Canada Kicks Ass
Online Shopping or Porn?

REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  Next



raydan @ Sat May 16, 2009 6:33 pm

kitty kitty:
lily lily:
How is this any different from any of your avatars, kitty?
i am not selling anything

In that case, there are a few -18 (even some -16) year olds I've seen that are like giant billboards. :(

   



kitty @ Sat May 16, 2009 7:54 pm

lily lily:
kitty kitty:
lily lily:

How is this any different from any of your avatars, kitty?


i am not selling anything


Yes you are.

You said it yourself...

$1:
The call to action for all these ads is indeed to get peoples attention. But then what?


Your logic is faulty.
Advertisers may uses ads for brand awareness but ultimately they want a sale.

i pick the avatars that i do because i like them. They may garner attention but i am not selling anything.

It is not the same at all.

   



Blue_Nose @ Sat May 16, 2009 10:05 pm

Personal vs professional - the distinction is ridiculously obvious.

   



ShepherdsDog @ Sat May 16, 2009 10:19 pm

Blue,
remember who you're trying to explain this to.

   



sandorski @ Sat May 16, 2009 10:20 pm

kitty kitty:
lily lily:
kitty kitty:

The call to action for all these ads is indeed to get peoples attention. But then what? The brand awareness has little to do with what they actually sell.


How is this any different from any of your avatars, kitty?


i am not selling anything


That's too bad, because I was just about to Buy!

   



Public_Domain @ Sat May 16, 2009 10:20 pm

Brenda Brenda:
Thats because girls like that only exist in pictures...

Fantasy is so much better then reality, :(

   



Ripcat @ Sun May 17, 2009 5:23 am

@ kitty and Brenda....bring it to the jello wrestling ring. You know where to find some suitable clothing. :lol:

err...make it a round robin comp. with lily....

   



CommanderSock @ Sun May 17, 2009 7:00 am

Brenda Brenda:
Thats because girls like that only exist in pictures...


That's not true.

I went to the black sea last year and plenty of Polish, Russian and German ladies sporting the wicked weasel, or no wicked weasel at all [drool]

North America is generally far more conservative when it comes to sexual imagery and innuendos in the open (but when the doors are closed we are far freakier).

   



Blue_Nose @ Sun May 17, 2009 8:34 am

lily lily:
Isn't the intent of both to draw attention?
It's still a matter of the difference between professional and personal attention - an advertisement with a girl laying on a bed with her stockings half pulled down and her legs wide open is a bit more than simply "drawing attention".

My girlfriend says that all American Apparel models are store employees - maybe someone else can confirm this?

   



dino_bobba_renno @ Sun May 17, 2009 8:50 am

Oh my, what guy on this earth would wear these?

Image

ROTFL ROTFL ROTFL ROTFL ROTFL ROTFL

But on a more serious note, I'm a little conflicted when it comes to topics like these. I'm a guy so of course I like seeing women in sexy things and I don't really see a problem with a grown mature woman wear what she wants. On the other hand though I have two daughters and hell freeze over before I ever let them out of the house wearing half the clothing on those pages. The real problem as I see it is two fold. One problem is that most of the suggestive advertising out there is aimed at younger girls but it's not just the advertising,the other problem is that a lot of the cloths being sold are a bit too riskie for the age groups their being pushed on.

My wife and I were in Old Navy the other day and were at least 5 or 6 out fits that were in the 7 year old size range that were completely inappropriate. I see it all the time. From toys like Brats (and even Barbie too) to wii games and music. They all push this "sexy" suggestive image thing to girls from the time girls are 5 or 6 years old and it worse the older they get. I'm not surprised to see advertising like this after seeing whats pushed on the 10 year old crowd but I will say I think it crosses a line. The "sexification" (if thats even a word) of younger women and the limits we put on advertising that is directed at them is something that we as a society seriously need to look at.

   



novachick @ Sun May 17, 2009 10:17 am

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
lily lily:
Isn't the intent of both to draw attention?
It's still a matter of the difference between professional and personal attention - an advertisement with a girl laying on a bed with her stockings half pulled down and her legs wide open is a bit more than simply "drawing attention".

My girlfriend says that all American Apparel models are store employees - maybe someone else can confirm this?


In all fairness I think Lily in the end result, is the one that is correct. AA is utilizing sexual imagery to draw attention to their line in the hopes woman will purchase it to attract men. As Kitty self admittedly stated she utilizes sexual imagery in the form of avatars to garner male attention. Woman X is purchasing this attention, Kitty is getting it for free. The vehicles employed may be different but the outcome is the same. Therefore,yes, there is an element of irony in the content of the thread and the OP of the thread.

   



Blue_Nose @ Sun May 17, 2009 1:25 pm

novachick novachick:
In all fairness I think Lily in the end result, is the one that is correct. AA is utilizing sexual imagery to draw attention to their line in the hopes woman will purchase it to attract men. As Kitty self admittedly stated she utilizes sexual imagery in the form of avatars to garner male attention. Woman X is purchasing this attention, Kitty is getting it for free. The vehicles employed may be different but the outcome is the same. Therefore,yes, there is an element of irony in the content of the thread and the OP of the thread.
I didn't question whether or not kitty uses sexy avatars - it's not a secret by any means, and it's irrelevant to discussing whether or not the ads are appropriate for a clothing company to market a product.

I feel there's a difference between using photographs of attractive women posing in their underwear and using photographs of women posing in what would otherwise be pornographic photos (and here I'm speaking specifically about the one with the girl with her legs wide open on the bed and the "tap panty" ass photo - I didn't see the "NSF CKA" one, but the rest are fine as far as I'm concerned). Sexuality and pornography are two very different things to me.

   



novachick @ Sun May 17, 2009 1:41 pm

lily lily:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
Personal vs professional - the distinction is ridiculously obvious.


Isn't the intent of both to draw attention?


I was referring to this and the posts that preceded it.

   



Blue_Nose @ Sun May 17, 2009 1:55 pm

I use copyrighted images for my avatars as many people do, but that doesn't mean it'd be alright for some other company to use those images to sell a product. I exploit the images of Transformers or Megaman or Bravestarr, but I'm not selling anything, and the owners of the images aren't going to care because of that.

Context has been completely removed from the discussion when you compare kitty's avatar to a marketing campaign by a clothing company, and that's why the comparison is irrelevant.

   



Proculation @ Sun May 17, 2009 5:02 pm

I prefer porn to online shopping for a simple reason: porn is easily free while you always need to pay to shop online.

   



REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  Next