Marketing to Women: Femvertising vs.
Faux Feminism
Has sexism really disappeared, or is it just sneakier?
The international movement against sexual harassment and assault, #MeToo, has increased visibility of the challenges women face worldwide.
It has also raised the prominence for brands to engage female consumers (Martell, 2018), attempting to reduce the gender inequality in advertising campaigns, known as “femvertising.”
In the Mad Men era, advertising frequently demeaned women, confining them to the kitchen or objectifying and hypersexualizing them. Over time, however, we have seen ads featuring confident women and girls playing sports or becoming astronauts. (Shequal, n.d.).
But has sexism really disappeared, or is it just getting sneakier?
Femvertising and Its Purpose
In recent decades, femvertising has risen sharply (Martell, 2018). This emerging area of marketing is defined as “advertising that employs pro-female talent, messages, and imagery to empower women and girls,” and it is dubbed “femvertising” (Abitbol & Sternadori, 2019, p. 22). Essentially, the concept is a marketing trend that uses feminist ideals in advertising. The term “femvertising” was first used in the 1990s but gained particular attention in the 2010s due to large-scale adoption by many companies in their marketing strategies (Clara, 2023). Although the origins of the word were contested, SheKnowsMedia, a U.S. digital media company focused on women’s experiences, is often credited with coining it (Shequal, n.d.).
Initially considered a point of pride and a positive change in how women were being represented in advertising, the term eventually lent its name to an award, first won by “Dove 2004 Real Beauty” and other brands that use uplifting messages empowering women (“You go girl”) (Martell, 2016; Shequal, n.d.).
It was followed by campaigns like Nike’s "Dream Crazier":
The National Lottery – “This Girl Can – What About You?”:
Always – “Like A Girl”:
Femvertising is intended to acknowledge and celebrate brands that shift gender norms and break down gender stereotypes. It is utilized in global campaigns by multinational brands (e.g., KPMG, Audi, Cisco, Covergirl, McDonald’s) (Martell, 2016; Martell, 2018; Shequal, n.d.).
The femvertising trend is growing due to evolving consumer expectations. For example, 50% of Millennials (ages 18–34) want brands to take a public stance on social issues, compared to 25% of Baby Boomers (ages 55+). Across all generations, 6 in 10 will not make a purchase if they do not believe in what the company stands for (McKinsey & Co., 2024).
This concept boosts brands, given the current popularity of women’s rights movements. For instance, Dove received 30 times more exposure than its paid media space during its Real Beauty campaign, which increased sales for the brand (Martell, 2018).
Additionally, femvertising embodies the advocacy of women’s rights and the assertion that individuals should be treated equally regardless of sex or gender identity. It involves understanding how sexism intersects with other forms of structural oppression, such as racism, ageism, disability, LGBTQIA+ disparities (in comparison with cisgender norms), and other inequalities (Sobande, 2019).
Although female independence and liberation rhetoric have been featured in advertising since 1929 (Amos & Haglund, 2000), femvertising is recognized as an innovative backlash against female stereotypes perpetuated in advertising (Akestam et al., 2017). The concept claims to challenge gender stereotype clichés in advertising, and it is expected to improve societal views and behaviors among consumers while offering a novel technique to reach female target markets (Sharifzadeh & Brison, 2024).
Usually, femvertising urges organizations to challenge stereotypical depictions of women (Hunt, 2017). Advertisements deliver messages that motivate audiences to consume or endorse favorable images of the brand (Abitbol & Sternadori, 2016). Advertising reinforces behaviors and beliefs that serve sellers’ interests (Pollay, 1986). When advertising does not help boost corporate sales, customer loyalty, or brand preference, it can be challenging to justify a company’s support of social issues like gender equality. Consequently, femvertising (the combination of feminism and consumption) carries an inherent conflict among its economic, political, and social functions. Femvertising also references the dynamics of gender inequality (Gill & Elias, 2014). As such, it can be viewed as a new strategy by marketers responding to critiques of gender stereotypes in advertising.
