Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For starters these ads are effective. We can make it so they are ineffective, or maybe we can campaign to appoint a committee that determines what is "too sexy" and censors ads. Which do you prefer? It seems that the later is the only viable option in your opinion.
I mentioned TV because it is the worst subliminal offender. I'd honestly never seen a sexy CJ ad until someone here pointed them out. The few magazines I read don't use sex to sell either.
There is a lot of really serious and awful **** going on in the world, and sexy ads are pretty far down the list IMO. I let other people do whatever they like generally. If it isn't something that is forced on me, it really isn't my business. Ads *aren't* forced on me. I can avoid them pretty easily. Getting rid of the TV takes care of most of it.
This is always the response when someone runs out of things to say or feels that they "lost" the debate.
Well, I for one am not going to stop watching television. When commercials come on, I am muting the TV, changing channels, ignoring it or leaving the room. I use my iPad or computer with the TV on at the same time, anyway. The point is, that ads exist and the masses are not getting rid of their TV and just using devices, so sexually-influencing or sexist ads will be viewable no matter what. It would need to be altered at the root of the problem, which is to change how things are done by advertisers. Carl's Jr does not need to depict a half-naked, sexually-posed female with stuff dripping all over her in order to sell burgers, but men like this, so it's not going away. (I don't know how much this brings customers into their restaurants, when people are just hungry).
Just as there are magazines which a lot of us do not buy, but apparently many do, it is difficult to control the sale of. It also doesn't mean that everyone is buying products that are displayed. The point is, there should not be print ads, billboards by a company such as "Dolce and Gabbana", depicting a faux rape scene to sell perfume or clothing.. (whatever it is). It is not that some will not see the ads or just pretend they are not there, but that they exist in the first place. Do you understand?
And what are you, or any objectors going to do about it? You can protest. As long as the ads are legal, they can exist. If the companies decide these are the ads they want to produce then they will continue to do so. You can certainly write to them and object. You can try to force censorship. It seems most people really don't mind these ads or you would have heard a lot more about it.
Carl's Jr. must find men eat more of their burgers so they are primary ad target, and women are not protesting enough to affect their bottom line.
Carl's Jr. must find men eat more of their burgers so they are primary ad target, and women are not protesting enough to affect their bottom line.
It would not surprise me if these ads were quite effective with women also. Maybe even more so than men.
I watched the compilation of CJ ads and they appear to portray women pretty similar (though more over the top) to what I've seen in movies and TV. That is sexy *and* powerful. Guys are all doofs who stare in wonder.
who buys and perpetuates all the sick -thin looking model magazines???
it isn't men...next time you are at a check out in the grocery store,,,or at the salon,,,look at the woman on the front page,,,again,,it isn't men buying this
whatever happened to "I am woman hear me roar"
don't look at men,,
50 yrs ago, you ladies were expected to be homemakers and breeders,,,,and depend on men
40 yrs ago more and more and more going to college which is a great thing,,,,30, 20, yrs ago,,,,young ladies are going to college as much if not more than young men,,,,and as independent as ever,,,,which is great..
this is the age of female empowerment
so...it isn't the men,,pushing their daughters to go into pageants....
its mostly always the mother ..
it isn't men/fathers pushing their daughters to be miss teen pageants,,,its the mothers
most men don't give a rats ass about the fashion industry....and most men I know do not like the sick thin looking woman as models,,,,,they look like greyhound dogs
so all these women on magazines that are setting unrealistic
standards are not set by men
most men I know like some meat on the bones for women they know,,,
and one thing that drives me nuts because men get blamed is this..
from the earliest ages ...lets take twins,,,a boy and a girl..
the girl will get " omg what a little princess" from age 2, 3, 4, 5,
this is from other older women...
"isn't she cute, isn't she adorable" " I love those colors, I love that outfit"
you hear this from older women...
that's all about looks and clothes,,
with the little boy- twin brother,,,you do hear more questions,,,,what are your favorite things to do??
and yes, we do praise...what a big boy,,,but boys don't get hung up on it ..
before you point the finger at men....look at the big picture
This is an excellent post, I can't believe people are skipping over it.
Historically women have been sexually objectified more than men, exponentially. There is a reason the expression for the riotous life has been described as "wine, women, and song." Frankly, I don't know of a culture that has typically objectified only men, but many cultures have and still do objectify women exclusively. The fact it is less true in the 21st century western culture doesn't mean there is anything like a balance. The difference is real and it is serious.
This isn't necessarily true, the Greek and Romans celebrated the male body a lot more then they did women's. In fact when observing Greek statues I noticed how almost all the male statues were naked and female statues were almost always fully clothed. I guess with the introduction of Christianity is when things started to change as Christian values suppressed both gay and heterosexual female desires.
This isn't necessarily true, the Greek and Romans celebrated the male body a lot more then they did women's.
I don't know about the Roman's but the Greeks were into homosex to a significant degreee. They definitely revered a strong and toned male body, and prowess as a warrior. It was a very important part of their male pecking order, unlike now when any fat weak guy can be the alfa male if he has enough money. They were also big on athletics (hence the Olympics).
This has been going on forever. It won't change while men are suppose to make money and show physical prowess...women are suppose to be sexy, gorgeous even more so by the media/music/ads. Stuff like this will never end.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
