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.
Exactly. That's why this thread is pretty much useless. They're never going to understand.
It is hopeless...and despite many going to such trouble to make good points, information is not absorbed, understood, or acknowledged. After explaining in length to one "asking for examples" of ads that had been referenced, there is NO response to what I took the time to explain as to why it is clearly offensive, as if talking to a wall. Oh, and the retort is "I have never known any female who is offended by any of this" (so this feeling must not have any validity, since he apparently knows every woman, and has discussed everything with all of them). Besides, HE cannot imagine why they are offensive, himself?
Though some men are intelligent, aware and get it, I need to remember that is not the case with others.
It is hopeless...and despite many going to such trouble to make good points, information is not absorbed, understood, or acknowledged. After explaining in length to one "asking for examples" of ads that had been referenced, there is NO response to what I took the time to explain as to why it is clearly offensive, as if talking to a wall. Oh, and the retort is "I have never known any female who is offended by any of this" (so this feeling must not have any validity, since he apparently knows every woman, and has discussed everything with all of them). Besides, HE cannot imagine why they are ffensive, himself?
Though some men are intelligent, aware and get it, I need to remember that is not the case with others.
The D&G ads are basically still performance art pieces and many of them do feature half naked very buff men. Carl's Jr. ads are pretty much clownish, just over the top silly and obviously meant to be goofy.
You can be offended by them but not everyone is, despite any of your interpretations or explanations as to why you feel the way you do. You are entitled to your opinion and others are entitled to legitimately disagree.
The D&G ads are basically still performance art pieces and many of them do feature half naked very buff men. Carl's Jr. ads are pretty much clownish, just over the top silly and obviously meant to be goofy.
You can be offended by them but not everyone is, despite any of your interpretations or explanations as to why you feel the way you do. You are entitled to your opinion and others are entitled to legitimately disagree.
One D & G ad from a while back, was specifically one depicting a "faux rape" of a woman, with men looking on. So, that is what it is come to - depicting rape to sell something? That is "performance art"? This just contributes, whether sub-consciously, as with violence towards females in video games, to the derogatory attitude that has been created and is worsening.
Although the Carl's ads may be seen as humorous, it does not alter the content seen or how women are displayed in such a way, contributing to an unrealistic standard and false message to measure women by.
I know that many want to downplay or deny all of this, but myself and others are not making it up, having there been a lot analyzed and written of this subject. This is how it goes.. men don't see it or care to know how it is affecting society overall, so it continues.
I am talking mainly about adds that showcase pretty women in an erotic manner. I remember around the Superbowl there was this controversy surrounding this sexy Carl jr add with some Kate Upton look alike in it. Frankly I saw the add and saw nothing wrong with it. A lot of people however were claiming it was onbjectifying women, giving men unreleastic expectation of women, etc. I saw things differently, to me it was a celebration of feminine beauty/power.
So as a women I encourage my other fellow women to start looking at these things differently. Don't view these adds as an insult to your appearance but rather a celebration of female beauty. I know that advertisement companies have a tendecy to only represent one type of female beauty, and that should change. To me black, asian, european, and hispanic women are ALL equally beautiful. You almost never hear men getting upset over David Beckham underwear adds, or claiming Abrecrombie&Fitch dehumanizes men. Its not that men are naturally less insecure then women, we women just take this stuff way too personally.
If god hated the human body who wouldn't have made us naked .
I'll take your word on the ads referred to since I'm isolated, mostly by choice, of most of the current advertising. Although, the Xoom commercial I just saw on Galavision had similar placement, for a 40 year old woman, to Jennifer Love Hewitt on the poster for "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer".
Been through a college (psychology) course on propaganda and I know the various techniques used in advertising as well.
Doesn't bug me............but then again, I view things on multiple aspects to include, unfortunately or not, the ability to use something as a weapon, be it offensively, defensively, or in support.
I am talking mainly about adds that showcase pretty women in an erotic manner. I remember around the Superbowl there was this controversy surrounding this sexy Carl jr add with some Kate Upton look alike in it. Frankly I saw the add and saw nothing wrong with it. A lot of people however were claiming it was onbjectifying women, giving men unreleastic expectation of women, etc. I saw things differently, to me it was a celebration of feminine beauty/power.
So as a women I encourage my other fellow women to start looking at these things differently. Don't view these adds as an insult to your appearance but rather a celebration of female beauty. I know that advertisement companies have a tendecy to only represent one type of female beauty, and that should change. To me black, asian, european, and hispanic women are ALL equally beautiful. You almost never hear men getting upset over David Beckham underwear adds, or claiming Abrecrombie&Fitch dehumanizes men. Its not that men are naturally less insecure then women, we women just take this stuff way too personally.
If god hated the human body who wouldn't have made us naked .
I don't think it's objectification if the women are consenting to it. Men are objectified too. Human beings in general are objectified. It's been scientifically proven that people are attracted naturall ( brains scans etc.) to a certain body/ facial type and it sells products.
I don't think it's objectification if the women are consenting to it.
Men are objectified too. Human beings in general are objectified. It's been scientifically proven that people are attracted naturall ( brains scans etc.) to a certain body/ facial type and it sells products.
That certain women choose to be used in advertisements, or porn, has little to do with the fact that it contributes to and represents something negative. They do this for their own reasons, mostly I would say, for income.
I don't think its right for women to be objectified. It must be understood that they have feelings & aspirations along with a beautiful body. Don't look at them like sex toys.
Wearing revealing clothes at ones desire isn't objectification. Being forced to do it for pleasing others is.
Who is forcing women to wear such outfits?
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.
.