Femvertising messages mainly address concepts like individualization, self-surveillance, confidence, new versions of embracing femininity, and body positivity (Windels et al., 2020). These are known as post-feminist discourses (Gill, 2007; McRobbie, 2009).
Post-feminism is a set of assumptions suggesting that feminism has largely achieved its goals and is now a thing of the past (Moseley & Read, 2002). It presumes that women, unsatisfied with legal and social equality (taken for granted), can find fulfillment only through practices of transformation and empowerment (Spigel & McRobbie, 2007). However, there are still critical discourses on post-feminist representations within capitalism, as advertisements are often seen as manifestations of faux feminism (Gill, 2019).
Feminism Shaping Femvertising
Feminism is a set of beliefs and ideas central to the broader social and political movement aimed at achieving greater equality for women. It advocates for gender equality and the end of sexism and oppression. Women seek equality in all spheres of life and employ various strategies to achieve that goal. Feminism strives for equality in both law and practice, including equal pay, voting rights, and the right to hold public office. Additionally, the movement seeks respect, empowerment, and social change for women (Fiss, 1994).
Western feminism is commonly divided into four waves (McRobbie, 2009):
The first wave dates back to around 1840 and is characterized by the suffragette movement and property rights for women, ending with the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920 (Siegel, 1997).
The second wave spanned the mid-1960s to the 1980s, focusing on workplace gender equality, abortion rights, economic parity, and violence against women (Faludi, 2006). This period highlighted men’s and women’s equality and emphasized women’s liberation from patriarchy (Banet-Weiser, 2004). However, it was criticized for privileging “whiteness,” thereby marginalizing the perspectives of women of color (Thompson, 2002).
The third wave emphasized empowerment and diversity, validating all forms of gender expression. This wave redefined feminism as “a woman’s right to pleasure and to determine her own sexuality” (Maclaran, 2012, p. 466), often referred to as post-feminism (Coppock et al., 1995).
The fourth wave of feminism, characterized by social media and the Internet, addresses issues such as sexual harassment, rape culture, and violence against marginalized groups (Chamberlain, 2016; Munro, 2013).
In the past decade, advertisers have adopted an innovative approach to depart from commodified representations of women. That is, showcasing empowered women and celebrating their liberation became a focal point, with less emphasis on the product (Case, 2019). Empowerment is a fundamental element of feminist approaches aiming to achieve gender equality (Birrell, 2000). Thus, advertising targeting women in an empowering way and celebrating their achievements is known as femvertising (Abitbol & Sternadori, 2016; Qiao & Wang, 2022). It is considered distinct because it challenges traditional female stereotypes perpetuated by advertising. This revamped approach—featuring narratives of women’s empowerment—has also positively influenced sales (Castillo, 2014; Hunt, 2017).
Since the emergence of femvertising, research on its effectiveness and authenticity has shown that promoting empowerment in ads produces positive perceptions and attitudes among consumers (Hainneville et al., 2022), leading to higher purchase intentions (Kapoor & Munjal, 2019).
Nonetheless, brands and creatives have exploited femvertising to promote products under the guise of “empowering women.” In particular, femvertising has evolved into a trend primarily designed to increase product sales to women, rather than facilitating genuine subversion and transformation of gender stereotypes. It has lost authenticity. Many current femvertising approaches essentially tell women they can do or be anything they want—if they choose the right product or brand (Shequal, n.d.).
Evaluating Femvertising Campaigns
Many brands have invested millions in femvertising campaigns, and there are countless campaigns in the market. On the positive side, it is encouraging that major brands recognize gender inequality as an important topic. They have inserted positive, empowering messages into public discourse. However, feminist advertising is complex and requires businesses to operate with sincerity and candor. There are examples of good and bad femvertising; audiences should approach them critically. Often, the campaigns that succeed do so with authenticity. Unfortunately, not all brands align their mission with the topics their campaigns address. Below are brief examinations of selected advertising campaigns.
