal biological processes are far more important than treating a natural symptom.  This analysis matters because it will be an increasingly important field to analyze as time goes on as more and more parts of our lives are medicalized.  The tendency of overpsychologizing biological processes is a danger to all of humanity and will cause problems in everyone's health if it is not addressed in time. 

Discussion Questions: 

- How does the medicalization framework emphasize the power of physicians to define

illness for something that is proven to be a natural biological process as well as create a series of paradoxes?  
 -How do physicians and society in general classify women and their premenstrual syndrome as "always having a problem?"   
 -How does the medicalization of women's discontent have an effect on men's health?  

  

 

Allergan's My Chronic Migraine Commercial

Allergan's My Chronic Migraine Commercial

My Chronic Migraine Commercial

Beginning in 2012, the commercial linked above began circulating on major television networks. With a cursory look, the advertisement seems to be an unremarkable public service announcement (PSA) defining chronic migraine and providing a resource through a website called mychronicmigraine.com by which more information on the matter can be found. What is rhetorically interesting about this health artifact is that the commercial is not actually a PSA, but rather an ad produced by a pharmaceutical company, Allergan. In my analysis, I took a look at direct-to-consumer advertising by pharmaceutical companies that takes the form of a PSA in addition to two rhetorical moves made by Allegan through the taglines used during the commercial.

            In the 21^st century, the public is constantly bombarded by advertisements. All segments of the market place have felt the effects of traditional advertising becoming less and less effective and have had to come up with innovative ideas on how to reach their target audience. One way that the pharmaceutical industry found to do this was not through advertising their product, but by bringing the condition that their product treated to the forefront of pubic awareness. This strategy causes an upswing in the number of patients asking about the condition and consequently spikes sales of treatments for the condition. Allergan used the My Chronic Migraine ad to boost sales of their product, Botox, which is used to treat migraines. The only way that Allergan is tied to the commercial is by a small, brief appearance of the company’s name and logo at the end of the advertisement, which could make it seem as if the ad is unsponsored. Unsponsored ads, or PSAs, have inherent ethos with the public, which Allergan is deceptively using to raise Botox sales.

There were two taglines used in the commercial. The first promised, “Knowing this thing you’re going through has a name means knowing that you can find treatments that are right for you.” This line uses medicalization to persuade the viewer that relief from an illness can be found just by naming it. Following this line of logic, diagnosis is health, which can lead to implications of increasing amounts of money spent on diagnostics and treatments. The second tagline stated, “Go to mychronicmigraine.com to find a headache specialist, and don’t live a maybe life.” This line uses neoliberal pressures to persuade the audience that they can and should be improved.

Discussion questions:

1.     How can pharmaceutical advertisements masquerading as public service announcements be harmful to the public?

2.     How can medicalization’s promise that naming an illness means healing the illness affect the patient-doctor dynamic?

3.     What other health related issues lend themselves to neoliberal pressures of health optimization? Why is the push to always improve health so persuasive in today’s culture?

Advertisements for Pregnant Women

How do companies advertise their products toward pregnant women?

Pregnancy in the media has become more popular than ever. With America’s obsession with celebrities, we are always on “baby watch” for the latest celebrity birth. Whether it be Kim Kardashian’s baby or Kate Middleton’s newborn, new fashionable mothers stay in the media. Companies have banked on the obsession with newborns and it shows in their advertisements. Advertisements  for pregnant women are everywhere in magazines, internet sites, television, and social media sites. Advertising is something that is very important to a company’s success and it is how they tell to their target audience.

 For my critical analysis, I chose the topic of companies' advertisements towards pregnant women. I'm not focusing on one advertisement but several advertisements for different companies. These advertisements are normally geared towards pregnant women who according to the company should be dressed in tight maternity clothing and looking fantastic and glowing at 8 months. The companies influence its customers to buy a certain product and look a certain way while they are pregnant.

I chose this topic because my older sister recently gave birth to a baby girl over Thanksgiving break. I had never paid such close attention to advertisements involving pregnant women than I have the past 9 months. I noticed almost the same identical white, beautiful, tall, thin pregnant model in every advertisement for a company. I also noticed how celebrity moms are being used more and more in the media to advertise products for pregnant women.

Discussion questions:

1)How do advertisements for pregnant women play into gender roles we discussed in class?

2) How do advertisements making pregnant women feel they need to look and feel a certain way tie into the point Dubriwny is trying to make in  The Vulnerable Empowered Woman ?


