Letters to the Editor
-
What the @#$%&* is the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood???
And I hope none of the members are my neighbors.
What - you didn't see commercials and advertisements when YOU were a kid??? And didn't your 'rents handle the situation by saying either "yes" or "no" based on their own values and judgment, and you had to deal with it either way?
And didn't you grow up to understand the pros and cons of advertising, and its rightful place in a capitalistic economy???
And now that you have offspring of you own, you just can't handle the pressure and want either the public or private sector to make rules to forbid advertising kid-appropriate consumer goods in a kid-appropriate way, because you just can't take the time to, oh, you know, be a parent???
Like I said, if any of you are my neighbors or co-workers, please don't tell me!
-
petty?
Is it just me, or does this sorta come off like not being able to take a joke? Those Axe ads are definitely playing to the Maxim reader, but they're also incredibly goofy and tongue-in-cheek.
Besides, even if you find the Axe campaigns horribly offensive, does it really change anything about the Dove campaign? Is a supermarket hypocritical because it sells both toothpaste and sugary snacks? And why does anyone expect a moral pure ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN to fix society anyway? Perhaps they're even worse for using this issue as a WAY TO SELL SOAP that probably isn't worth the brand-name mark-up.
-
No, here's the irony.
The real irony is that Axe body spray is probably more likely to make a woman run away from you, holding her nose. If she does come near you, it will be with a mask, gloves and hose to wash off the nose-assaulting grossness that is Axe body spray. Bleargh.
Dove really ought be marketing its products to men, too, because their original-scent products have a very pleasant, neutral, soapy smell. Much nicer than Axe or Drakkar or any of the other awful man-scents the beauty industry has foisted upon us. Yick.
-
A shame that Broadsheet doesn't not believe women are rational, effective actors.
Interesting to think that Broadsheet believes:
A) Smelling Axe prevents a real threat to a women's purity
B) Women can't simultaneously have self esteem, an ordinary body, a sex drive that they wish to "indulge"
I guess in addition to Unilever getting rid of Axe and their commercials, Broadsheet wants Unilever to come out with a series of chastity belts that us parents can put on our daughters lest they become sex poisoned by Axe.
Weird. When did feminism become the movement to disempower women?
-
advertising and selling aren't inherently evil
Advertisers are NOT in the business of boosting self-esteem...and even if they were, what a losing proposition, as self esteem comes from.....the SELF, not a product.
There is nothing wrong with Dove trying to sell some of its products to 'real' looking women with a few extra pounds, cellulite, etc. Those women exist, and they need and/or want moisturizers and lotions etc.
There is also nothing wrong with Dove trying to sell some of its products to girls who want to feel sexy. Face it - "tutus and pirouettes are no match for lingerie and pole dancing" is pretty much a true statement when the goal is to get a boy's attention, or just to feel sexy. It's not a true statement when you are talking about developing hobbies or interests to be a well-rounded person - but Dove isn't trying to do that with this product, or the advertising for it.
Girls will always want to look sexy, if not actually be sexy. As I recall, this desire starts at a fairly young age - am I the only one who remembers sneaking on makeup in grade school and having battles about short skirts and tight clothes as early as 12 (and it would have been earlier had I not gone to a school with uniforms).
Part of accepting girls' self esteem is accepting that part of their adolescent separation/rebellion from parents involves trying to look grown-up at the earliest stage they can get away with. Looking grown-up often means looking sexy - and there's nothing wrong with that at all. It's time people stop thinking that advertisers so easily corrupt girls - when about half of them would be wearing spangled bra tops and mini-skirts with knee high boots and blue eye shadow at the age of 10 if they could get away with it.
We as a culture have a real fear of girls and women owning their own sexuality. Rent the documentary about the MPAA - "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" to see how the movie industry has codified objectifying women while rating any scene in which a woman is actually seeking out or enjoying sex as an R or X, a move that radically reduces potential ticket sales.
It's time to stop freaking out when a girl chooses to look sexy. We need to let girls navigate this part of growing up. Give them information and be willing to listen so they are prepared for the potential consequences - both fair and unfair - of their choices, and then back off and let them make those choices.
-
hey broads, there is a new gray rape article up at the times. fair and balanced? not a chance. you'll love it. it blames men for everything.
Go get him grrrls!
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/gray-rape-a-new-form-of-date-rape/#comment-58523
‘Gray Rape’: A New Form of Date Rape? - City Room - Metro - New York Times Blog
Hey red star man, can I get a red star for linking to some more man blaming for you?
-
So a giant multinational's advertising should all be forced to conform to one brand's identity?
Therefore, wouldn't it be just as valid for every Unilever ad campaign to mirror the Axe esthetic?
Shouldn't the beer-soaked, Spike TV-watchin' lads who douse themselves in Axe start a letter-writing campaign to demand more hot, naked flesh in Dove ads?
After all, isn't Unilever just selling out the frat boy demographic by trying to raise female self-empowerment with those Dove ads?
-
Broadsheet once again misses the point entirely
The Dove campaign is an ad campaign just like any other - they are trying to position their product as the product of choice for non-models. You know, everyone else. It is a good ad and it serves its purpose well (otherwise, we wouldn't be talking about it here, right?). It also has, as its basis, a noble theme; keeping girls from killing themselves by turning into stick-figures. The ad not only works, but it is also well intentioned.
The Axe campiagn is not directed at girls. It is directed at horny guys. And it promises to get them laid. This is the basis of ALL male hygiene ads. "Use our product = get laid." It is also a good ad, though not as well intentioned as the Dove ad, because it is memorable, and it gets people talking (see, once again, we're talking about it).
While it is of noble purpose to insist that girls be shown in the same respectful light in both ads from the same manufacturer, it is naive in the extreme and fails to acknowledge that two very different products are being sold. Moreover, it fails to acknowledge that two very different demographics are being targeted.
But let us entertain this pious notion for a moment. Please explain to Madison Ave how you can promise a young man that he will indeed get laid if he uses your product while simultaneously (and in the same ad) showing reverence to the girls your target demographic wishes to exploit.
We'll wait...
Alternately, if you could show how selling male hygiene spray to young men without promising that it will get them laid, when every other product on the market unabashedly makes that promise, can net the same market share, that will work too. Duh...
Or, you could get off your soap box and stop beating up the ad industry. Instead of beating Unilever up for creating the standard masculine hygiene product ad, you could just praise them for creating a responsible soap ad for women. Whatever.