Dove
Pioneering this femvertising trend in 2004, Dove launched its “Real Beauty” campaign in response to findings from a major global study, The Real Truth about Beauty: A Global Report, revealing that only 2% of women worldwide described themselves as beautiful (Etcoff, Orbach, Scott, & D’Agostino, 2004). The main message was that women’s unique differences should be celebrated rather than ignored, and that physical appearance should be transformed from a source of anxiety into one of confidence. This message was communicated through TV commercials, magazine spreads, out-of-home ads, talk shows, and worldwide Internet discussions (Celebre & Denton, 2014). Dove’s advertisements often promote health and beauty products, based on the idea of advocating “real beauty,” compared to what is implied as artificial or photoshopped alterations. Their marketing efforts have featured women’s bodies typically excluded from mainstream ads (e.g., older, overweight, racially diverse) and opposed the slender, white, and heavily photoshopped body norms (Cook, n.d.; Shequal, n.d.).
The positive achievement of the Dove campaign is its role in initiating a global dialogue to broaden the definition of beauty. The brand specifically chose real women whose appearances differ from stereotypical norms (e.g., wrinkled faces, higher body weight, diverse skin tones). These women were relatable and, therefore, more appealing to female audiences (Celebre & Denton, 2014).
However, new insecurities can arise, and some sponsor companies do not necessarily uphold high ideals internally. For instance, Dove’s parent company, Unilever, also owns Axe body spray, a brand infamous for its misogynistic campaigns. This creates a conflicting message for consumers.
Unilever additionally owns Fair & Lovely, marketed primarily to dark-skinned women, which promotes a desire for “lighter skin,” contradicting Dove’s message of positive body image (Celebre & Denton, 2014).
Fearless Girl
Commissioned by State Street Global Advisors, the Fearless Girl campaign aimed to raise awareness about gender diversity in corporate leadership. In 2017, on the eve of International Women’s Day, State Street placed the statue of a young girl standing defiantly with her hands on her hips in front of the famous Charging Bull on Wall Street. It symbolized the need for greater gender diversity and equality at work. Yet the same firm that funded Fearless Girl agreed to pay $5 million to settle claims that it discriminated against 305 top female employees by paying them less than male counterparts, including accusations that it underpaid Black executives (Mustafa, Curry, O’Brien, & Wankel, n.d.; Stein, 2017).
KPMG’s “Breaking the Glass Ceiling”
Similar to Fearless Girl, KPMG’s uplifting women’s leadership commercial is contradictory when examining the company’s lawsuit record, alleging a pattern of gender discrimination, including denying promotions to women and penalizing them for taking maternity leave (Martell, 2018).
Pantene’s “Stop Apologizing”
While the message seems empowering, there is tension in a beauty product brand promoting femvertising, as women spend billions more than men on appearance-related products—often earning less than their male peers (Cook, n.d.).
Audi’s 2017 Super Bowl Ad (“Daughter”)
This ad centered on gender equality shows a young girl in a go-kart race, with her father worrying about how she might be valued less than a man. Though intended to convey Audi’s commitment to gender equality, the brand had never publicly stood for it before. Critics pointed out that Audi had no female board members at the time, and the ad received more dislikes (59,000) than likes (47,000) on YouTube (Kauflin, 2017; Martell, 2018).
H&M’s 2016 Fall Collection (“She’s a Lady”)
This campaign embraced a “bad-ass” and “fearless” spirit, featuring diverse hair types, body shapes, and backgrounds, aiming to push against normative ideas of what it means to be “ladylike.” The soundtrack, a cover of Tom Jones’s “She’s a Lady,” was performed by Jillian Hervey (Lion Babe), shifting the perspective away from the original male gaze (Mulvey, 1975). Yet questions remain about whether such campaigns genuinely tackle gender disparities or simply profit from feminist language (Sobande, 2019).
Boohoo’s 2017 “#AllGirls”
Advertised as inclusive of women of all shapes and sizes, the campaign faced backlash for predominantly featuring slim women and lacking representation of plus-size, trans, or disabled women. Consumers criticized the brand for a lack of authenticity (Ekall, 2017; Hardy, 2017).
Missguided’s 2017 “Keep on Being You”
This campaign highlighted individuality, featuring a broader range of gender identities. Yet it used gendered terms like “babes” and “guys,” showing that the brand still relies on certain conventional norms (Sobande, 2019).