Chelsea Anderson

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYuBDIWpvT4&noredirect=1

For my analysis I chose to focus on the “Smiling Bob” television commercial used in the advertisement campaign of the “male enhancement” drug: “Enzyte”. This advertisement became embedded in popular culture in the early 2000s. I chose this advertisement because it was an extremely popular ad filled with multiple examples of stereotypes and played on sexual double entendres. Yet as the years went by, I saw less and less Enzyte commercials featuring their character “Smiling Bob”. The advertisement also jumped on the medicalized trend of erectile dysfunction brought on as a result of the Viagra era. Since this relatively new area of men’s health has gotten so much attention and funding in our generation, I wanted to see what tactics these drug advertisements were using to reach out to their audience and potential customers/patients. The very nature of the advertisement campaign was also one of the main points of interest for me. Since these advertisements were direct to consumer television advertisements, the audience becomes called into patient hood by these ads. Optimization and bodily entrepreneurship are also huge aspects of these ads. Since erectile dysfunction is not an illness but rather a condition, maximizing their health to lead a happier life is a huge aspect of these advertisements. In my research I found the reason for Enzyte’s drastic drop in commercials. In 2008, the CEO was imprisoned and confessed that Enzyte did not have any affect what so ever. It was the tactic of utilizing stereotypes including but not limited to gender roles, and masculinity. Along with using stereotypes Enzyte’s use of words such as reliable, and natural gave the notion of a natural alternative to the potential health risks associated with use of Viagra and Cialis.

My question is why Enzyte able to successfully market a product that did not work for years?

Should we reshape direct to consumer advertisement laws?

Should more people look at outside sources for the truth behind their medications?

 Was it the use of masculinity and other stereotypes that convinced men to buy their product?

What exactly was Enzyte selling? Is erectile dysfunction a medicalized condition?

Are men called into patient hood by erectile dysfunction advertisements?

Religious Rhetoric's Influence on Health

"How does religiously motivated rhetoric influence health perceptions and decisions?"

     Religion plays a vital role in the decision making process across cultures around the world.  Religion is a social institution that involves a sense of interrelated community dynamics centered around beliefs, rituals, and practices that influence everyday life.  This means that religion itself is a form of rhetoric that can influence people at their deepest level.  One of the primary consequences of religious beliefs are the effects a particular set of beliefs have on the health decisions of believers.  I chose this topic because often times, especially in societies were a dominant religion maintains a majority status in the society, religiously motivated health decisions can have an impact on people not affiliated with the particular majority religion.  Beliefs and practices can often hinder the ability to take full advantage of medical progress in areas such as mental disorders, birth control availability, and genetic research.  This hindrance can spread to various fields of health, but I chose to focus on a few select areas.  

     My analysis does not focus on a single artifact, but instead draws from a variety of sources to see the overall influences of religious rhetoric on the health decisions and perceptions of believers.  My analysis shows the effect religiously motivated rhetoric influences the three main areas of health; mental health, physical health, and sexual health.  The major findings of my analysis cover the main areas that one would expect religion to influence, but is insightful in that it goes further beyond the expected into subcategories that address religious rhetoric's influence on such areas as suicide as a mental disorder, obesity as a physical condition, and fertility in sexual health.  This analysis is highly important, as many people are not fully aware of how much religious rhetoric impacts health opportunities, health research, and the general view of illnesses within their lives, despite them not sharing the belief that is influencing their own health.

My discussion questions cover broad ranges and various topics addressed:

1)  How do religious convictions instilled by religious rhetoric influence one's views on mental disorders such as depression and personality disorders similar to Thornton's views on brain optimization?

2)  What are the political and legal limitations that must be placed on treatment options for physical health related problems when the choice falls between following ones religious beliefs and seeking professional medical help?  How does kairos play a factor in this decision?

3)  How does religion perforate into the media to influence how people view their own sexual health in regards to actual religious beliefs, and is there an unequal distribution of responsibility in sexual health between men and women as a result religious beliefs?

Equinox Fitness

For my analysis, I have chosen an artifact by Equinox Fitness. For those of you who have never heard of Equinox, they are a fitness club that has been known for their provocative ad campaigns. I chose this particular ad from their campaign mostly because of how outrageous I think it is that this ad was displayed as a billboard out in the public of a community. In today’s desensitized society, I can easily see this being on countless numbers of websites and television programs, like sports and fashion, that are targeting young adults, but the fact that it was in a community for all the kids to see and snicker at on their way to school kind of blew my mind.

