This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Sex in society...

Jump to new
J

JTLP

Joined
27 November 2007
Posts
1,390
Reactions
72
Might tie in with the Nanny State thread - but essentially I wondered how we are evolving in society and the sexualisation of things to make them sell?

My thoughts came across as I saw this article recently:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/socie...-dovetails-with-hypocrisy-20120620-20ocf.html

As well as the advertisement on TV.

Personally - I think things like the above are quite humerous and obviously aimed at the teenage demographic - not appealing to a mum with 2 toddlers. I don't think it's degrading to women or condescending to men (having said that I like Lynx's commercials and used their products when I was younger). I would appear to be in the majority who really couldn't care - but increasingly people are getting quite vocal about sex in advertising and society. Are we shielding kids from the inevitable? Or taking the necessary steps to ensure kids grow up decently with morals?

We are subject to a lot more these days via the media - violence/poverty/crime/sex - is this evolution?
 
perhaps devolution?

I think as a society we may as well except the fact people arent going to live in the dark ages anymore on any subject they have a curiosity about, the internet generation is here to stay
 
The ad in question isn't offensive or derogatory. But also, it's not in any way funny or entertaining. It's basically a dud ad that runs far too long and won't sell them any more deodorant. I tried Lynx once and it has a cheap, sickly sweet smell. Piss it off. Bad product.
 

I think they have a lot better ads than this one. I usually get a smile out of a lot of Lynx ads despite myself, but this one seems to have gone too low (or maybe i have finally matured)
 
I don't really have a problem with the ad (thought it was kinda sad though), but I do have issue with this from the article:

Lynx's latest campaign featuring Sophie Monk offering to clean various men's ''balls'' has attracted criticism relating to female objectification and sexploitation.
Click to expand...

Uhh...female objectification and sexploitation?? If anyone was being objectified and sexploited, it was men. I can guarantee you if something along the same lines was done in reference to breasts, then the controversy would be a multiple of ten.
 
Agree. I thought it was just crass. To so labour the point about "balls" with such lack of sophistication must surely have very limited appeal.
And the reference to the old bloke was simply sad.

I don't usually watch any advertising so I don't have much of a yardstick of comparison.
Just hope with all the clever people in advertising agencies they can usually come up with something a little more esoteric and interesting than that stuff.
 
There was a time when advertisers tried to put forward actual reasons why their product was better than something else. Shoes, furniture, audio equipment, washing machines, cars, food products and so on. It wasn't that long ago that the basic format was to promote the supposed merits of the product - comfortable, good quality, easy to use, reliable, good performance, healthy or whatever.

And if it was something new with lack of consumer familiarity regarding the product or service generally, then advertising tended to focus on reasons why you would want to buy that product or service, often with a direct focus on that business as the only means of obtaining the product or service in question.

Then we entered the "dumbed down" age and now it's all about casual association. You see a car, you see an attractive woman. No mention of the car's performance etc but just an attempt to link two minimally connected desires of men. The same goes for everything from deodorant to carpet whether the target audience is men, women or children.

So far as the actual product is concerned, well grooming products of whatever description aren't exactly revolutionary or exciting. But some people really will pay big $ for things like that. It reminds me of the "anti bacterial" craze, so widespread they even shortened the term to "anti-bac" assuming most knew what it meant, some years ago. Never mind that unless you really are running a hospital, in which case you'll already have disinfectant, there's a few health related reasons why you're better off avoiding these products rather than seeking them out.

Shower gel? Whatever happened to soap?
 
JTLP said:
Are we shielding kids from the inevitable? Or taking the necessary steps to ensure kids grow up decently with morals?
Click to expand...

We spend more time grown up than as children - childhood passes too quickly. Let kids be kids - they'll have plenty of time to discover the adult side of life, with all the good and bad it brings. Why rush them into it.
 
Great post Johenmo

Its all a shock factor, and they think all this negativity is going to give them more publicity.
Their humour is in the gutter.
 
JTLP said:
Or taking the necessary steps to ensure kids grow up decently with morals?
Click to expand...

What is so immoral about sex?


Smurf1976 said:
Then we entered the "dumbed down" age
Click to expand...

The proliferation of anti-intellectualism is one thing kids should be guarded from. This advertisement does the opposite as does so much of the crap on television.
 
JTLP said:
Nothing immoral about sex - just pondering the question about whether it was worthwhile shielding children from the innuendo...
Click to expand...
Or maybe rather just pathetically poor advertising?
 

It just comes from the fact that Western societies, in a consumer sense, have advanced not a lot in the last few decades.

Every product has a multitude of brands, so one isn't really better than the other. Hence advertisers try and give product association as opposed to promoting its benefts over other brands (as there aren't any).

IMO it was probably the 60's - 70's when the last real wave of consumer product innovation came along. Microwaves, TV's, ovens etc. Evrything these days, with the exception of computers and the Internet, is just a variation instead of a revolution
 
jersey10 said:
What is so immoral about sexual innuendo?
Click to expand...

Just because you have it doesn't mean you have to flaunt it. Like I said earlier, kids don't need to learn this early on. So stick the ads on after midnight - lots less kids awake then (I hope).
 
Hear Hear Johenmo
They should be made accountable for what they put on TV.
Its a public TV and we should say what we think.

One minute we have an ad saying, children are watching your every move, the next we have this.
All the kids the next morning will be doing this at school, just lovely.

I know most of their ads get put on and then taken off pretty quickly, and thats how that company works, with their shock tactics. They like to push the envelope and I think its up to us the public to have our say about what we think.

I am not talking about just this ad, all things that we arent happy with we should be stating our like or dislike.
 
sptrawler said:
Soap lasts too long and costs a lot less.
That's what is wrong with it, as far as manufacturers are concerned.
Click to expand...

Soap dries my skin out. l use shower gels only. I usually grab a 1L bottle from Woolies that lasts about 2-3 months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...