Lean Cuisine’s “Can Women Have It All?”
Lean Cuisine, a low-fat frozen dinner brand, tried to address the pressure on women to balance motherhood, housework, and careers while staying thin, reflecting the problematic, gendered notion of “having it all.” Critics deemed this inherently sexist and emphasized the need for men’s active role in household responsibilities (Martell, 2018).
Johnnie Walker’s “Jane Walker”
In 2018, Diageo released a limited edition of Johnnie Walker Black Label with a “Jane Walker” logo for Women’s History Month, intending to celebrate women’s progress and donate $1 per bottle to relevant organizations. Critics initially doubted its authenticity, wary of brands exploiting feminist themes, yet Diageo supported the campaign internally by having women in leadership positions (Nurin, 2018).
Secret (Procter & Gamble)
Secret deodorant, originally launched in 1956, repositioned itself to appeal to Millennial women with new campaigns addressing real “stress tests,” such as the wage gap or proposing marriage. Some argue these ads trivialize women’s experiences and subtly blame women for inequality, while P&G’s internal leadership does not reflect complete gender parity (Martell, 2018).
Barbie
Barbie’s femvertising campaigns promote the idea that young girls can succeed in any career they choose, without reference to boyfriends or shopping. However, the iconic doll still embodies a tall, thin, blonde, White ideal of beauty. The 2023 Barbie film ties the doll’s identity to consumerism with over 165 brand collaborations, illustrating the complexity of mixing feminism and commerce (Herman, 2023; Puga, 2023; Treisman, 2023).
Special K’s “93% of Women Fat Talk”
Special K’s campaign claimed “93% of women fat talk,” but failed to provide a credible source. Critics questioned the ad’s approach and whether it was using body shaming to sell cereal (Cook, n.d.).
Fauxminist?
Typically, advertisements from Dove, Nike, KPMG, Secret, Barbie, and Audi are designed to attract female consumers. Brands portray self-empowerment and affirmation, upholding the profit-oriented notion that women must buy certain products to feel “feminism” (Banet-Weiser, 2018). Many question whether such marketing represents a true commitment to feminism or a fake (“fauxminist”) attempt to convey a brand’s investment in women’s equality and empowerment (Sobande, 2019).
Organizations must be exemplars of gender equality if they wish to adopt femvertising effectively, or else their efforts may backfire. Consumers and the public are increasingly sensitive to perceived hypocrisy and might boycott the brand (Martell, 2018).
When companies claim to champion feminist ideals in their advertising but fail to embody those ideals in practice, it can harm the broader women’s rights movement. There is a risk of trivializing feminism to mere taglines or hashtags. This creates an illusion of progress, potentially misleading consumers—especially those who have not experienced sexism—into believing the problem is solved. However, a 2024 McKinsey & Co. report finds that men are more likely to believe the workplace is equitable, whereas women perceive it as less fair and supportive (Martell, 2018; McKinsey, 2024).
When companies claim to champion feminist ideals in their advertising but fail to embody those ideals in practice, it can harm the broader women’s rights movement.
How Brands Are Failing to Invest in Women
It might seem that women are on track for global domination— Taylor Swift was Time’s Person of the Year, Barbie was 2023’s highest-grossing film, and women’s sports reached new viewership milestones during the Women’s World Cup and WNBA finals. Moreover, more women than ever are the main breadwinners in their households, and they control a third of U.S. financial assets valued at over $10 trillion (Creative X, 2024).
Yet, globally, full gender equality remains elusive. According to the United Nations, women worldwide will likely spend 2.3 more hours per day on unpaid care and domestic work than men for the foreseeable future (Creative X, 2024).
Roger Danger
Roger Danger
Kaori Shelley
Kaori Shelley
Gender Inequality in Advertising
Despite some industry progress, the pace is slow. For instance, female characters were five times more likely to be shown cooking in Mars Food ads in 2018 than in 2023, yet men appeared cooking twice as often as women in 2022. Some companies, such as Unilever, have joined the Unstereotype Alliance to remove biases in their advertising, with 60% of their ads labeled as strongly progressive in 2020 (Creative X, 2024).