            After looking more into this ad, it started to remind me of several discussions that we had in class:

1. The underlying theme of gender inequality that lies hidden in our society. I immediately thought back to the discussion about how biology/anatomy textbooks portray the process of reproduction and fertilization. Although the majority of the themes were of the passive helpless female and the active heroic-like male, but we also mentioned the aggressive “femme fatale,” the seductive female that lures men into her trap. The image of the naked, vulnerable male in the image with a clothed and relaxed woman being carried on his back, and the simple word “Dominance” printed on the bottom explains it all.

2. The idea brought up by Segal that “our identities are becoming health identities.” Although their slogan is “It’s not fitness. It’s life”, this ad is in no way screaming health and fitness. In my mind it is actually going against Segal.  This ad doesn’t promote health and fitness; it promotes sex and aesthetic appeal, which some may say is becoming an unhealthy trend among those trying to become “healthy.”

             I also learned while analyzing and researching for this project, that studies show that while ads like this one are affective in causing women to become more anxious and stressed about their fitness and image (Yay for taking advantage of women’s emotions and insecurities! SARCASM), it is also counterproductive because it causes the women to feel too out of place to go into these gyms because they think they wont fit in and will be self-conscience.

+ Has our society become so engulfed in our body image that we are slipping away from understanding/knowing what being healthy really is?

+ Although there is still evidence of gender inequality themes all around us, have we grown as a society and culture that we no longer even realize they are there or does it still subconsciously have a hold on us?

Tripping in the Name of Normalization.

oh, ambien.

Ambien is a prescription sleeping pill which is infamous for the strange behavior it incites in its users.  There are tons of hilarious stories online about the crazy things people have done while under the influence of the drug.  The pill makes you hallucinate like crazy, but also affects your brain in a way that you briefly can't form memories... meaning its a total blackout tripfest. 

I took ambien for about a year, and had a great laugh over the antique bird cage I didn't remember ordering, my apparent obsession with muting Daria and playing Flynt Flossy songs over it, ("it syncs!") the video I shot of myself talking to a camera and inexplicably barking at random intervals, amongst others.  What wasn't so funny was the time I drove to the gas station, bought Cracker Jacks and proceeded to crash my car. Or the time I got a little too up close and personal with one of my best friends and didn't remember a thing... awkward.  I didn't mean to get so high, I just would keep taking them on the pursuit of sleepiness because your tolerance for the pills just skyrockets. And please don't judge, sleep driving, walking, eating, and sexual activity are all way common side effects of the drug.  I stopped taking it after I realized that being able to sleep on command was just not worth the consequences. I got wondering, if this drug is so strong, why did my doctor prescribe it to me?  I mean, people are really causing a lot of damage out there on Ambien.  I wanted to look at an advertisement for the sleep aid to see how exactly they justify such a strong drug for something as natural as sleep.  This is the one I picked:

Right from the first few seconds, the disconnect became clear to me.  It starts "there is a rhythm to life, we sleep at night and wake in the morning. It helps keep us at a healthy balance."  This just does not apply to me.  I hate having to sleep by a "normal" schedule.  To me, it feels more natural to stay up for 36 hours and sleep for 12.  Does that mean that there's something wrong with me for not naturally adhering to a typical sleep schedule?  Am I not balanced?  To be honest, I always thought there was something the matter with me.  My circadian rhythm has just always been different from everyone elses.  I can't help it, its just the way my body functions. 

The ad goes on to say "for millions of Americans, sleep doesn't always come easy."  What. Millions?  That's a lot of people.  The ad then comes in with its charge.  "Fortunately, there's Ambien."  It just seems to me that if millions of Americans are dealing with this, then maybe there's not something wrong with them.  Maybe its the fact that society forces people to sleep within an eight hour parameter, and if they can't do that, then they can't really exist in the professional world. The only reason we think we are supposed to sleep during the normal window is because we are trained that's the only way to be.  It seems to me that we should listen more to what our bodies tell us is natural over living uncomfortably so that people don't think you're weird.

And hello, the advertisement gave viewers absolutely no warning of the crazy mind excursion that comes with taking the pill.  "Side effects may include drowsiness, dizziness, and diarrhea" Usually I'm down for alliteration, but how are they going to downplay straight up hallucinations as "dizziness?"  For some reason when you're on Ambien, you have the feeling that someone else is with you.  I would seriously have conversations with this other entity.  Hence, the "Ambien Walrus" comic up top.  But I mean, this is prescribed.  Why is this legal but marijuana isn't?  Inexplicable.

So, now that you've heard my spiel, what do you think? 

Should we really be giving out such a potentially dangerous drug to people when there isn't necessarily something wrong with them?  

Or, do you think that insomnia is a real medical problem? What's your justification?

Is there a way that we could restructure society for people who just can't do the 9-5 day? 

Get back to me.

Competing Discourses Surrounding the Pink Ribbon Industry

         I chose to explore the competing discourses that surround pink ribbon culture. In my paper, I discussed the ways in which traditional breast cancer awareness organizations, such as Susan G. Komen and the Avon Foundation Breast Cancer Crusade, frame the disease through metaphors such as “medicine is war” and “diagnosis is health”. I found that through these metaphors women are pushed continuously to get tested and live a life free of risk factors for the disease. They present detection and action as the only ways to “battle” cancer, putting a great deal of responsibility on women to take charge of their health and encouraging an entrepreneurial culture. One of the most interesting concepts I came across was these organizations’ use of numbers. They always advocate to women by presenting how old most women are when they are diagnosed, how likely a woman is to get cancer, and other statistics to create ethos around their cause. Through this method, they also advocate for the work they are doing as an organization, asking for support, action, and donations by stating how much money they’ve raised, how many events they’ve sponsored and in how many cities, and how many volunteers they have. However, even with factual numbers, these statistics are framed through terministic screens designed to select, reflect, and deflect only the information that the organizations want the consumer to see. Numbers have little meaning until they are presented in context and given a frame of reference. I chose to explore these organizations use of numbers and how they’re used to garner support for the pink ribbon industry

            I also looked into opposing literature that aims to dismember some of the misconceptions that are created through the language used by the traditional groups. Organizations like Breast Cancer Action, as well as many other publications, have brought attention to the misrepresentations that often occur when promoting the support of the pink ribbon industry. I found that these organizations also employ numbers but with an opposite effect. They use them to deplete credibility of the traditional organizations by drawing attention to aspects like how much money is actually given to research and offer alternative ways to interpret data. I also found consistent messages that highlight companies claiming to support breast cancer, yet still use chemicals that cause it. They also highlight products, like alcohol, that often sport the pink ribbon logo, despite the fact that the product itself can increase the risk of getting the disease. These messages encourage consumers to “think before they pink” and become more responsible for their interpretations of information and promotions from traditional breast cancer awareness groups by presenting a countering view to normal pink ribbon discussions.

 

 
        Below is an image of Breast Cancer Action's website that asks for support in "ending the breast cancer epidemic":

I chose to complete this project because I felt this topic epitomized what this class has been about. It exemplifies the persuasion that is evident in each facet of the medical institution that we all deal with on a day to day basis, consciously or not. Prior to this class, I had no idea that pink ribbon industry criticisms existed. I only saw what was presented by the traditional breast cancer awareness organizations. Comparing these two discourses really emphasized the effect that rhetoric has on how we interpret information. It highlights the need for members of society to become informed consumers, especially as we make decisions in the medical institution.

Discussion Questions:

1.      In what ways do the traditional breast cancer awareness organizations support Dubrwiny’s concept of the vulnerable empowered woman?

2.      How do both discourses, despite their opposition to one another, exemplify Thorton’s concepts of an entrepreneurial rationale and optimization?

3.      What other industries and movements can you think of that use numbers as tools of persuasion? What other tools of rhetoric do they employ?

Emergen-C: Making Healthy Contagious

A few years ago, the producer of the Vitamin-C supplement Emergen-C launched a new advertising campaign. The commercial linked above was included in the campaign and is still aired on television today. All throughout class, we have considered health, illness, and the terministic screens through which we consider them. I was particularly intrigued by idea of the never ending pursuit of greater levels of health. This 15 second commercial promotes some rather radical ideas about health and illness in relation to that idea.

In my rhetorical analysis, I argue that the commercial persuades viewers to continuously pursue greater levels of health.  The commercial finishes with the statement, “to help you come down with a serious case of healthy, Emergen-C…making healthy contagious.” The producers seek to persuade viewer to achieve health so great it is contagious; people cannot help but to notice it. This ideology is the foundation of all the rhetorical devices. The character choices, scenery, music, and visuals are all full of overflowing life and vibrancy. They all work to promote the same messages about health and illness as mentioned above.  