In 2023, women were featured in 56% of ads versus 42% for men, but how women are portrayed remains key. Men remain 23% more likely to appear in professional roles, while women are often cast in family settings. Even though 2023 was a banner year for women’s sports, men were still 82% more likely to be shown in athletic roles (Creative X, 2024).
However, ad spending on more progressive portrayals has soared. Ads featuring women in leadership and professional roles saw respective increases of 493% and 395% in investment. Ads that show women challenging stereotypes are 1.7 times more likely to achieve top scores in positive portrayals and boost short-term sales and long-term brand loyalty (Creative X, 2024).
Older, Black, and Brown Women Still Invisible?
Women over 50 are often termed “super consumers,” with over $15 trillion in purchasing power, making them the healthiest, wealthiest, and most active generation in history. Still, individuals over 60 featured in less than 2% of ads in 2023, and they often appear in stereotypical roles (Creative X, 2024). Educated women aged 50+ report feeling “invisible” to brands that fail to represent them authentically.
Furthermore, women with darker skin tones are least represented in ads. While representation of darker-skinned women rose by 63% in 2023, they only appeared in 21% of ads, and those roles were often stereotypical. Lighter-skinned women were more than five times as likely to appear in professional roles and seven times as likely to be depicted in leadership positions. Women with the darkest skin tone accounted for a mere 2.6% of total ad spending (Creative X, 2024).
How Can Brands Improve Representation in Advertising?
Enhancing diversity, inclusivity, and equity in media and advertising is challenging. Improving on-screen diversity typically starts by improving staff diversity behind the scenes (Collins, 2023). Many advocates for diversity lack tools to quantify these issues, establish measurable goals, and persuade senior leadership of the financial and ethical benefits. Organizations need unbiased, data-driven methods to effect meaningful changes in representation (Creative X, 2024).
Marketing Tips to Target Women on a Feminist Platform
If companies plan to capitalize on the #MeToo or feminist movement, they should consider these preliminary guidelines for femvertising messages (Martell, 2018):
The Litmus Test
A litmus test, originally a scientific term, now refers to a single decisive factor guiding a decision. In diversity and inclusion contexts, it is a practical tool for assessing moral and ethical questions. If answering “no” to one or more litmus test questions, decision-makers should revisit their strategy or seek additional guidance (Putnam, 2017).
Below is a simplified litmus test for businesses considering femvertising (Martell, 2018):
|
Litmus Test Criteria |
Yes or No |
|---|---|
|
Is gender equality a core value that the company consistently demonstrates internally (e.g., pay equity, representation in leadership)? |
|
|
Does the company actively champion women’s issues beyond advertising campaigns? |
|
|
Can the campaign’s claims of empowerment withstand public scrutiny (e.g., are they verifiable and genuine)? |
|
|
Is the brand committed to inclusivity across its other product lines and marketing messages? |
|
|
Does the brand have a history or track record of supporting feminist or social causes? |
Conclusion
Femvertising is a marketing strategy through which businesses sell products to women by leveraging feminist ideas and themes of empowerment (Clara, 2023). However, it can create disillusionment among consumers who hold brands accountable for the ideals they promote. If organizations cannot uphold genuine gender equality across their operations, they risk backlash for exploiting feminist narratives (Martell, 2018).
Yet, if brands truly want to depict more inclusive content, they need reliable ways to measure representation. Major brands are building creative databases to track content at scale and glean insights on advertising. Another critical step is increasing representation in creative teams—those developing the ads. Currently, women account for only 35% of the marketing, media, and ad tech sector, down from 46% in 2021, according to the She Runs It #Inclusive100 survey.
It is promising that many major brands recognize gender inequality as worth addressing. While there are strong and weak examples of femvertising, authenticity is often the most crucial factor. Ultimately, we must remain critical and evaluate how well a brand’s mission aligns with its messaging. A helpful approach is applying a litmus test to gauge how sincere a brand is about championing women’s equality.
Built with Shorthand