The rhetorical messages in the commercial are promoting radical ideas about health and illness. Viewing health and illness from this perspective leads to an unending pursuit of health because healthy is never healthy enough. Even when you feel good, there is always a higher level of health to achieve. You could always look a little better and certainly feel a little better, especially in comparison to those around you. Even with these achievements of “health,” people still get sick. Not to mention, people feel guilty when they fail to be “healthy.” The pursuit of greater health is exhausting and can leave the believers feeling quite defeated.

Discussion Questions:

1.      Through what terministic screen do you feel the commercial is persuading you to consider health and illness?

2.      What are potential consequences of always seeking a greater level of health?

3.      What is the definition of healthy? What role does the absence, prevention, or elimination of illness have in the definition?

4.      Should there be regulation of direct consumer advertising for vitamin and dietary supplements? 

ageless male

I chose to use this artifact because I think it shows the state of our popular culture and what kind of values and norms are being displayed in media. It was an interesting artifact because it focuses a lot on convincing a man that masculinity is found in his muscle strength and sex-drive/performance. I found through rhetorically analyzing this artifact that a lot of the rhetorical tools Ageless Male uses reflect and promote traditional views of masculinity and gender norms. As we discussed in class about how society is largely patriarchal, my eyes were opened to this reality through analyzing this artifact. In my analysis, I make that argument that Ageless Male's focus on a male's muscle strength and sex drive/performance reifies traditional gender norms and views of masculinity, and it diminishes the role of women and femininity by focusing on testosterone saying that the effects of high testosterone are desirable and useful for becoming the best you can be. I go on to argue that we need to be aware of the negative effects that Ageless Male's marketing techniques can have on our society. Its focus on muscle strength and sex drive/performance as the independent variable to the dependent variable of high quality of life encourages men to slip into traditional gender norms and expect traditional gender norms/roles from females as well.

Discussion Questions: 

What does Ageless Male's use of Kairos as a rhetorical tool say about the views and values of our society?

How can buying into the views on masculinity portrayed in this video negatively effect our culture?

To Catch A Thief: NFL's A Crucial Catch campaign catches heat!

I chose to do my artifact on the National Football League's A CRUCIAL CATCH campaign.  The entire organization participates yearly during the month of October in support for Breast Cancer and to spread awareness to at risk women ages 40 and up.  The main reason I wanted to look into this campaign was because of the world of sports awareness that I believe blinds us sometimes to the bigger picture. I explained one day in class how on a college level, the University of Georgia Bulldogs received pink attire for the month of October in support of breast cancer awareness but it really baffled me that some of the guys on the team were not aware themselves of this special month that is dedicated to Breast Cancer. I was upset at the fact that no one had ever explained the reason for us wearing pink during our games; it wasn’t something that the coaches, equipment staff, or television channels explained to us as players. It pissed me off so bad that I decided as an individual not to wear any of the pink apparel that was put out in our lockers with our game day uniforms. When Dr. Hurt assigned this assignment I quickly decided to do research on the Pink campaign. I specifically wanted to look into college athletics and the use of Pink Ribbon products but because student athletes don’t get paid, there really wasn’t any specific statistics in the college athletics field. So I decided to look into professional sports, specifically football and it’s NFL Pink campaign.

Before I dove into criticizing the NFL for their participation in Pink washing I did research to actually see where they might have been doing great things in support of women battling breast cancer which they were. True, the NFL does spread awareness from the players, the coaches and the referees wearing pink apparel but were they really collecting a profit to give 100% to the American Cancer Society like they advertise on the NFL Pink website? No. I began to research the positive press about the profits earned for the ACS but the NFL doesn’t even have statistics on how much they actually donate which led me to believe that there might be a problem with this campaign. I looked through scholarly articles and I found a lot of press and statistics that called the NFL out for not doing enough to support the battle of breast cancer. They were only giving under 10% of the earnings from pink ribbon products to the American Cancer Society and they were keeping close to the majority of the profit for themselves. As I continued to do research I found more evidence that this campaign might be a cause marketing ploy to make money, gain fans, and get great television ratings for the month of October.

1.     If you gained more knowledge on the subject of cause marketing and how big business gains profit from real life problems such as using cancer as a marketing ploy, would you continue to support the NFL and purchase their pink products? 

2.     The NFL is a league dominated by men, if they started a campaign for prostate cancer, do you think they would have the same returns of profit as they do for breast cancer?

3.     The NFL uses photos of women who are low risk in their advertisements, if they really wanted to make themselves seem closer to the cause shouldn’t they advertise more older women who may be at high risk for breast cancer in their ads?